Sam Cohen’s Ashley & Martin

Sam Cohen’s Ashley & Martin

Print This Post Print This Post

You can’t have a conversation with Sam Cohen without him telling you that he worked at Ashley & Martin for 33 years. What he does not point out is that the company to which he is referring is not the company that we know in today’s market. The modern Ashely & Martin is not the company for whom he worked. Yet Sam Cohen will spin that line, hoping that we might be impressed about his past. Here is a sworn and signed Affidavit presented by Mr Cohen on the 3rd of May 2010 to the District Court of NSW, saying on Oath that he was a ‘director’ of Ashley & Martin for two years. Unfortunately for Mr Cohen, ASIC records (see below) contradict this.

Let’s explore this argument to see what emerges:

1) Saying that he worked at Ashley & Martin is like someone saying that they worked at IBM for 33 years. This is an incomplete, misleading statement. IBM could stand for Indian Boot Menders. Mr Cohen drags his past into the conversation, knowing that the current Ashley & Martin is a large company. He wants us to believe that he had worked for the well-known company. This is not the case. The Ashley & Martin whom Sam worked for was an old company in trouble. It folded and disappeared under a cloud of debt, in-fighting, and insider theft. That old company was run to the ground as a result of mismanagement. Sam worked for a failed company. A defunct enterprise that disappeared in shame. He never worked for the modern Ashley & Martin. (Click here to read a transcript of a Tribunal hearing wherein Mr Cohen told the Presiding Member that he worked at Ashley & Martin.)

2) At a hearing for a former client called Lucy, on the 29th of July 2010, Mr Cohen said that he left Ashley & Martin to pursue his own business. In fact (and I have it on perfect authority) after the old Ashley & Martin had come out of Administration, the new owners did not offer Mr Cohen a position with the new company. That was a conscious decision by the new Board to terminate their association with Sam Cohen.

3) Mr Cohen has said that he was a Director of Ashley & Martin for two years. ASIC searches contradict this. So I summonsed Mr Cohen to provide his employment history, because he had submitted an old Ashley & Martin annual report as part of his defence for my case at CTTT. Unfortunately, Mr Cohen did not produce a single document. How hard could it be for him to submit basic information? Why would he not comply and respond to the summons? He makes wild statements left, right, and centre. Yet, when he is called to prove his statements, he can’t produce anything at all. (By the way, I have similar questions about Mr Cohen’s supposed Bachelor of Science. Click here for more information about his alleged degree.)

So before we ponder how Mr Cohen can swear that he was a director for TWO years, we must note why and how he became a director. My reliable source told me that Mr Cohen was made a director during a turbulent time when there were struggles and disputes on the Board of the old Ashley & Martin. One of the power-brokers on the Board was appointing new directors so that he could have loyal supporters who could help him to swing the votes. It was a strategic move on the part of an old shareholder. I was told that it was a manoeuvre to assist that shareholder to gain more traction on the Board. Was Mr Cohen a director in the real and operational sense? My source tells me that Mr Cohen was merely a director on paper. He had no real duties as a director, and he did not operate in any senior capacity. In those days, Sam was the manager of the Sydney office and his role was to look after the staff in that office and to consult new clients. I was told, ‘At no time was he involved in the management of the company’s financials, development, or implementation of new technologies or marketing decisions.’ I was told that Sam Cohen had no input on the management of the company.

Despite this, Mr Cohen had printed a brochure in which he claims to have been associated with ‘research, development, improvements and innovations…’ He claims to have helped thousands of people. He says, ‘I have helped.’ And he adds, ‘I also solved their “hair and scalp problems”… improved “Hair Implantation’ procedures and consulted and advised on all types of “Hair Transplants”.’ I made enquiries about these claims, and I was told, ‘Regarding the statements on hair implantation (artificial hair implants) Sam did change the methods of aftercare which was against the manufacture’s and the company’s guidelines. With hair transplantation, he contributed nothing because he is not a surgeon. Many of the statements made by Sam Cohen with his role and input to Ashley and Martin would be considered as marketing puffery.’


In conducting ASIC searches, I discovered that Sam Cohen is known to ASIC under two dates of birth. This could be a simple administrative error, or a clever tactic. I always worry when I meet people who seem to have more than one date of birth. The fact of the matter is, ASIC seems to think that Mr Cohen was born twice. This makes me suspicious.

Mr Cohen had said that he was a director of Ashley & Martin for two years. He also said that he worked at Ashley & Martin for 33 years. Here we see the ASIC extract showing that Sam was with Lord Jim Hair Pieces (wigs) from 1983. This was an off-shoot of Ashley & Martin. However, selling wigs is a different speciality, and requires a different set of skills that have nothing to do with medically trying to re-grow people’s hair using Minoxidil, Proscar, and Loniten. The first reported date of Sam Cohen working at Ashley & Martin is 1990. So when it comes to experience selling hair treatments (as opposed to wigs) it amounts to 20 years, not 33.

Below we see that ASIC shows that Mr Cohen was a director of the old Ashley & Martin, including a director of its parent company Clinics Australia, not for two years as he had sworn, but for only six months from 2 May 1997 to 30 October 1997. So from where does Sam get the two years? Once again, I shall extend the invitation to Mr Cohen to set the record straight. If he wishes to correct anything on this site, with real proof, he would be most welcome. According to ASIC, Mr Cohen was not a director of Ashley & Martin for two years, as he had stated.

By the way, if you want to know what Ashley & Martin thinks about Sam Cohen, just watch this video from the Ashley & Martin channel on YouTube and fast forward to 3:00 minutes. You can also read the ‘Ashley & Martin Scam Watch’ report at this link where we see Ashley & Martin noting the following warning: ‘Sam Cohen IHRB scam – Sam Cohen IHRB story. Here is a classic example of a non-medical person being involved in the medical hair loss arena. In this instance a non-medical person handing out incorrect medications, having no prescriptions, selling other peoples medications and tampering with prescription medications. All of these things are dangerous and illegal. Fortunately the NSW Health Department have stopped him trading awaiting a review.’

Comments are closed.