[mission]

[mission]

I thought it appropriate to let you know about issues I am having with Graffik Gallery and Ollie Cox. I bought these two Invader street pieces from them last year. However, after contacting Invader, i have been advised that they are fake and Graffik are refusing to refund me what I paid. Invader has confirmed that – they are (in his words) “absolutely fake” and are “just a few tiles bought and assembled”. I know that street artists don’t like their art being removed from the street and I understand that – and Invader was very clear about that aspect and how it destroys the street aspect when removed. But he was also very clear that he didn’t assemble or place the tiles the art that Graffik had sold me – and that whoever was selling it would know that.

When I spoke to Graffik, they initially agreed to refund but then they changed their mind because, so they said, the gallery didn’t have the cash available which, by itself raises other questions especially as Ollie stated that he “needed the money [from the sale] to keep the gallery afloat”.

I am disappointed by Graffik’s response. The invoice clearly stated that the art that was by Invader but Graffik also hold themselves out as experts in Invader street art –the gallery is described as having “carved a master status” and having “expertise” in “the realm of street art”. Additionally, Invader is listed as one of the gallery’s main artists (https://shop.graffikgallery.co.uk/collections/invader-art).

I purchased these for my own private collection, due to spiralling prices on his Alias works....I have been offered 5 figures ££ for them but have chosen to speak out instead against this Gallery, as i am aware they are and have sold other street works by Invader...in fact numerous .

I understand that i should never have purchased them in the first place but hey....BIG MISTAKE...

[Deleted]

Buy street art , get burnt.

[Masong]

If I was invader I would deny that they were anything to do with me even if they were mine. It would be my lesson to people not to remove them from the street which is where they were meant to be.

[Jonas B]

Sounds like the fault is with the gallery selling products which aren’t as advertised - they’re selling them as Invader’s work which they are not regardless of how they were acquired.

[concrete jungle]

Dealt with Ollie back in the day and found him decent enough - actually sold him a sizeable Invader print at one point and all went well. Times probably hard enough for galleries at the minute - but alarm bells should have been ringing on any sort of Invader street pieces (same for Banksy) - there’s enough info on here to raise the red flags. That being said I’d agree that if this is mis sold (which it appears to be) a full refund should be forthcoming, cash flow issues or not. The alternative might be accepting a return payment plan, or some other piece in stock in lieu, but that’s if you are feeling generous. Pretty sure you can go the legal route on this, but probably not ideal for you or the gallery…..

[mission]

Lawyers involved it’s going to Court!!
I agree with everything above but these were sold as ‘1000%’ real and ‘as good as it gets’ by Graffik .. with regards to street works .. extremely disappointing that he is unwilling to address the situation .

[Masong]

Jun 9, 2023 17:54:35 GMT 1 mission said:

Lawyers involved it’s going to Court!!
I agree with everything above but these were sold as ‘1000%’ real and ‘as good as it gets’ by Graffik .. with regards to street works .. extremely disappointing that he is unwilling to address the situation .

It sounds like you’re not being demanding enough with the gallery. You have the best evidence in your favour, that they are not real direct from the artist. Calling them out on here might not be beneficial in your favour for a fast resolve.

[mission]

They have blocked me on every channel , they have not replied to my Solicitors letters , they don’t take calls .. I’m pretty much done with trying .. I need to be careful what I say on here for legal reasons
But I can certainly state the facts !!

[Charlie Bronson]

No matter the gallery’s financial situation, as soon as it was proven these are fake, they should’ve refunded your money. What an absolute shit move by graffik. I just came across several posts about this on IG; their name is forever tarnished, and by not making this right, rightfully so.

[Loobaz]

It'd be interesting to know the gallery's story as to where, and from whom, they were obtained.

Surely, there would have to be a paper trail in that regard for accounting purposes, and if not, you'd have to wonder who was putting them together in the first place?

Hope it gets resolved quickly mission.

[John The Badgers]

Thank you for your honesty Mission, and really sorry to hear of this issue.

Just my input, but my main concern is if they were 'requiring the funds to stay afloat', a real chance they would declare bankruptcy in advance of paying any of their debtors, yourself included.

I would be going in as fast, and as 'hard' as possible to get what is owed to you before they potentially do this. All the signs are there for this to happen.

All the best with sorting.

[mission]

Thanks .. I’m also posting in case anyone has consigned artworks to them ..

[John The Badgers]

Nice one Mission.

Just to add to the above, you could instigate a claim yourself via The Small Claims Court? This I have personally found to be a very effective, cost effective, way of getting what is owed.

All the best with sorting.

[Wanchope]

Sorry for you mission, whilst like most I don’t agree with street pieces being removed and sold, they have properly and royally fxxxed up here! What also annoys me, and this goes for a lot of modern day twats, if you can’t afford your lifestyle then don’t live that kind of life. I own a business and could rinse my bank account like lots of my competitors but I don’t because you need to keep a buffer zone and when they all die of death I will still be fighting strong. So basically I can’t stand the response of “can’t afford to refund you”. Everyone nowadays think they can open and run a business but few have the accumen or will power to say I’ll earn the right to have x y or z. Sorry for the rant but this story has properly hit a nerve and am sorry for you mission!

Hope it al works out

[artlife11]

Jun 9, 2023 19:48:33 GMT 1 Wanchope said:

Sorry for you mission, whilst like most I don’t agree with street pieces being removed and sold, they have properly and royally fxxxed up here! What also annoys me, and this goes for a lot of modern day twats, if you can’t afford your lifestyle then don’t live that kind of life. I own a business and could rinse my bank account like lots of my competitors but I don’t because you need to keep a buffer zone and when they all die of death I will still be fighting strong. So basically I can’t stand the response of “can’t afford to refund you”. Everyone nowadays think they can open and run a business but few have the accumen or will power to say I’ll earn the right to have x y or z. Sorry for the rant but this story has properly hit a nerve and am sorry for you mission!

Hope it al works out

Lots to come out hear. Im going to get some popcorn.
small claims is much easier now and costs less than £100 I think.
I don’t think graffik’s will survive this for many reasons

[orchid]

I don't get why the gallery's financial situation is relevant? Start a claim.

[Deleted]

Because they are obviously going to go into administration and there will be no money coming back.,

you can’t get blood from a stone and this gallery sounds done 

[Terry Fuckwitt]

The moral of the story, don't buy lifted street art...
The only winners are the thieves that steal them. Robin Barton learnt the hard way too recently

[Terry Fuckwitt]

Why were you contacting invader? To ask if they were real? I don't understand what sort of answer you were expecting 

[Arty Farty 15]

Sorry to say it doesn’t look good. Accounts overdue and proposal to strike the company off (from Companies House):

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/10009395

[Jeezuz Jones Snr]

Sorry to hear this mate and hope they are forced pay you back the full amount. Their response is really bad. As if they expect you to give up! Just thinking wouldn't Invader get the police involved also as it's fraud?

Looking at their website and for them to raise funds (as they are broke) they have a lot of art they can sell and even just to sell all the banksy's (do they own them?) at auction will raise a few hundred thousand and can pay you out.

Hope it gets sorted quickly fella and keep us updated 👍

[concrete jungle]

Jun 9, 2023 22:27:33 GMT 1 Jeezuz Jones Snr said:

Sorry to hear this mate and hope they are forced pay you back the full amount. Their response is really bad. As if they expect you to give up! Just thinking wouldn't Invader get the police involved also as it's fraud?

Looking at their website and for them to raise funds (as they are broke) they have a lot of art they can sell and even just to sell all the banksy's (do they own them?) at auction will raise a few hundred thousand and can pay you out.

Hope it gets sorted quickly fella and keep us updated 👍

In my experience a lot of the art work is likely to be in 3rd party ownership with Graffik acting as a broker. So not as straight forward as quick sell off - although they may well have some ‘stock’; sadly the amount of debt may eat that up pretty quickly - and as other posters mentioned, worst case scenario is they file for bankruptcy - which will seriously complicate any chance of getting your money back. Wondering if they own or rent the gallery - it was a nice space from memory and probably worth a few quid…..

[Jeezuz Jones Snr]

Jun 9, 2023 22:39:44 GMT 1 concrete jungle said:

Jun 9, 2023 22:27:33 GMT 1 Jeezuz Jones Snr said:

Sorry to hear this mate and hope they are forced pay you back the full amount. Their response is really bad. As if they expect you to give up! Just thinking wouldn't Invader get the police involved also as it's fraud?

Looking at their website and for them to raise funds (as they are broke) they have a lot of art they can sell and even just to sell all the banksy's (do they own them?) at auction will raise a few hundred thousand and can pay you out.

Hope it gets sorted quickly fella and keep us updated 👍

In my experience a lot of the art work is likely to be in 3rd party ownership with Graffik acting as a broker. So not as straight forward as quick sell off - although they may well have some ‘stock’; sadly the amount of debt may eat that up pretty quickly - and as other posters mentioned, worst case scenario is they file for bankruptcy - which will seriously complicate any chance of getting your money back. Wondering if they own or rent the gallery - it was a nice space from memory and probably worth a few quid…..

Good post and yes as I was scrolling through their website I was thinking how many do they actually own or physically have in their gallery? As this is fraud, there needs to be investigation into have they sold any other fakes? 

[LJCal]

They've filed one set of accounts since 2019, so over 4 years one filing. Looks like they're lining up to go pop, I'd say make sure you get together with other creditors and appoint your own administrator if they do file for VA, don't let them appoint some matey IP. People have this false idea that you can fold companies with impunity where you've behaved improperly, this is a big misconception. I'd be willing to bet money that there is a massive directors loan account; what most clueless business owners forget is that this is an asset to the business that upon liquidation the administrator will look to collect. Furthermore these loans create big personal tax liabilities with HMRC, hiding behind the corporation won't work when it comes to HMRC or when an administrator demands payment of the debt to the company, the director is personally liable in both circumstances. Furthermore if it can be demonstrated that the owner was trading whilst insolvent and engaged in deception this becomes a criminal matter which could lead to prosecution and various pretty nasty sanctions, there's no hiding behind the corporate veil when it comes to crime. Even if criminal intent cannot be proven I'd say based on the way they've managed the business from a filing and tax point of view the insolvency service will highly likely investigate them and ban them from being a director for a number of years, I would bring the case to the attention of the insolvency service in the event the business is put into liquidation. All of this should be spelled out in no uncertain terms to the directors who may think that they can just rip people off and walk away from the company debts and suffer no consequences. It's sounds highly possible in this case that should the business go there could be significant liability for the directors.

[LJCal]

Jun 9, 2023 23:01:34 GMT 1 Jeezuz Jones Snr said:

Jun 9, 2023 22:39:44 GMT 1 concrete jungle said:

In my experience a lot of the art work is likely to be in 3rd party ownership with Graffik acting as a broker. So not as straight forward as quick sell off - although they may well have some ‘stock’; sadly the amount of debt may eat that up pretty quickly - and as other posters mentioned, worst case scenario is they file for bankruptcy - which will seriously complicate any chance of getting your money back. Wondering if they own or rent the gallery - it was a nice space from memory and probably worth a few quid…..

Good post and yes as I was scrolling through their website I was thinking how many do they actually own or physically have in their gallery? As this is fraud, there needs to be investigation into have they sold any other fakes? 

They'll rent for sure based on their balance sheet from 2019, 99% of what they sell is on consignment and I'm sure any decent inventory will be "sold" cheap before the liquidators are called in. 

[LJCal]

Jun 9, 2023 23:11:59 GMT 1 LJCal said:

They've filed one set of accounts since 2019, so over 4 years one filing. Looks like they're lining up to go pop, I'd say make sure you get together with other creditors and appoint your own administrator if they do file for VA, don't let them appoint some matey IP. People have this false idea that you can fold companies with impunity where you've behaved improperly, this is a big misconception. I'd be willing to bet money that there is a massive directors loan account; what most clueless business owners forget is that this is an asset to the business that upon liquidation the administrator will look to collect. Furthermore these loans create big personal tax liabilities with HMRC, hiding behind the corporation won't work when it comes to HMRC or when an administrator demands payment of the debt to the company, the director is personally liable in both circumstances. Furthermore if it can be demonstrated that the owner was trading whilst insolvent and engaged in deception this becomes a criminal matter which could lead to prosecution and various pretty nasty sanctions, there's no hiding behind the corporate veil when it comes to crime. Even if criminal intent cannot be proven I'd say based on the way they've managed the business from a filing and tax point of view the insolvency service will highly likely investigate them and ban them from being a director for a number of years, I would bring the case to the attention of the insolvency service in the event the business is put into liquidation. All of this should be spelled out in no uncertain terms to the directors who may think that they can just rip people off and walk away from the company debts and suffer no consequences. It's sounds highly possible in this case that should the business go there could be significant liability for the directors.

I'd also write to the director who stepped down  in 2022 who maybe thinks he's off the hook because he's resigned, this is absolutely not the case. He is also very likely to carry significant responsibility and liability if it can be demonstrated that the business was being run improperly during his directorship, based on the company's filings this would be pretty easy to demonstrate.

[artlife11]

Jun 9, 2023 23:18:56 GMT 1 LJCal said:

Jun 9, 2023 23:11:59 GMT 1 LJCal said:

They've filed one set of accounts since 2019, so over 4 years one filing. Looks like they're lining up to go pop, I'd say make sure you get together with other creditors and appoint your own administrator if they do file for VA, don't let them appoint some matey IP. People have this false idea that you can fold companies with impunity where you've behaved improperly, this is a big misconception. I'd be willing to bet money that there is a massive directors loan account; what most clueless business owners forget is that this is an asset to the business that upon liquidation the administrator will look to collect. Furthermore these loans create big personal tax liabilities with HMRC, hiding behind the corporation won't work when it comes to HMRC or when an administrator demands payment of the debt to the company, the director is personally liable in both circumstances. Furthermore if it can be demonstrated that the owner was trading whilst insolvent and engaged in deception this becomes a criminal matter which could lead to prosecution and various pretty nasty sanctions, there's no hiding behind the corporate veil when it comes to crime. Even if criminal intent cannot be proven I'd say based on the way they've managed the business from a filing and tax point of view the insolvency service will highly likely investigate them and ban them from being a director for a number of years, I would bring the case to the attention of the insolvency service in the event the business is put into liquidation. All of this should be spelled out in no uncertain terms to the directors who may think that they can just rip people off and walk away from the company debts and suffer no consequences. It's sounds highly possible in this case that should the business go there could be significant liability for the directors.

I'd also write to the director who stepped down  in 2022 who maybe thinks he's off the hook because he's resigned, this is absolutely not the case. He is also very likely to carry significant responsibility and liability if it can be demonstrated that the business was being run improperly during his directorship, based on the company's filings this would be pretty easy to demonstrate.

I think they have bankrupted companys before.
they were punting DotMeister’s for £££ as serious street art to the locals.
I did go to a show for Ru Knox who is a great Artist but wasn’t great and young girl was knowledge less about works on display & I think Ru Knox has moved on the better things.

[shoottheglass]

It's really difficult to have any sympathy when you've been trying to sell the problem on to unsuspecting buyers on here knowing full well they are fake. If the money from the sale 'was' going to charity anyway, whats the problem? You got burnt and you deserve it. Write it off and move on.

[Terry Fuckwitt]

I'll apologise in advance if I'm wrong, but is the OP (mission) of this thread Andrew Lilley? AKA Contemporary Art Trader (CAT) AKA the same guy that sold a load of fake/backdoor invader prints here years ago and refused to refund any money after invader confirmed they weren't authorised...
I see there are a lot of good members backing him up in the laugh now thread, where he posted a signed print instead the unsigned print he was selling, so I'm sure I'll get my answer soon enough.
If however he is Andrew Lilley, then karma got you good...