GUILDERLAND — Robert Loucks knows what it’s like to be on a ladder when it slips out from under him.

He’s invented something to solve the problem — a ladder stabilizer.

“It’s been in my head for 12 or 15 years,” said Loucks. At 55, he’s been in the construction business for over three decades.

Last year, he went to a safety seminar for his company and heard a guest speaker from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “He said ladder fatalities are number 6 on the list for fatal accidents,” recalled Loucks. “There are at least 500 ladder fatalities a year.”

A little over a year ago, Loucks started working with the Invents Company to help him get his idea patented and into production. He has paid Invents Company $15,000, he said.

“They do everything for you,” he said. “I had a 3-D CAD drawing,” he said of computer-aided design, “and they made a brochure and a website ... I’ve got a patent pending … They will get 10 percent and I’ll get 90 percent,” he said of profits.

“I’m hoping this is going to be my retirement,” said Loucks.

Loucks shared with The Enterprise drawings Invents Company had made of his invention as well as the paperwork toward his patent. The paperwork was not a full application but a provisional application only, which acts as a placeholder for up to 12 months, meaning the regular application needs to be filed by Aug. 15, 2018. Only a full application can become a patent.

He also shared a press release from Invents Company, describing how the “Ladder Safety Stabilizer provides a smooth and safe climb up or down a ladder.”

Loucks said the stabilizer will be made of aluminum. He says that Invents Company has recommended the stabilizer be sold for $40 to $70.

“I’ve been with the company a little over a year,” said Loucks. “In two to three weeks, they’ll assign a licensing agent ... I’m hoping to get it manufactured in two to three months, and then on to the market.”

Invents Company

The release that Loucks brought to The Enterprise listed Jeanne Nelson in the “Media Dept.” as the contact. When The Enterprise called Nelson to ask how many customers Invents Company handles in a typical year, what percentage get patents, what percentage have their inventions in production, and if the $15,000 fee is standard, Nelson said she couldn’t answer those questions.

“I only write press releases,” she explained, noting she works from her Myrtle Beach, South Carolina home and is unaware of anything about how the company functions save what is in its brochure.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office lists three complaints against the Invents Company, with only one of them answered by the company.

The first is from Stacy R. Ross of Topeka, Kansas, filed on Sept. 13, 2014, who says she invented a collapsible upright tool caddy systems that clients weren’t interested in, and that the company didn’t pay attention to her revisions. Further, at the time she filed her complaint, she hadn’t heard back from the company in over a year.

The second, filed on March 27, 2015, is from Eugene T. Booker of Phoenix, Arizona, who says he was “led to believe they were hard at work on my invention/idea, only to disappear with my money and idea.” The company responded, “Mr. Booker did not contract for the second stage of our services and we never submitted information regarding Mr. Booker’s invention to industry.”

The third complaint was filed on May 10, 2015 from Phil and Anne Middlebrook of Stamford, Connecticut who wrote they had been “scammed.” The Middlebrooks said that they first paid $1,200 for a patent search after which they received a “bound book” stating their idea was patentable and marketable, which the Middlebrooks note is “one of the beware” points in the United States Patent and Trademark Office guide.

“We were then pressured to take the next step for the marketing matrix itinerary for $9,995,” the Middlebrooks wrote. “They don’t explain the point that they only cover the provisional patent.”

After over a year, the Middlebrooks say they had no follow-up from the company — “they have no direct phone numbers and only one number for the whole company and don’t return calls when you leave a message.” When they finally received a call back from “Dorothy @ ext. 4809 … and asked if we could get a copy of one of the ads about our invention that they supposedly placed in trade journals and magazines, the request was denied,” the Middlebrooks wrote.

The Middlebrooks concluded, “We understand that several complaints have been made about this company. Perhaps several more are too ashamed to come forward.”

Nelson gave The Enterprise the number for Dorothy Pieterse who said she had been at the company’s “operation center” in South Carolina for 10 or 11 years. She said Invents Company also has an administrative office in New York City.

When she couldn’t answer questions about the number of customers or percentage of those who get patents or see their inventions produced, she said she would connect The Enterprise to someone who could.

A few minutes later, she returned to the phone and said, “We don’t release information about the company … The press releases are sent out to enhance the product.”

Told that The Enterprise would be writing about the complaints with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and would like to include the company’s response, she said, “If you want to write something about the client and the press release, you can, but you can’t write about the company.”

Told about the complaints lodged against the Invents Company, Loucks was not fazed.

“When I went down to Manhattan for my initial conference, they said everybody thinks they’ve got an invention that will change the world,” Loucks said. “They said they probably take like 1 percent … They put it on a scale to make sure it is marketable.”

Updated on Nov. 7, 2017: Drawings and comments on Robert Louck’s provisional application were added.