I have no information on whether there is a genuine Queens Modelling agency or a genuine Mark Phillip.

To get updates delivered by e-mail as they become available, subscribe to this blog.

Last night I received an e-mail from Elaine in the United States that somebody calling himself Hugh Pederson was offering modelling jobs on Facebook. He claimed that he worked for me and said something about the “Marie Claire Face of the Year”.

Update July 2010: The same scam runs now with somebody claiming to look for “the Gloss Magazine face of the year”. Various names are used, the name Glen Reid has been mentioned more than once. See user submitted comments below.

Update November 2011: Getting more reports on this scam, the name Victor Reid is being used, now claiming to scout for “Gloss Magazine face of the month”.

I have never heard of anybody called Hugh Pederson, neither has Elaine nor the people at Marie Claire magazine, which is not surprising because it is a false name used by somebody trying to commit a crime.

Here is a warning to all (aspiring) models: Nobody works for me contacting models and I am not in the habit of offering lucrative modelling jobs on the strength of a snapshot or two. It is a scam. Don’t fall for it, however tempting it may sound.

Although I have no details of this latest scam, I have little doubt that it is a variation on the scam, which is described in detail on my website as the photographer’s rep scam.

Here is a copy of the original message, kindly sent in by Kim:

Hi there. Im Hugh from WOLFKETTLER . Im a professional scout for potential and upcoming models. I am sorry to bother you but i have something that might interest you. Im on a search for a face for our clients .. “the Mary Claire face of the year” Fortunately your profile picture has been viewed and we are interested in hiring you for this highly anticipated project. Please send your email address to hugh.wolfkettler@gmail.com. So i could contact you formally. Thanks a bunch …

The scam is an advance fee fraud. If a model falls for the scam, she is sent a cheque, asked to cash it into her own bank account and then transfer most of the money, except for her fee, to a third party. The explanation is that the money is to cover expenses for the photo shoot, studio hire, etc. Needless to say, the cheque bounces but the fraudsters hope that the transfer from the model has already been made by the time she finds out.

This current variation of the scam differs from the original one because it is written in much better English. The use of my name as part of a gmail e-mail address is clever but can be done by anyone. Still, the message just does not sound genuine and professional.

If you have been contacted with this or similar “offers” through facebook, please post details in the comments box below.

The Internet is essentially a lawless space, in which anybody can pretend to be anybody else with little fear of persecution. When I was first alerted to this scam, in which my name was used, I reported it to the police. Over a period of time, I had gathered some evidence. I had the trail of a cheque and I had an address in the UK.

The police told me that there was nothing they could do because no crime had been committed. I was convinced that there must be a crime somewhere in attempting to obtain money by deception and filed an official complaint. The complaint was looked into but not upheld. It did not help that it was the police who looked into a complaint against themselves.

As long as the police are unwilling to investigate crimes, there is very little that the rest of us can do. The scammers are safe in the knowledge that nobody goes after them.

We should not blame the police alone for not performing. Unrealistic government targets ensure that only those crimes are officially recorded, which have at least some chance of being solved. I doubt that my report and subsequent complaint ever featured in any statistics.

Even though a “cooling off” period had been introduced last year, aspiring models are still being exploited by unscrupulous agencies. New plans would outlaw upfront fees.

This new legislation is a welcome move, which confirms what readers of my models guide have known for years already:

Do not join an agency if you are expected to pay a fee (e.g. for joining, membership or to have a portfolio produced) – so-called upfront fees. Reputable agencies never charge their models any fees. They make their money from finding paid work for you and taking a commission.

My fear is that some so-called agencies will now simply find new ways of charging models, e.g. for test shots or producing portfolios, which also should not happen.

Read more about becoming a model and avoiding the scams in Wolf’s Models Guide.

It involves somebody appearing to be a legitimate business, telling you that they are not a modelling agency but can help you to break into modelling. The scam is ingenious because aspiring models (often with the involvement of their parents) are promised nothing yet still happily pay large amounts of money.

The help seems to consist of two steps:

Firstly, referring an aspiring model to a photographer or studio to have a model portfolio produced. The facilitator only exists to sell model portfolios through an apparently independent photo studio or photographer. In reality, the facilitator and photo studio are one and the same.

The photo shoot itself is often free but you may have to pay a studio rental fee and pay dearly for prints and digital images on CD. Often, the model portfolio is justified by the need to show agencies what you could look like and to teach you how to perform with distractions around you.

The model portfolio is a common misconception. I agree that there are situations, when you want a portfolio. Generally, however, if you want to join one of the reputable agencies, you do not need a portfolio. A few decent snapshots will do. Crucially, legitimate agencies do not want to see what you could look like, they want to see what you do look like: Do not wear any makeup, let anybody do any digital retouching or tell you otherwise.

If you want your application photos created professionally (there is nothing wrong with that), think that you need a portfolio or simply want one, go to an independent, reputable photographer, who knows what kind of photographs agencies want to see and what photographs you may need to have a go at freelance modelling. Many photographers do not know. My own really useful model portfolio is an example of what you should aim for. Check out the price list, too. You should not pay more for a model portfolio.

Secondly, to send the aspiring model’s details and photos to a large number of agencies from some magic database. Apart from the fact that this probably never happens, you do not need anybody to apply on your behalf. If anything, it may well harm your chances of having your photographs looked at. You can find model agencies on the Internet and contact them yourself. This involves a bit of time but does not cost a penny. Do not forget to research whether you are dealing with a legitimate agency.

A variation to this second step is a reply from a model agency, which wants to sign you up but charges an upfront fee (a definite no-no among reputable agencies). This agency is not a real agency and is again the facilitator wearing a different hat.

I have seen some of the marketing materials. My first reaction was “how could you possibly fall for it” and I admit that this was probably a little unfair. The materials look professional, are designed to sell and many people would probably take them for genuine. They are just very dishonest and full of made-up facts.

Try to become a model if you must but be safe and don’t fall for the scams. If you already have become a victim, you should contact Trading Standards.

To find out about becoming a model, checking out agencies and avoiding the scams, visit the Models Guide on my website.

I have written this post in response to an e-mail, which I received today. I am a photographer, not a model agent, and cannot comment on individual companies or give individual advice.

This is the original message, which is typical for many messages that I receive.

Sent: 24 September 2009 12:59
From: xxxx xxxx
E-mail: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Location: xxxxxx Notts
Telephone: xxxxx xxxxxx

Message:
Xxxxxx Xxxxxx are a scam in which I and my daughter fell victim to on 18 September 2009, after being put forward by them to have a photo shoot done at the Xxxx Xxxxx Studios in Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx Street London. I paid a total of £500 for a portfolio which was loaded onto a disc. Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxx Xxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxx Xxxx and Xxxx Xxxxx are all the same company owned by Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, and are mentioned on many sites as being a scam. Their ad is dishonest I feel, because although they say they are not an agency and does not find models work, they can help you break into the modelling world. Their idea of help is by arranging the photo shoot in order to sell you a portfolio, which according to them is your CV, when in actual fact they are only helping themselves. I doubt very much whether my daughter will find work, as the agencies they have recommended are also asking for upfront fees.

Subscribe to this blog to be notified of updates and new posts.