The AVN and their sometimes magazine – redefining the language

Meryl Dorey sent out this AVN Newsletter today which, unfortunately for Dorey, raises more questions than it answers.

In the Newsletter Dorey asserts many things, among which are: that she can’t get the magazine out on time because, well, she is so busy (which is no excuse for continuing to sell subscriptions to a product she cannot provide); that she has not had  “one AVN member or subscriber complain about the delays in the magazine production” (which is demonstrably untrue. There are a few).

Here’s one from February 2011 (the magazine, Issue 8 came out six months later):

This is not 'no one'

Here is another satisfied customer from November 2011 (Issue 8 came out three months previous):

This, too, is not 'no one'

These are just the public ones. There are others. The lack of response is a very common complaint. This is a certainty.

But, that’s not the main point I want to address. What I really want to question is the appearance of a new definition for annual magazine subscription which has bobbed up in the Newsletter:

Some new questions are raised due to this red paragraph

Before I continue I want to highlight this post from antivaxxers.com: The AVN Magazine Money-Making Machine. The post clearly sets out the trouble into which Dorey has landed herself and her Committee. This is not going to end well. If I was one the Committee members of the AVN, I would be seeking representation.

As an example, in a newsletter from December 12 2010, Dorey clearly states that the “gift subscription” contains “our magazine 6 times in the next year”: when you follow the link to here, you find out that it is “digital editions” you will be receiving (this doesn’t matter; only one of these has ever come out. Maybe you get the same edition six times in the same year?)

You won't get the hard copy for this. Hell, you won't even get all of your online copies for this.

So, the promise of six online editions is false. But what about, for instance, the 3 Year Subscription at the bargain price of $180.oo? At the rate this magazine is coming out, if you figure on past performance, you will be forking out $60.00 per magazine, for a three-year subscription, for three magazines. Six issues will take six years to fulfil your subscription. Where will any of us be in six years? Where will the AVN be in two years?

“AHA!”, I hear you say. Dorey says it in red ink, that the AVN will still supply all magazines offered, no matter how long it takes for this to happen (I certainly wouldn’t be taking a big breath and holding it whilst counting magazines as you try and doze off).  The big question Dorey needs to answer for everyone right now is, “how long do you think is appropriate to keep forestalling on promised goods?” Another question is, “do you think it is appropriate to quietly reinterpret the English definition of annual subscription“?

Let’s forget the problems regarding the non-delivery of a product, and consumer law, for the moment. This is well covered in the blog post linked above.

What really grabs my attention right now is Dorey’s red line of text, “any loss is borne by the AVN”.

Well, frankly, I’m not sure that any loss can be borne by the AVN right now, or in the future; considering that the AVN’s last Financial Statement shows that the AVN’s liabilities are only a couple of thousand dollars (but; money accrued from subscriptions, unfulfilled, would count as a liability, would it not?). Look again at the approximated amount of money Dorey owes her creditors (the unfulfilled subscriptions). This is just one question of many questions which have been raised as to the continued operation of the Australian Vaccination Network as a solvent entity. Trading whilst insolvent would be a surprising, extra please explain for the Committee (who could be personally liable to creditors) to put to the President/Treasurer/Spokesperson.

More questions will definitely be asked of the Australian Vaccination Network. We can be certain of that. They may well be happening as we speak.

There is one thing that the AVN (an incorporated association) should keep in mind, as pointed out to me by a friend:

the Commissioner for Fair Trading can apply to a court for the winding-up of an incorporated association. It is an offence for an association to trade whilst insolvent.

ASSOCIATIONS INCORPORATION ACT 2009 – SECT 68

(1) If an association incurs a debt and:

(a) immediately before the debt is incurred:

(i) there are reasonable grounds for believing that the association is or will become insolvent, or

(ii) there are reasonable grounds to expect that, if the association incurs the debt, the association will become insolvent, and

(b) the association is or becomes an association to which this Division applies,

any person who was a committee member of the association at the time the debt was incurred is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units or imprisonment for 1 year, or both.

(2) The association and any person who was a committee member of the association at the time the debt was incurred are jointly and severally liable for the payment of the debt.

About these ads

About reasonablehank

I'm reasonable, mostly.
This entry was posted in anti-vaccination dishonesty, australian vaccination network, AVN, meryl dorey and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to The AVN and their sometimes magazine – redefining the language

  1. AndyD says:

    Assuming the credit card transaction is processed at time of subscription, how can the AVN be the one carrying a loss in respect of those subscriptions? Surely the people who’ve paid the money but received no goods are, by every reasonable definition, the ones carrying a loss.

    Or do the AVN not process the cc transaction until delivery? Which I assume would be a strange way of doing things – and still not equate to a loss.

  2. AndyD says:

    On the other hand, I’m glad she’s finally cleared up the issue of Living Wisdom subscription time frames. That had me confused. Now I’m just perplexed.

  3. shellity says:

    Great post Peter. Between you and Fuzz, I damn near nodded my head off.

  4. Pingback: Meryl Dorey repeats her libellous claims regarding The West Australian’s Cathy O’Leary | reasonablehank

  5. Dan Buzzard says:

    The AVN is slowly collapsing. The fact that Dorey has lost her staff is evidence of that.

  6. Pingback: Why does Meryl Dorey refuse to respond for her demonstrable mistruths and false accusations? | reasonablehank

  7. Pingback: Why does Meryl Dorey refuse to respond for her demonstrable mistruths and false accusations? | reasonablehank

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s