BULLETIN: Lucrazon ‘Program’ Sued In Massachusetts, Amid Allegations Of Fraud

breakingnews72BULLETIN: (Updated 10:18 a.m. ET Dec. 24 U.S.A.) Lucrazon Global, a purported revenue-sharing program pushed on Ponzi boards such as MoneyMakerGroup, has been sued in federal court by private plaintiffs who allege fraud.

Named defendants in the Dec. 9 complaint in Massachusetts federal court are Lucrazon LLC and Lucrazon Global LLC, both of Delaware and California. Plaintiffs are Scott Bonarrigo of Massachusetts and Todd Betlejewski of California.

Oscar Garcia and Alex Pitt are identified in the complaint as officers or employees of Lucrazon.

Former TelexFree huckster Faith Sloan at one time pushed Lucrazon. Sloan was accused by the SEC of securities fraud earlier this year in a case that alleged TelexFree was a massive, international fraud.

Some promoters of the WCM777 Ponzi scheme broken up by the SEC earlier this year also were targeting prospects for Lucrazon and seeking to get them to buy in at $8,000. The PP Blog noted in April that Lucrazon was promoting “Luxury Car Giveaways” and touting appearances by politicians/business figures such as Carlos Gutierrez, Mitt Romney and Vicente Fox at a Los Angeles confab.

Garcia and Pitt are accused in the complaint of making repeated false and misleading representations “that the [Lucrazon] daily bonuses ‘could go to $20 a day, $50 a day . . . who knows.'” However, this was never possible and based upon faulty (as well as meticulously and deliberately skewed) mathematical statistics promulgated to entice Plaintiffs and others into buying into Defendants’ scheme.”

Bonarrigo bought in for $46,000, with Betlejewski paying Lucrazon “approximately $110,000,” according to the complaint.

“Further, Defendants and Oscar Garcia and Alex Pitt (again, falsely and in an attempt to mislead Plaintiffs) represented that Defendants would assemble some 10,000 merchant accounts each making $10,000 into a $100 million bundle, akin to mortgage bundles, and then sell them to the banks at many times monthly recurring commissions,” the complaint alleges. “This never happened and Defendants never intended to do so.”

From the complaint (italics added):

Defendants also advised Plaintiffs that online accounts were worth 10 times the monthly commissions, retail accounts were worth 30 times commissions, and medical accounts were worth 60 times monthly earnings, and that Plaintiffs could sell those accounts every month, or keep them for an alleged large payoff when the bundles were sold. This was not true [sic?] never offered to Plaintiffs nor did Defendants make any attempts to secure such sales that would provide Plaintiffs the ability to elect to either sell or retain their merchant accounts . . .

. . . As further enticement, Defendants repeatedly advised Plaintiffs and others that when these “bundles” were sold, each Brand Partner position (to which both Plaintiffs purchased several) was entitled to a share of this pool of money, and that leaders of said accounts, like Plaintiffs, would be offered interest into another bundle. This was not true [sic?] never offered to Plaintiffs nor did Defendants make any attempts to secure such sales that would provide Plaintiffs the ability to elect to either sell or retain their merchant accounts or be offered the opportunity to re-invest their proceeds towards another endeavor . . .

Despite Defendants’ false and misleading representations, and due solely to Plaintiffs’ own work ethic and business acumen, Plaintiffs began to successfully develop business accounts and profit, which, per Defendants’ representations, was to be passed onto Plaintiffs as part of the aforementioned “daily bonuses.” In fact, said “bonuses” were to commence in January of 2014. Not surprisingly, Defendants never paid any amount of “bonuses” to either Plaintiff . . .

Despite this, and for vague and illusory reasons, these bonuses owed and due to Plaintiffs were then postponed to February of 2014, then yet again to March of 2014, then again in April of 2014 . . .

As such, Plaintiffs [believe] that there simply was no intent whatsoever to actually pay out these “bonuses” but instead Defendants’ representations to the contrary were simply part and parcel of an overall fraudulent scheme to secure as much monetary benefit as possible from Plaintiffs at Plaintiffs’ expense and detriment.

What is more, when daily bonuses did finally begin to commence, they were nothing like what was promised to issue, both in terms of amount and frequency of disbursement. Then mysteriously, all bonus payments simply stopped . . .

However, despite this demonstrable cessation of payments, Plaintiffs’ back office reporting evidences that Defendants falsely and deceptively reported these payments or “bonuses” has having been successfully transmitted, when no such payments were in fact issued to Plaintiffs in any fashion. Put bluntly, Defendants is intentionally and knowingly withholding money that rightfully belongs to Plaintiffs.

NOTE: Our thanks to the ASD Updates Blog. View complaint here.

About the Author

16 Responses to “BULLETIN: Lucrazon ‘Program’ Sued In Massachusetts, Amid Allegations Of Fraud”

  1. There is a bad smell to the Plaintiffs here. It sounds like they were high level participants who may have promoted or recruited for this. Whether or not this is how it all falls out, the case should be stopped and at the very least expanded to a class action to prevent these two plaintiff to be made whole, possibly with the promised returns, leaving other losers to split up a smaller pool of assets should the company later be taken over by some regulatory agency.
    I don’t know why, but this reminds me of the guy who moved to have Banners Brokers involuntarily dissolved in the Isle of Mann, a case that eventually led to officials in Canada later moving to shut that scam down.

    I’m going to dig a little bit onto this, it sounds like an interesting turn. Do you have the actual complaint?

      (Quote)

  2. “due solely to Plaintiffs’ own work ethic and business acumen, Plaintiffs began to successfully develop business accounts and profit, which, per Defendants’ representations, was to be passed onto Plaintiffs as part of the aforementioned “daily bonuses.”

    That’s the part that makes me think “what would happen if Robert Craddock sued RVG”?

      (Quote)

  3. Gregg: Do you have the actual complaint?

    Hi Gregg,

    A link to the complaint now appears in the last line of the story above. Courtesy of the ASD Updates Blog.

    Patrick

      (Quote)

  4. In fact, when
    Plaintiffs and hundreds of others expressed dissatisfaction in the
    false and misleading representations made by Defendants and its individual officers,
    agents and employees,Defendants curiously changed its approach and sales pitch
    towards selling Plaintiffs and others web merchant sites for a profit.

    I think that right there backs up your theory Gregg.

      (Quote)

  5. In sum, Plaintiff Bonarrigo is owed by
    Defendants
    at a minimum, $15,000.00 for
    each of his four (4) accounts purchased
    in addition to the approximately $46,000.00 paid
    to Defendants initially
    . Plaintiff Betlejewski is owed by
    Defendants
    , at a minimum,
    $15,000.00 for each of his ten (10
    ) accounts purchased
    in addition to the approximately
    $110,000.00 paid to Defendants initially
    . Thus, at a minimum,
    Defendants
    is wrongfully
    withholding $
    321,000
    , which belongs to the Plaintiffs

    That’s what I was thinking, they want their “ROI” in addition to the initial investment, whereas if the company was to be taken over by a receiver and liquidated, as some recently have and seems to be the trend, other investors would only expect to get fraction of their initial investment back. That’s just not fair, and as I thought, these guys involvement was before the scam actually launched, which makes them look like almost insiders to me.

      (Quote)

  6. Quick note: There is a case in the Central District of California styled Lucrazon Global v. Francisco Mendoza, Stop Fraud Against Hispanics and Does.

    Don’t have the details.

    Lucrazon and WCM777 are getting some heat from this website:

    http://www.altoalfraude.com/

    Google Translation from Spanish:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.altoalfraude.com%2F&edit-text=

    Patrick

      (Quote)

  7. There also is a case in Idaho styled “Melaleuca Inc v. Lucrazon Global, Inc. et al.”

    Patrick

      (Quote)

  8. Melaleuca Sues Lucrazon Global For Recruiting Their Representatives

    http://www.10incomes.com/page/melaleuca-sues-lucrazon-global-for-recruiting-their-representativ

    Melaleuca, the Idaho Falls-based provider of natural consumer products through a direct-marketing program, is suing a California company, accusing it of stealing away some of its marketing representatives and attempting to recruit numerous others.

      (Quote)

  9. does anyone know if there is a class action against lucrazon?

      (Quote)

  10. Oscar Garcia is a giant scam artist! He should be arrested and thrown in jail. I have data, reports and a list of people he has ripped off dating back to the early 2,000’s! This guy owes me over $35,000. Companies he has been involved in include Lucrazon Global, Explore Talent, 2GO Industries Inc., Market 2 Millions, Web90X, and OG Media. Beware if you meet him, he is a smooth talker and will disappear when he gets what he wants from you.

      (Quote)

  11. Please post the attorney office that is representing the lawsuit if you have it.
    Thanks

      (Quote)

  12. Cristina: Please post the attorney office that is representing the lawsuit if you have it.

    In the Dec. 9 complaint, the attorney was Derek H. DePetrillo, Esq. of Consumer Rights Law Firm PLLC in North Andover, Mass.

    Patrick

      (Quote)

  13. I had bought into Lucrazon for $15,000.00 and another account for my wife for the same amount. I tried to cancel but they kept making empty promises. Can you please advise as to how I can either join this lawsuit or open up my own case to at least get my money back.

      (Quote)

  14. I am also a victim of this people.i withdraw my retirement, and thinking that this people are honest.they are scam!!!!!they should be in prison.

    Cristina:
    does anyone know if there is a class action against lucrazon?

    Gregg Evans:
    In sum, Plaintiff Bonarrigo is owed by
    Defendants
    at a minimum, $15,000.00 for
    each of his four (4) accounts purchased
    in addition to the approximately $46,000.00 paid
    to Defendants initially
    . Plaintiff Betlejewski is owed by
    Defendants
    , at a minimum,
    $15,000.00 for each of his ten (10
    ) accounts purchased
    in addition to the approximately
    $110,000.00 paid to Defendants initially
    . Thus, at a minimum,
    Defendants
    is wrongfully
    withholding $
    321,000
    , which belongs to the Plaintiffs

    That’s what I was thinking, they want their “ROI” in addition to the initial investment, whereas if the company was to be taken over by a receiver and liquidated, as some recently have and seems to be the trend, other investors would only expect to get fraction of their initial investment back.That’s just not fair, and as I thought, these guys involvement was before the scam actually launched, which makes them look like almost insiders to me.

      (Quote)

  15. Hello anyone how can I participate in that law suit me myself I lost $3,000 with them?

      (Quote)

  16. They sued back in 2014 and you’re asking 18 months later?!

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply