Tag: RVG

  • Alleged Zeek ‘Winner’ Repeatedly Invokes Fifth Amendment In Clawback Case

    UPDATED 3:07 P.M. EDT U.S.A. Darren Miller, an alleged winner of more than $1.635 million in Zeek Rewards and one of the lead defendants in a civil class-action clawback lawsuit filed by Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell, repeatedly has invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself, according to new court filings by Miller.

    In response to Bell’s 2014 clawback action in which the receiver seeks return of the winnings plus interest, Miller, of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, also marked “sic” next to mentions of himself as a defendant. Bell is suing Miller and more than 9,000 alleged Zeek “winners.” The case is styled Bell v. Disner.

    Miller appears to have invoked the Fifth Amendment 41 times in response to 41 inquiries from Bell — 14 questions and 27 requests for documents.

    His response provides an overview of the sorts of questions Bell asked alleged “winners” through interrogatories. It also provides an overview of the type of documents sought from defendants by the receiver. Zeek was part of Rex Venture Group or RVG, alleged by the SEC and federal prosecutors to have been a North Carolina-based Ponzi- and pyramid scheme that gathered hundreds of millions of dollars before the SEC shut it down in August 2012.

    The Zeek clawback litigation itself shows the perils of pushing MLM schemes authorities deem to be fraudulent. Not only is money received from a “program” at great risk of clawback, expensive and emotionally draining legal proceedings on multiple fronts may ensue.  Some defendants even may fear criminal prosecution.

    At the same time, the Zeek clawback actions may provide something of a preview of what’s in store for tens of thousands of TelexFree “winners” pursued by the trustee in that Massachusetts case for return of their gains. TelexFree also was an MLM scheme.

    Pictured below is the first of 14 interrogatories advanced by Bell, according to Miller’s response:

    Question 1 of the Zeek interrogatories.
    Question 1 of the Zeek interrogatories.

    As you can see above, Bell not only asked about Miller’s involvement, he also asked about the involvement of others, potentially including upline sponsors. Here’s how Miller answered Question 1 and 13 others. (Only minor variations such as the Interrogatory number were present.)

    Darren Miller's answer to the first Zeek interrogatory.
    Darren Miller’s answer to the first Zeek interrogatory.

    For years now, the SEC has expressed concern about scams spreading on social media. Bell also had a question about that — in this case, in Interrogatory 14 (as show below):

    The Zeek receiver asked about social-media accounts. There has been a longtime concern about scams spreading on Faceek, Twitter, YouTube and other sites.
    The Zeek receiver asked about social-media accounts. There has been a longtime concern about scams spreading on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other sites.

    In the interrogatories, Bell wanted to know when an individual’s participation began and when it ended. The receiver also was interested in dates and sums and outcomes — such as when money was paid to Zeek and when money was received from the “program” and how it was spent or kept.

    Individuals also were asked to name people who had information “related to your defenses or claims,” according to Miller’s response. Meanwhile, they were asked if they contended Zeek was not a Ponzi or pyramid scheme and to provide the names of individuals who could back up the claim.

    Bell previously expressed concern that some MLMers were moving from one fraud scheme to another in serial fashion.

    On the document front, Bell had 27 specific requests for production, according to Miller’s response. Here is how Miller answered a request to produce documents used “in connection with recruiting persons to participate” in Zeek.

    Miller's response to a request for document production by the receiver.
    Miller’s response to a request for document production by the receiver.

    Miller’s response to the 26 other requests for documents was substantially similar.

    Also see PP Blog editorial from July 1, 2014: On The War In Zeekland And HYIP Rabbit Holes.

    NOTE: Our thanks to the ASD Updates Blog.




  • URGENT >> BULLETIN >> MOVING: TelexFree Trustee Sues MLM Attorney Gerald Nehra

    newtelexfreelogoURGENT >> BULLETIN >> MOVING: (6th Update 8 p.m. EDT U.S.A.) TelexFree Trustee Stephen B. Darr has sued MLM attorney Gerald Nehra and the Nehra and Waak law firm, alleging they were “actively involved” in promoting TelexFree’s Ponzi scheme and “duping” participants.

    Nehra and the firm have asked for more time to respond to the April 1 complaint, saying through court filings that they “anticipated participation in criminal proceedings related to the case.”

    Chief Bankruptcy Judge Melvin S. Hoffman extended the response deadline until June 1. The original deadline was May 2.

    Whether Nehra or the firm considered themselves potential TelexFree criminal defendants was unclear in the response. TelexFree principals James Merrill and Carlos Wanzeler are the sole criminal defendants to date.

    Separately, prosecutors in the Zeek Rewards’ criminal case against Paul Burks said in court filings in the Western District of North Carolina Monday that Nehra and law partner Richard Waak may be called as witnesses in the case against Burks.

    Nehra and Waak have settled with Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell, who alleged they “encouraged investors to participate in the [Zeek] scheme by knowingly allowing their names to be used in providing a false façade of legality and legitimacy and gave improper legal advice that allowed the scheme to continue far longer than it would have without the Defendants’ support.”

    Darr wants Nehra and the firm to return all legal fees paid to them by TelexFree between May 2012 and April 2014 — about $24,000. Hoffman has ruled TelexFree a Ponzi- and pyramid scheme, and Darr contends neither Nehra nor the firm provided any “compensable advice” during the two years they represented TelexFree.

    The trustee further contends that Nehra appeared in a YouTube video promoting TelexFree.

    MLM attorney Gerald Nehra at a TelexFree rah-rah event in California in 2014. Source: YouTube.
    MLM attorney Gerald Nehra at a TelexFree rah-rah event in California in 2014. Source: YouTube.

    Representing Zeek and TelexFree created incredible problems for the two lawyers. At least three of their MLM clients have been charged criminally and a mountain of litigation has been filed against Nehra and the firm, including actions by Darr, Bell and class-action attorneys.

    In the settlement with Bell, Nehra and Waak agreed to a confession of judgment for $100 million. They contended “that they acted in good faith as legal counsel,” but now “acknowledge and agree that, based on their current knowledge, during the period they served as counsel RVG in fact operated an unlawful Ponzi an pyramid scheme involving an unregistered investment contract that caused hundreds of millions of dollars in losses to innocent victims of the scheme,” according to filings from Bell.

    Government attorneys handing the Burks’ criminal case quoted the settlement language in their May 2 filing. RVG, or Rex Venture Group, was the operator of Zeek.

    Zeek and TelexFree combined allegedly gathered on the order of $3.9 billion while creating hundreds and hundreds of thousands of victims globally.

    A TelexFree video featuring Nehra appeared on YouTube in August 2013, according to Darr’s complaint. That’s two months after authorities in Brazil called TelexFree a pyramid scheme.

    Also in August 2013, MLM attorney Jeffrey Babener advised TelexFree that it was operating a pyramid scheme, Darr alleged in September 2014.

    TelexFree nevertheless continued to gather money until it collapsed in bankruptcy in April 2014, Darr alleged. The last payment to Nehra and the Nehra and Waak firm was made on April 3, 2014, just 10 days before the implosion, according to Darr.

    Read Darr’s complaint against Nehra and the firm.

    NOTE: Our thanks to the ASD Updates Blog.

     




       

  • Full Statement From Zeek Receiver On Motion To Certify Net Winner Class

    EDITOR’S NOTE: Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell has issued the following statement (below). The original is here and is dated July 30, 2014. “RVG” stands for Rex Venture Group, the operator of Zeek. Zeek is alleged to be a Ponzi- and pyramid scheme that gathered on the order of $850 million. The receiver’s statement addresses U.S. domestic class-action claims against more than 9,000 alleged “winners.” Still engaging in willful blindness, pushing HYIP schemes and hoping to harvest “commissions” from them — and perhaps deluding yourself into believing there will be no consequences?

    Zeek-related matters have been inside the courts for nearly two years, meaning the litigation is at an advanced stage compared to, say, TelexFree. Zeek’s history therefore may provide a roadmap of sorts on what’s in store downstream for the TelexFree “program” and certain insiders and promoters. On a side note, the trustee in the TelexFree bankruptcy case is seeking court approval to issue subpoenas to many businesses and people who came in contact with that “program.”  TelexFree, which operated in the United States, Brazil and other countries and appears to have gathered more than $1 billion, is known to have had promoters in common with Zeek. By one account, Zeek had 100,000 promoters in Brazil alone.

    Bell is expected to file litigation against alleged international Zeek “winners.” How deeply that will touch Brazilian affiliates is unclear.

    ** Editor’s Note update at 2:08 p.m. Please see Comments thread below for possible Zeek promoter tie-ins to the Profitable Sunrise and Text Cash Network schemes. **

    ** _____________________________ **

    Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell. December 2013 screen shot.
    Zeek receiver Kenneth D. Bell. December 2013 screen shot.

    ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE RECEIVER – JULY 30, 2014

    On March 3, 2014, I announced the filing of a lawsuit to obtain the return of the money paid out to net winners in the ZeekRewards scheme in excess of the amount they paid into RVG. In that lawsuit, Kenneth D. Bell v. Todd Disner, et al., Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-91, I made claims against more than 10 of ZeekRewards’ largest “net winners” in the United States asking that the Court order them to repay the net winnings they received from the scheme. I also made class action claims against approximately 9,400 ZeekRewards net winners in the United States who each won more than $1,000.

    Today, I have filed with the Court a motion asking the Court to certify this Net Winner Class and asked that the Court appoint one or more of the largest net winners sued by name as class representatives because they will, by virtue of their own defense to the same claims, be adequate and appropriate representatives for the rest of the Net Winner Class. Proposed Net Winner Class members are not required to file any response to the motion, but may, of course, discuss this matter with legal counsel if they choose to do so. The deadline for the named defendants to respond to the motion has been set for August 18, 2014.

    A copy of the Motion to Certify the Net Winner Class and the Memorandum of Law in Support of the Receiver’s Motion to Certify the Class can be found here: Motion and Memorandum. Also, a list of those individuals whom the Receiver believes won more than $1,000 and therefore would be included in the Net Winner Class can be found here.

  • BULLETIN: Zeek Receiver Says ‘Large Sums . . . May Have Been Transferred By Net Winners To Other Entities In Order To Hide Or Shelter Those Assets’

    breakingnews72BULLETIN: (UPDATED 2:34 P.M. ET U.S.A.) The court-appointed receiver in the Zeek Rewards Ponzi scheme case has advised a federal judge that he “has obtained information indicating that large sums of Receivership Assets may have been transferred by net winners to other entities in order to hide or shelter those assets.”

    The dramatic assertion by receiver Kenneth D. Bell that Zeek winners may have hidden cash appeared in a motion to Senior U.S. District Judge Graham C. Mullen to compel certain alleged Zeek “winners” to produce documents in advance of anticipated clawback actions.

    Bell’s move may send shudders across the HYIP sphere because it signals an effort to unmask bids by willfully blind hucksters and professional Ponzi players — known derisively as “pimps” — to benefit from serial scamming on a national and international scale. It is known, for instance, that some Zeek participants also pitched AdSurfDaily, which the U.S. Secret Service described in 2008 — at least two years before the launch of Zeek — as an international Ponzi scheme that had gathered tens of millions of dollars.

    ASD operator Andy Bowdoin pleaded guilty to wire fraud in May. In August, he was sentenced to 78 months in federal prison.

    HYIP schemes thrive in part because serial scammers race from scheme to scheme to scheme while turning blind eyes to obvious markers of fraud, including purported returns that dwarf the marketplace and are unusually consistent. Zeek planted the seed that it provided a daily return of between 1 percent and 2 percent. In August, the SEC said Zeek’s payout “consistently has averaged approximately 1.5% per day.”

    Zeek operator Paul R. Burks, the SEC charged, “unilaterally and arbitrarily” determined the daily dividend rate to give “investors the false impression that the business is profitable.”

    In 2009, the U.S. Secret Service effectively accused Bowdoin of doing the same thing. ASD purported to pay 1 percent a day. In August 2012, the Secret Service said it also was investigating Zeek. Court filings in the ASD case show that some members of ASD established entities through which to receive proceeds from ASD. One was described as a “ministry of giving,” for instance. Another was described as a nonprofit religious entity.

    The Secret Service described ASD as a “criminal enterprise” that directed tainted proceeds potentially to thousands and thousands of participants while scamming the very people it purported to be helping earn money through its 1-percent-a-day revenue-sharing “program.”

    Zeek also described itself as a revenue-sharing program and, like ASD, preemptively denied that anything untoward was occurring. Burks did not contest the SEC’s case against his firm, neither admitting nor denying wrongdoing. ASD’s Bowdoin eventually acknowledged that he was at the helm of a massive Ponzi scheme and that ASD had never operated lawfully from its inception in 2006 through it collapse in 2008.

    Bell also revealed in the filing that he had filed paperwork in “all” 94 U.S. federal court districts to inform judges and court officials that he was presiding over the receivership ordered by Mullen in August after the SEC described Zeek as a $600 million Ponzi- and pyramid scheme operated through Rex Venture Group LLC (RVG) and Burks. The move was designed to consolidate jurisdiction over clawback actions in a single place: Mullen’s courtroom in the Western District of North Carolina, the home base of Zeek.

    Among other things, Bell is seeking “All documents constituting or relating to any communication involving or related to RVG.”

    “The Receiver has asked for these documents to learn more about how the recipient was involved in Zeek, portrayed the scheme to others, solicited others, and otherwise conducted activities related to Zeek,” Bell said in court filings.

    Meanwhile, Bell is seeking “All documents constituting or related to any communication to any affiliate, vendor, customer or client of RVG related to RVG.” At the same time, he is seeking “Documents sufficient to show all user names, passwords, email addresses and accounts used . . . in connection with RVG.”

    That information is needed because many “individuals used multiple user names, and this information will clarify which user names a given net winner used,” Bell advised Mullen. “In addition, the account information will help to allow the Receiver to verify the financial figures calculated from RVG’s records.”

    Bell’s motion to compel specifically references Zeek affiliates Robert Craddock, David Sorrells, David Kettner and Mary Kettner as the recipients of subpoenas from the receivership. In October, Bell mailed a first wave of subpoenas to about 1,200 Zeek affiliates. He effectively is seeking the same information from them that he is seeking from Craddock, the Kettners and Sorrells.

    Craddock, the Kettners and Sorrells “have failed to produce any of the documents requested by the Receiver despite multiple requests,” Bell advised Mullen. “Therefore, the Receiver has filed a motion to compel production of a portion of the documents originally requested by the Receiver.”

    The Kettner and Sorrells potentially have nearly $2 million in combined clawback exposure, according to court filings. Craddock’s exposure is unclear. He has referred to himself as a Zeek “consultant.”

    One of the authorities Bell pointed to in advance of Zeek clawback actions and in his motion to compel the production of documents is a case involving Michael Quilling, an attorney for Craddock, the Kettners and Sorrells. Quilling himself has presided over SEC receiverships.

    Bell pointed out to Mullen that Quilling once sued the estate of a a deceased individual who’d received proceeds from the Frederick J. Gilliland Ponzi scheme in 2002. That lawsuit was filed on the same legal theory Bell is pursuing in the Zeek case: that recipients of fraudulent proceeds from a Ponzi scheme are not entitled to keep them.

    See post on ASDUpdates.