EOW confirm Speak Asia criminal case charging on
Given that the Solomon James writ 383 case lodged in the Supreme Court is a civil case revolving around the recovery of money from Speak Asia, I myself have maintained that there is little chance it will have any bearing on the criminal investigations into the company.
I wrote the above a few days ago and it pretty much illustrates my thoughts on the Solomon James writ 383 case currently being heard in the Supreme Court.
Ask a Speak Asia panelist (one of the few left who still believe they’re going to get paid thousands of dollars for recruiting people) about the criminal investigations into Speak Asia and your most likely to be told that the Supreme Court will decide everything, criminal or otherwise pertaining to Speak Asia.
Furthermore many believe that it is on the basis of the Solomon James writ 383 case that Speak Asia’s business operations will restart – despite as yet unresolved criminal investigations launched by various agencies (most visibly the EOW and CID).
After publicly failing to clarify the status of their investigation themselves since the Solomon James writ 383 case was launched last year, today finally the EOW have made public how the 383 writ affects their investigations.
The short answer?
It doesn’t.
Acknowledging the James writ 383 proceedings and the mediation process accompanying it, the EOW has clarified that writ 383 ‘will not affect their (the EOW’s) case, even the SC has said that mediation is separate from the case‘.
Of course one only needed to look at the amount of cases Speak Asia have launched against the authorities attempting to stop investigations into the company to realise this. Cases have been launched in Raigad, Thane, AP and Mumbai, all with the sole intent to prohibit criminal investigations going forward which could potentially result in proceedings at a later date.
Had Speak Asia themselves believed the Jame writ 383 case was going to settle everything, they surely wouldn’t have launched all these cases (there’d be no need).
Many Speak Asia senior panelists have been running around the last few days announcing that with AISPA paying off Navniit Kkhosla, that this means (in Mumbai at least) that there is no basis for the criminal case against the company.
Adressing this, the EOW have answered that
Navneen (sic) Khosla’s money (had been returned) but it will not impact the criminal case.
Kkhosla himself also clarified the status of his FIR,
“I have got six demand drafts collectively amounting to the money I invested,” said Khosla, adding, “I have not withdrawn the complaint. It is the state’s prerogative what it wants to do with the case.”
And whilst senior panelists are running around calling for calm and reassuring what’s left of Speak Asia’s panelist base that they ‘will definitely win’, the EOW meanwhile are pressing on with their investigation.
The latest development could see the possible arrest of AISPA secretary Ashok Bahirwani.
Bahirwani went into hiding late last year and surfaced only when he managed to obtain a 72 hour notice period order from the Mumbai High Court in the event the EOW wished to arrest him.
Following a series of interrogations, the details of which Bahirwani never made public, sometime over the weekend the EOW served Bahirwani with the required notice to inform him of his pending arrest.
A bail application is to be heard later today in Mumbai and seeing as Bahirwani hasn’t been arrested yet, one can assume Bahirwani has applied for anticipatory bail. To date, if I’m recalling correctly, nobody who has been arrested in regards to the Speak Asia case has been awarded anticipatory bail, indicating the strength of the criminal cases against the accused.
Unfortunately for now the EOW haven’t further elaborated on what ground they are arresting Bahirwani on, nor the extent that they suspect his involvement in Speak Asia is.
On the 5th of November 2011 Bahirwani wrote on the AISPA website:
I am the Secretary of AISPA and not part of the SAOL management. The company is not in touch with me, so I have no information what so ever about the internal happenings of the company.
Yet on the 3rd of March 2012, Bahirwani then wrote:
Once the (Speak Asia) business restarts, AISPA will serve us (sic) an interface between the Panelists and the Company Management.
Quite clearly there is an obvious relationship between AISPA and Speak Asia management. AISPA paying off Navniit Kkhosla on behalf of Speak Asia and the revelation that AISPA President Melwyn Crasto was recieving payments from the company (after they had ceased business operations) only strengthen the apparent relationship.
Hopefully if the EOW arrest Bahirwani then the extent of his personal involvement in Speak Asia and its management will finally be made public.
In the meantime, part of what was revealed today by the EOW regarding their investigation did raise an eyebrow.
Money has been repaid by an association and not by SpeakAsia. We are probing a case against the firm. We have 200 other victims.
Mathematically speaking it’s been known for a long-time now that Speak Asia cannot pay out the RP balance it owes to its panelist base, so one would hope that the EOW investigation extends beyond the recovery of funds.
That said, perhaps they are leaving the CID to go after the company itself. Last year it was the CID who announced they were going to approach interpol to try to bring in Speak Asia’s fugitive management team from overseas, where they are currently hiding in Dubai and Singapore.
Shortly after this Speak Asia launched Supreme Court action against the CID to try to stop them further investigating the company. The case is continuing in the Supreme Court with the next hearing set for March 23rd.
Additionally after being repeatedly denied anticipatory bail, Tarak Bajpai and three others have approached the AP High Court (CRLP 10782 / 2011) to quash the CID FIR that they have previously been arrested in connection with. This case was repeatedly delayed last week and has been set for hearing today, March 19th.
Finally, in my last article on Speak Asia I discussed the EOW’s revelation that they had approached the Supreme Court and put in a stay application. I strongly suspect this is the Solomon James writ 383 case however it has been discussed that it might very well be the Speak Asia case against the Andhra Pradesh CID.
The argument I can see for it being in relation to the James writ 383 case are that this case has been cited numerous times by AISPA in their 3611 writ as a reason to quash the EOW investigation. A stay in the 383 case eliminates this argument.
As for the CID case, the only thing I can come up with is that the EOW believe the CID investigation’s continuance will help their own case against the company and strongly influence the Mumbai Court’s ruling in the AISPA 3611 case.
Hopefully later this week this will be clarified and along with Bahirwani’s arrest a more detailed picture can be painted regarding the current status of the various criminal investigations into Speak Asia.
This is only the frustration of EOW, as after 9months investigation they got Nothing…
…how does a regulator experience “frustration”?
They don’t have anything to lose or gain, nor do they have any money invested in Speak Asia. Regulatory bodies don’t get frustrated as there’s nothing to get frustrated about.
Implying that the EOW are frustrated is just senior panelists trying to push the ‘us vs. them’ line. Only the EOW have no vested interest in the success or failure of the company, nor whether it’s a scam or not.
Language like “attacking/harassing panelists” and “frustration” is just emotional driven manipulative language. Effective in herding up the villagers but ultimately inconsequential.
Naming Bahirwani as a ‘top official from SpeakAsia’‘, Samarth Moray from MidDay writes:
Bahirwani’s letter sounds like too little too late. He was aware something was up and pre-emptively fired off a ‘ok I’ll stop stuffing you around letter’ to the EOW. The article mentions co-operation with court orders, but nothing about co-operating with the EOW.
Rather than co-operate with the EOW last year Bahirwani chose to go into hiding for over a month. Sounds to me like the EOW have had enough of Bahirwani’s ‘I have nothing to do with Speak Asia’ crap and are bringing him in. Wonder what the evidence they have against him is?
With Saturday being the date of issue of the arrest notice, that puts us on schedule for a Tuesday afternoon arrest. If he doesn’t get anticipatory bail, I wonder if Bahirwani will disappear again?
The EoW should thrash this rascal, Ashok Bahirwani, in custody in order to make him sing like a canary.
EOW has told that Speak Asia has’t paid the balance amount to Khosla, only Association has paid. Now, it’s very clear that EOW wants SpeakAsia to pay the payment to all the panelists BUT they won’t allow any route or gateway to pay that until all criminal investigations / charges gets completed or cleared. (Sufferers are common panleists like us! But Navniith Khosla is lucky he got his money back!)
Next question? When EOW will complete the investigation?
That depends on the cooperation what they get from SpeakAsia officials, What sort of cooperation EOW is expecting from SpeakAsia officials?
That is secret! Even if they co-operate, EOW will tell Speak Asia is not co-operating, in such case Speak Asia has to remain silent – that was the co-operation. Whatever EOW tells everyone has to remain silent, that’s what EOW is expecting! Actual plan is until EOW gets the target (many knows what is their target!)
So, what finally EOW is expecting?
Is it they want MONEY from the Speak Asia management or MONEY from those panelists whoever earned from SpeakAsia as DNA reported on 21st Feb, 2012. (www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_speakasia-panelists-accuse-eow-of-harassment-move-court_1652796).
(It should not be a gamplay everyone jointly playing to make common man (entire panelist community as bakra..!))
Also more interestingly, On 16th March, 2012 MidDay’s Samarth Moray reported as..
(http://http://www.mid-day.com/news/2012/mar/160312-Investor-withdraws-first-complaint-against-Speak-Asia.htm)
On 19th March, 2012 Times Of India’s Mateen Hafeez reported as..Navniith Khosla says
(www.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Repayment-will-not-hit-SpeakAsia-probe/12322249.cms)
What a news? What a coverage by these news papers? Totally opposite news, DNA & MidDay giving little favour of SpeakAsia and it’s panelists and Times Of India’s Mateen Hafeez acts as a mouthpiece of EOW from the start like you Oz.
I want to congratulate & appreciate you for your articles Oz, really you are a genius, you are drafting things nicely, like an experienced craftsman, creating each & every news in a beautiful manner, such a way like it seems to be correct news, but the actual reality – only members associated with speakasia knows.
You are having good skill of compiling things – and also you are having extra ordinary skill which many people wouldn’t have – to create or make right news as wrong one and more specifically and importantly wrong news as a right one (Mateen Hafeez’s all TOI News is the best example for that)!
That’s great way of reporting the news!
Keep it Up man..!
mind ur langauge mr jutamaro, anyone fighting for lac of families is not a rascal.
mr jutamaro u must be hit with a shoe on your head MR ASHOK is our leader you have no right to abuse himm.
I jsut wanna say one thing to BEHINDMLM plz type out facts not allegations why you dont care for lakhs of people who have invested in the company ? are u interested in company to be shutdown
I want to clear your doubts:
this the courts order plz go on facts
@Shiva
Thanks for the kind words, it’s not easy putting the information together into a narrative but it’s certainly an interesting task to undertake.
I think the 27th will clear up what’s going on in the 3611 case. Also hopefully by the end of the week we know which case the EOW have applied for a stay of proceedings in.
I note that Bahirwani’s bail hearing has been postponed till tommorow so that’s of interest too. If the EOW reveal what they’ve got on Bahirwani and it’s not enough to arrest him that’ll certainly be interesting. Likewise if it’s enough that’ll also be interesting.
Crasto was silent on his involvement in Speak Asia but Bahirwani has streneously denied any involvement, despite announcing AISPA would be defacto local management should the company restart.
I like to look at it as if it was a robbery. If you rob someone and they file a FIR, even if they get the money back and you opt to withdraw the FIR, that doesn’t mean the police just suddenly drop all investigations into the crime itself.
Panelists and AISPA seem to be quick to overlook the whole ‘we ran a ponzi scheme for a year’ issue regarding Speak Asia and believe payments and exit options somehow negate that.
i didnt understand on the last three lines you wrote plz dont define speak asia as ponzi scheme its not at all an ponzi scheme its just an allegation that the company is running an ponzi scheme
ponzi scheme is much different then what speak asia is offering
plz explain what do u mean by ponzi scheme. speak asia doesnt giv payment only to members who are having sub-panels but it is also to members who are timely putting there surveys
@shiva
Compiling things may be both good or bad. I will consider it to be a bad idea if it only shows one side of a case. It’s a good idea if it’s used to make facts become clearer.
I consider it to be “make things clearer”, when Anjali and I had different viewpoint, when we both presented pretty onesided viewpoints. And so far, very few have been willing to disagree in the onesided viewpoint I presented (about fake surveys being meaningless).
I’m not very willing to accept businesses having illegal stages, since this soon will become a major problem if other businesses claim the same right. Speak Asia will have to face the real problem before they can continue without resistance. They can’t WIN this problem in court, or by introducing a vague business plan that makes the problem worse.
The real problem is that Speak Asia was operating for a year, without having real clients paying for the surveys. The money they paid for doing surveys and in the binary compensation plan was the members own money (as a group).
They can’t solve it by recruiting more members or selling additional panels. It will only make the problem worse. They can’t cheat people either, since this will eventually lead to other problems.
@Badshah
The real problem is within the business model, where members will have to pay to participate, and the business constantly will need to recruit more members to be able to pay old ones.
The problem isn’t within the authorities, the court system or the media. They have only made the problem become visible. When Star News reported about fake clients in May 2011 they told the truth.
You can’t expect being able to solve a problem if you’re not able to identify it, so the first step should be to identify the problem correctly.
A solution to the problem would be to have real clients willing to pay for the surveys, but the business model doesn’t support that solution. They have too much panelists, panels and IDs, and the surveys are over priced. With 12 lakh members they will need clients willing to pay tens or hundreds of million dollars each week.
12,00,000 panelists * 5 panels per member * $20 = $120 million USD per week.
You can’t expect to solve this problem by recruiting more members and selling more panels.
Beyond that, we have also the 4.5 billion RPs(each RP worths 1 dollar) that SpeakAsia owes its panelists
But who is Bahirwani REALLY fighting for, since thus far all he had done is take money from the panelists to serve SAOL (for lawyer fee, for Kkhosla), and not the other way around?
To analyze whether it is a Ponzi scheme or not, you need to analyze where the money is coming from, and going.
In a REAL survey business, majority of income is from actual companies who paid $$$ to have surveys conducted, and that $$$, minus expenses of conducting the survey and some profit, was passed on to the panelists.
In a Ponzi scheme, vast majority of the income is membership dues, enrollement fees, or whatever you call them. They came from members who joined.
Then through some sort of an internal system (which is not relevant), it is determined that some people deserve MORE money than others, usually people who joined early, so they are paid $$$ (net gain), whereas other members paid $$$ but not not yet gained (net loss). Little to none outside revenue was fed in.
So which one is SpeakAsia? While SpeakAsia does have surveys, there has been ZERO PROOF that they have ANY CLIENTS that paid them ANY MONEY for surveys. Every client they IMPLIED they had have denied ANY involvement with SpeakAsia.
Which leaves you Ponzi scheme, since you cannot have a survey company without any clients PAYING for the surveys.
chang ur just talking like jutamaro, and whats wrong in that if Bahirwani has taken money form panelists to pay nawneet, panelists have given money to bahirwani at their own will, he never forced anybody, and last but not least read nawneet FIR carefully..
Again, Bahirwani is supposed to be representing the panelists rights, and that means they get paid, right?
instead of getting panelists money, he’s actually GETTING MONEY FROM THE PANELISTS (to pay various things on behalf of SAOL).
Is that what he’s supposed to do? Please answer the question.
Told u chang read Nawneet affidavit clearly, Nawneet affidavit said he would accept payment from the company or any of the accused in the matter, hence Bahirwani has made the payment collected from various panelists willing to help, and to support SAOL.
We can even sell or Homes, its our money its our will, do u have any question in that chang.
I don’t think they OWE all that in RP yet, I will believe most of it has been reinvested in additional panels (the “earn & burn” rule they had).
MISTER COLIBRI
By the way, has anything happened with Mister Colibri in Brazil? Are they offline or online, under investigation or still recruiting?
When I filed a report in Norway in 2009, I used some special tricks to guide it to the right authority as fast as possible, but such tricks shouldn’t be necessary to use. I identified the case as “economical crime, crossing borders, probably Interpol” when I sent it to the local police station.
I deliberately described the case as outside their local jurisdiction to speed it up. The local police sent the case to the Central Economic Crime Unit within a week (instead of starting their own investigation locally, or file the case among many others).
People will usually handle things as “within their own profession, jurisdiction, etc.”, and some people use lots of time before they discover other jurisdictions than their own in a case.
Adding a few tricks can make it more fun when I’m planning things like that, and it’s also interesting when tricks work. 🙂 But I don’t like using tricks if I can avoid it.
Tricks like that can be used when you know how an agency thinks and works, and I’m familiar with the Norwegian police (I know many of the details in how they handle cases at an early stage). I’m more careful when it comes to recommending the same methods for others (because I use other tricks too).
Most of my experience comes from having Government agencies and business corporations as customers in a sales job (selling office furniture). This means I’m very familiar with talking to officials, even if I’m often missing some specialized education in other parts of what I’m doing.
Some people seems to be very eager to get rid of their money? 🙂
“It’s my free will to sell my house and support SAOL with the money.”
It’s easier for people to understand you if you provide them with some other motives than “free will”. Free will should also include not to sell your house. Only having free will to sell your house isn’t very useful? 🙂
I have made a comment (one time) about some differences most people aren’t aware of, like that it’s more common to be self employed in India than in the U.S., Europe etc. – and that SAOL was a the best income opportunity possible to find (when it worked).
People may actually understand the motives, but they will never accept the idea of making Ponzi schemes become legal.
some one here was telling dat speak asia is a ponzi scheme
about the surveys i have a scanned copy of bata company where the company states that we give permission to speak asia to perform survey for us
Here i need your attention:
When we first saw speak asia news on tv there some one was telling to reporter that BATA AIRTEL etc were there clients but they were not speakasia’s clients it was wrongly said by that company official on tv,
I also need to say there is no usefulness to argue here lets wait & watch secondly if speakasia was really ponzi scheme then why EOW couldnt prove it in court has anybody got the answer and also it is a concern for atleast 12 lac panelist
It is absolutely false allegation that unless a panelist is added by another panelist company wont pay to first panelist the company wud pay extra if a panelist adds another.
The panelist must atleast do survey to earn,evn if a new member joins and he doesnt add anyoneelse he will get rewards for his surveys and if he adds a member he gets extra reward or commission i m saying the truth
Other than WHY, no. Why do you support SAOL so? or is it support of AISPA? Are they even separate in your mind?
Instead of getting money from it, you want to give it more money. Why? Is it like religion to you?
yet Manoj Kumar himself claimed that he did NO COMMISSIONED WORK for Bata
http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/speak-asia-clarifies-over-wrongly-claiming-clients_544022.html
@Badshah
Speak Asia needed constant recruitment, to be able to pay for more than a few weeks. They needed money IN to be able to pay money OUT, and most of that money came from panelists.
I was talking about payment in MONEY, not the payment in virtual points. If they only pays in virtual points they will be able to continue for a long time.
If people had stopped investing more money, Speak Asia would have been able to pay for surveys for a few weeks, if they had to pay in MONEY. I’ll guess maybe 4 weeks or something.
I don’t consider Reward Points to be money, even if you can use them to buy more panels.
As we see in the order released on March 15th, link given below:
http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/data/criminal/2012/WP361111150312.pdf
On 19th March, 2012 Times Of India’s Mateen Hafeez reported totally against the High Court Order by writing as ((he is a person from Supreme Court) and for that you also supported and encouraged)
As we see in the news released on March 19th, link given below:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Repayment-will-not-hit-SpeakAsia-probe/12322249.cms
This is a blunder mistake by both of you & Mateen. I think Mr. Mateen Hafeez hasn’t seen the Order properly, it is very bad, today’s media is really very bad, even Oz you haven’t mentioned clearly about the first half of the first point mentioned in the Order in your previous article (link given below)
https://behindmlm.com/companies/speak-asia-online/eow-move-to-freeze-speak-asia-supreme-court-case
which I’ve noticed, even you also after reading the complete order of High court (knowing everything) going with Mateen Hafeez’s article & supporting him, I can’t understand what you are coming to tell here? Are you mouthpiece of TOI’s Mateen Hafeez?
Please reply! For the first time – I started to hate your article, till yesterday I thought your articles had some real stuff… Now I doubt! Please explain Oz, you did a mistake here…!
There hasn’t been any trial yet, so we don’t know anything about how able they are to prove anything.
“Couldn’t prove it” will normally mean there has been a trial, so I’ll guess you meant something else, like “won’t be able to prove it”?
EOW won’t prove anything, neither before the Lahoti Committee nor the Supreme Court, since none of them have the right jurisdiction. The criminal parts of the case will have to be handled by a lower court first.
@Badshah
To dtae not one survey client has been publicly named by Speak Asia, nor has any company come forth and admitted they commissioned the company to do surveys.
In the absense of survey clients, all that’s happening is that people put money in (membership) and then earn a ROI over a year greater than the amount they put in. The surveys are a rudimentary task without actual clients.
The EOW have a sworn confession from the guy who was creating the surveys stating there are no clients. And what, if there were you don’t think Speak Asia would at least release the name of one publicly just to clear themselves? They won’t because like all the companies they lied about they’d quickly confirm they never had anything to do with Speak Asia.
Finally Seven Rings’ (one of Speak Asia’s parent companies) other most recent scams, the AdMatrix and Mister Colibri both also have no corporate clients (Mister Colibri actually admitted this in Brazil).
@Vicky
The FIR still stands and hasn’t been withdrawn. Kkhosla merely stated he himself has no complaint, the EOW quite obviously are intent on continuing their investigation.
Had the FIR been withdrawn it would have been noted and the court wouldn’t have set another date for the 27th. Mind you, if the stay application fails and whatever the EOW are currently up to doesn’t work out the FIR may very well be withdrawn. But until we actually see that it’s withdrawn in writing from somewhere, it hasn’t happened – Kkhosla has just said he wishes to withdraw his complaint.
Again I’ll reiterate the theft scenario. Someone robs you and you complain to the police who lodge a FIR. The thief then gives you back your money and you’re happy. Meanwhile the police still need to address the fact that a crime has been comitted whether you withdraw your complaint or not.
We are the innocent panellist & honest citizen of India. Why we’ll not support SAOL, close the eyes to it? & we will forget everything including our money which is trapped at controversy of EOW & SAOL? They were pull out our mind & spirits by means of Investigation set-off ?
Why our respected EOW unable to verify entire scheme is Ponzi if it was in fact over and done with illegal business transaction?.
How long criminal cases charging on & when they will prove of said scheme are against the law & move towards in favour of 12 lakhs panellist? Why they are not thinking at least in favour of innocent panellist earliest to clear dues payment if company is ready to pay back?.
Let’s accept your precious declaration for a minute. SpeakAsia don’t have clients & running entire business at money circulation based subsequently till today N nos of conclusion done at various courts & all accused granted bail.
However under no circumstances such type of decision come to an end as they were running illegal scheme, WHY still enquiry stay behind to prove?
If that guy or SpeakAsia itself produced fake surveys & collect money from marketplace by selling such type of surveys afterwards why that guys granted bail straight away from hon’ble court? Why they haven’t kept back permanently behind bars?
Hope you’re being the professional person & know everything concerning SpeakAsia matter & look forward to you’ll provide your helpful feedback to us.
Because SAOL *may* be a scam, and you all share responsibility in the sense that you willingly fed it?
Real investigation takes months and sometimes, years.
Except this so-called exit option was NOT mentioned in any court documents thus far, unless you want to BELIEVE (without proof) that it will be a part of Hon. Lahoti’s Committee mediation results.
Because the inquiry is not yet finished, and SAOL is trying everything they can (even suing TV shows and EOW in three provinces) to block investigations.
And with AISPA running interference (remember Bahirwani pleading “don’t sue SAOL”?) the whole process is even slower.
Because they have not been convicted yet. In fact, EOW has yet to actually charge SAOL and its executives with a crime, but they say they will
Clearly, few remembered that CID announced many months ago they intend to issue red letter notice to Interpol against the two fugitives outside of India.
Just for comparison, BurnLounge, which claimed to be a new way to distribute music, was charged by the American FTC in 2007 being a pyramid scheme. The case was resolved only a few days ago (14-MAR-2012), when a judge ordered the company to repay 17 million $USD to its members.
Furthermore, several of the most senior members were charged and ordered to repay much of their “earnings” as well.
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/03/burnlounge.shtm
I don’t know if the courts in India are faster or slower, but it’s a point of comparison.
The company had music for sale, but MAJORITY of income was derived from recruiting additional members.
Think about SpeakAsia. Where is its income coming from? Be honest.
Thanks Kasey chang,
Hope, your suggestion *may be* true & EOW *might not be* support innocent panellist if Hon’ble Supreme Court issue further order for dues disbursement in future!. We the poor innocent panellist’s voice are worthless.
@Mrvindoo — I understand that it is frustrating for something like this to “hang” and never come down. The American saying is “waiting for the other shoe to drop”. There are choices you can make, but you need to decide for yourself:
* You can support AISPA by giving them MORE money but what would make you poorer when you are supposed to get richer
* You can sue SAOL like Kkhosla, Solomon Jemes, and the other 114 (or however many) did. They should be getting their money soon, or “implead” yourself into the case (which EOW seems to want to help you do, as it suggested that SAOL should pay everybody who wants out instead of just the 115)
* You can keep singing the praises of SAOL and insult the government, which really doesn’t help, and hope somehow SAOL will be allowed to resume operations
* You can do absolutely nothing, and hope somehow SAOL will be allowed to resume operations
How do you choose? Very simple question… Which one is likely to get you your money back? (let’s forget any “points” you earned for now)
You’ll need to answer that for yourself though.
Actually, it wasn’t the robber that paid for money back, but robber’s FRIENDS who paid you in hopes of saving the robber jail time.
In the meanwhile police already has the robber under surveilance, and the FRIENDS who keep telling everybody that would listen that the robber didn’t rob anyone, while the robber claims he didn’t rob anyone, he had this new business model where people GAVE HIM THINGS, and as soon as you go away he’ll go out and make MORE people GIVE him things.
@Kasey
Not only are Speak Asia doing their best to block any criminal investigations into the company, but also the company’s panelists have taken to calling for the harassment of EOW officials.
This was lifted from Facebook a few minutes ago:
It translates into Sharma asking all Speak Asia panelists to send a SMS to investigating officer BP Shelke of the EOW with the message ‘I’m Ashok Bahirwani, arrest me plz’.
By flooding Shelke’s inbox with SMSs, Speak Asia’s panelists hope to crash it.
So apparently the anticipatory bail hearing happened today and a stay has been ordered on the arrest of Bahirwani until the 3rd April.
On the same date an anticipatory bail hearing will be heard too.
No information yet on what went down yet or why both the bail hearing and arrest were postponed till the 3rd.
Dear Kasey Chang….. Before answering your concern point of views, let me say we are not frustrating at all; we thought we should wait for further development & till miracle occur for approval of owing disbursement.
We are not following aispa views; in fact they are supporting all panellists to draw attention towards ongoing proceedings & day by day judgment whichever is in our favour or against. If Mr. kkhosla / Mr. Solomon group can able to retrieve his investment sooner/later then why not we can?
In my limited knowledge I don’t know what is really happening behind that if all Investigating agencies will look forward by considering prime subject as panellists curiosity then we can quickly recover our money as Mr. Kkhosla acquire.
Who had sign-up praise of SAOL? None, we simply associate members & our money was trapped there. So, we are expectant for that.
We are not insulting other government authorities. We respect & valued their works & they are doing administrative duties & responsibilities, besides that if they consider the desire of remaining panelists, keep aside further enquiry & try to clear payout matter first then it will better for us that sit.
I came here to give own opinion, for only here all individuals are genius & give us the right trend/suggestion for the interest of common panellists. Nothing is personal & professional.
We believe in our Indian judiciary & until matter is not clear from Judiciary still some ray of hope is left there. At the end of the day if we haven’t retrieved our hard earn money then its okay we find any other job to run our livelihood.
today the eow PP ,in the matter of bahirwani’s bail ,said he was not prepared and requested time. the court fixed a date of 3rd april,2012 and took on record the PP’s submission that the eow would not arrest bahirwani till this date.
so the interim bail sought by mr abdi did not have to be considered at all since the eow have themselves asked for time.
in the hearing of writ 3611 on the 15 th of march the eow gave a verbal undertaking to the bench that till the 27 th of march [the next date of hearing ],they would not precipitate action in the fir. even then they have served this 72 hour notice for arrest to bahirwani.it seems the eow has now become a habitual liar.
anyway the writ 3611 has been brought forward for hearing tomorrow [21 st march] as after thorough checking our lawyers have found that the eow has NOT made any stay application in the supreme court.
Should be a good hearing tommorow then, let’s see what happens!
(please don’t link to non-English news).
Aren’t you pre-empting the reason for Bahirwani’s arrest? The EOW investigation is clearly not tied into the FIR, so without knowing why they want to arrest him you can’t really call them liars now.
Also as the investigation is ongoing, who knows what might have come to light since the 15th. These things aren’t exactly static.
@Ajex
@Badshah
I do not agree with your view points. Ashok is fighting to keep SAOL afloat in India and for that purpose the biggest danger are associations of panelists who can go and file criminal cases against them.
Criminal cases will further put a spanner in the works of AISPA, on behalf of SAOL, putting forth the demand of SAOL to restart their operations in India especially with most of its India-management behind bars or or on the run.
For this very reason Ashok has resorted to mass hypnotism through the very leaders who had been making lacs via their 26k/day binary incomes. This, mass hypnotism does not seem to be a difficult task as is apparent with the likes of panelists like you singing and dancing to the tunes of Ashok’s less than half truths in his posts at AISPA.
As the RTI Act does not apply to courts, Ashok has been basking in his hallucinations that the details of the mediation process will not come to light. Ashok has also stating that EoW has been lying when it has stated in Mumbai courts that SC has allowed it to continue its criminal investigations.
Does he mean to say that the learned Judges of Mumbai courts do not have prior knowledge of proceedings in other courts? Ashok goes on to say that the first time EoW stated so was in Nov 2011 and then again now. If this was not true I am very sure the learned judges of the Mumbai Court would have brought it on record on it being not true.
This is where Ashok could be charged with contempt of court, but then alas he or his association is nowhere a petitioner in any court case.
I have two IDs and I sure am going to wallop the likes of you and Ashok Bahirwani & family at all forums for spreading lies to mislead the public especially the panelists though not their so called crooked leaders who would gain maximum if somehow SAOL restarts.
the affidavit in reply filed by the eow in the supreme court clearly says they have been conducting investigations into saol based on the khosla fir.
with khosla saying he does not want to pursue the matter further [we believe the court order and not halfbaked hafeez],the fir cannot survive.
YES. aispa wants the company to resume it’s business because everybody should be able to work and earn in the worlds largest consumer aggregation movement.
there is nothing criminal in wanting this, as much as it upsets the eow and you. if the eow had already proved in court that saol is a money circulation scheme and we STILL continued to support THEN it would be a criminal act.
NO. how can a judge in the mumbai high court know what exactly was SAID by whom in a hearing in the supreme court. They may be aware of the overall complexion of how the case is going but sorry they do not know in detail the word to word verbal discussions that went on.
bahirwani is a petitioner in 3611 and aispa is petitioner in writ 444 which has it’s first hearing day after [22nd march].
hey juta you have a PRINCELY two ID’s. how come instead of encouraging others to complain to the eow, you’re not doing so yourself?????
when saol restarts of course people who have come in front and fought, will stand to gain because hey, in direct marketing the more people you know they more you earn.
instead of singing and dancing to the tuns of the eow why don’t you ask them to cooperate with the mediator so that popl lik you can gt their exit mony soon?
@anjali
Yet it still exists…
As I said before, it doesn’t need to survive. An investigation isn’t static.
Speak Asia was a ponzi scheme bale of hay waiting to go up in smoke. All you need for an investigatve fire is a spark.
Try telling that fire the spark doesn’t exist anymore and see if it dissipates.
Speak Asia exists for a year and to date has never been involved in a consumer based business.
…yet you describe it as a consumer aggregation movement. Go figure.
last time i’ll explain this.
1]with the fir gone investigation will continue
2]with the fir gone the charges of cheating and conspiracy to cheat will go.
3]investigation as to whether saol is a money circulation scheme will continue.
4]when this question comes up in court saol lawyers will immediately show how saol is not money circulation.
5]meanwhile nobody can get thrown in jail.the eow will have to file it’s watertight chargesheet,win in court and only then they get to throw people in jail.
in it’s preoperative stage saol was building it’s huge infrastructure of a consumer base. panelists were always aware of the company’s plans and the moment this plan was publicly announced in goa all hell broke loose.
And so? Why did you expect EOW to prove anything in the Supreme Court? They haven’t even finished the investigation, and the criminal part of the case hasn’t been handled in court, either.
They shouldn’t prove it before the Lahoti Committee either, since a criminal case will be far beyond the jurisdiction of a mediation
@anjali
You might want to talk to Bajpai, Crasto and friends about that. They’re out on bail but they’ve all had stints in jail.
We all know there are no clients or the business wouldn’t have collapsed as it did. Supplying company names owned by Harendar Kaur and Manoj Kumar and passing them off as clients doesn’t prove anything.
Last time I’ll explain this to you. Unless you can prove Speak Asia had clients by supplying at least one name of a company that commissioned a survey from them, I will nuke any further comments claiming they had clients as spam.
You want to make the claim they had clients? Back it up or stop wasting our collective time.
No clients? Ponzi scheme.
it was a ponzi scheme.
Let’s stick to discussing what the company has done please, that is namely run a ponzi scheme for a year before being shut down.
Yet AISPA has not managed to get itself impleaded into the lawsuit and thus, get you all paid.
What has Bahirwani and Crasto done, besides getting investigated by EOW (for whatever reason linked with SAOL) besides issuing a lot of press releases and give you all hopes, many of them proven to be false?
Were you even aware that AISPA was not a properly registered association until recently and was thrown out of the case it managed at first to get itself into?
Clearly, not all panelists are as clear-minded and calm as you are, as Oz have pointed out in that call for SMS spam attack. Is Sharma a common surname? Or is it possible that Amit Sharma is a relative of Manoj Kumar Sharma?
I’m afraid this would make absolutely no sense, if EOW send Bahirwani a message that he’ll be arrested in 72-hours. Clearly EOW would have anticipated that Bahirwani would seek anticipatory bail when he got the “warning”.
So in effect, the 72-hour warning just became a full week’s warning.
2 weeks. Today is only the 20th.
I have found some information you can use, that perhaps will make some things become clearer to you. It is some sort of “counter-poison” to the negative influence from Bahirwani’s sing and dance updates.
It’s related to your statement “if EOW had already proved in court”. The criminal parts of the case has never been tried in court, so why did you expect EOW to prove anything?
I’m expecting a positive outcome of the link, something like “Thx, norway, now I’m seeing things clearer. The mediation process doesn’t have any jurisdiction of it’s own, it’s only a mediation between parties.”
You might want to talk to Bajpai, Crasto and friends about that. They’re out on bail but they’ve all had stints in jail.-soapbox
BECAUSE OF THE FIR.
no fir -no more jail stints.
I will nuke any further comments claiming they had clients as spam. -soapbox
i have never insisted that saol had survey clients. all i’ve maintained is that they have revenue from other streams besides panelists money as required by the money circulation act.
todays indian express has carried a favorable article showing the panelists viewpoint.
http://epaper.indianexpress.com/29752/Indian-Express-Mumbai/20-March-2012#page/23/2
As has been mentioned earlier, the FIR doesn’t mean the EOW can’t further investigate the company. An investigation has been launched now and it appears that it will continue whether or not the FIR exists.
Police don’t just drop criminal investigations because somebody drops a complaint. Running a ponzi scheme for a year expands well beyond getting AISPA to pay someone off and coming up with exit options that nobody is interested in because they still think they’re going to get all the money they earnt by recruiting people.
And what streams would those be? The only two avenues for money injection into Speak Asia were alleged corporate survey clients (which don’t exist) and membership fees.
That’s the entire scope of the Speak Asia business model as it ran between May 2010 and May 2011.
Please provide any details of other revenue streams as that’s news to me. Don’t bother with the ‘read about it in coury yada yada’ crap either. You’ve made the claim that there are additional sources of revenue other than membership fees so once again I’m asking you back it up with details.
yes. but normal police investigations without an fir mentioning cheating and conspiracy are under the PCMC act and the police cannot indefinitely keep the company shut down under the guise of investigations.
seeing that in 9 months no charge sheet has been filed the courts will be inclined to say let the business resume and carry out your investigations alongside. they can ask the company to cooperate fully.
you cannot shut down a business involving lakhs of people for YEARS because you cannot manage to file a charge sheet.
i’ve been talking about revenue streams for months now and you say ‘that’s news to me’.
i’ve told you before,these papers have been provided to the RBI and the supreme court, but i’m not allowed to talk about it.
the press conf should be uploaded today.
Kasey Chang,
Sorry! we don’t require your press release to motivate or de-motivate by reading bogus stories concerning SpeakAsia stuff in the platform no: 1 of BMLM Super Express.
We know all facts that who were misleading from up-front, in which direction & for what propose. Our hope remains same before & now & future.
Ask all, aispa is registered properly or not? Is your blog site was register properly while launching inauguration article in the year of 2010 on the subject of SpeakAsia & compiling with old article of 2009?
Why won’t migrate your entire blogs domain & family members towards Indiana country & inscribe daily crooked articles to hypnotized & brainwash all innocent panellist of India?
Besides your super Express, on 19th March an Indian Express newspaper prints facts in support of innocent panellist. At least some paper media heard our tone of voice.
I don’t have any press releases. Neither does Oz. How many times did Bahirwani appear in the news?
Are you *sure*? I have no doubt you believe it, but have you studied who presented what and what the REAL truth came out to be? Who has a record of being closer to the truth?
It was no surprise that newspapers cover all points of view. I’ve read many newspaper articles covering businesses that later turned out to be scams. Newspaper reporters can be duped as easily as regular citizens, esp. if they just cut and paste information handed to them from the company.
Didn’t Anju or whoever claimed that one cannot trust the media? Now ONE of them seem to be bending your way and it’s “pay equal attention to it”?
No, all news must be analyzed for bias and source. I have no read that article you referenced so I cannot comment upon it. I will do so soon. I’m sure Oz will do the same.
I thought they were arrested because of criminal charges against them? And because of evidence found supporting those charges?
Kkhosla withdrawing his complaint by settling the civil part of the case was fair enough for both parties, but I don’t think Kkhosla has the jurisdiction to settle criminal parts of a case. The criminal part is usually handled by the Public Prosecutor, and nobody has offered him a settlement. 🙂
Read the article, which was SHORTER than some of the comments here. The problem with the article is most of which directly quotes Bahirwani with few facts backing it up. it is little more than a press release by Bahirwani.
To be fair, you *could* say the same thing about the articles quoting “sources from the EOW”, but who has more credibility, EOW official who has to answer to all of India [or at least the jurisdiction he’s in], or AISPA official (how did he get that position?)
The police haven’t shut the company down, the banks did – voluntarily by refusing to do business with Speak Asia (please don’t mention RBI cautionarys, as we’ve well and truly established the RBI never explicitly mentioned Speak Asia to any bank).
The CID did freeze some accounts, but that has nothing to do with the Kkhosla FIR.
Yet here we are and no such thing has been ordered.
You do realise how ridiculous that sounds right?
‘Hi, I’m from bob’s car yard. We sell cars and mumblemumblemumble other stuff mumblemumble that I can’t tell you about mumblemumble lawyers mumblemumble criminal conspiracy mumblemumble‘
The only reasons Speak Asia wouldn’t publicly divulge their alleged alternative revenue streams are if
a. they incriminate management or
b. they don’t hold up to scruitiny
Like you said, the courts have to give benefit of the doubt but if the alternative revenue sources are just bullshit business between the many companies Manoj Kumar, Seven Rings and Harendar Kaur own – well that doesn’t exactly negate the fact that Speak Asia was a ponzi scheme now does it.
Again, provide evidence of mentioned revenue sources or stop claiming they exist.
‘Oh sorry we don’t have any survey clients, they were all just made up. But we do have revenue streams other than membership fees, they exist but I can’t tell you what they are!‘
Absolute horseshit.
Usually you will have the right to a speedy trial, but that doesn’t apply when you have avoided investigation yourself. In Speak Asia, several of the suspects have avoided investigation as best as they can. Manoj Kumar Sharma has been in hiding for 9 months or so?
They haven’t exactly contributed to a speedy trial, so claiming the right to one would be meaningless.
I have a feeling the management doesn’t fight for Speak Asia or Speakasians, they are fighting for something else – like Seven Rings International and other activities. Speak Asia is only used to draw attention away from something else.
i want to ask those people who are against SAOL?
some are here saying investigation takes months sometimes years my dear friends it already 10 months investigation is going and no single proof EOW could gather what non sense and secondly all those accused are given bail by honorable court and secondly most importantly the HON’BLE supreme itself has appointed a mediator and in many orders the apex court itself has seen this case as dispute between parties.
Where as the question arises of speak asia trying to halt investigations it means that court itself is helping SAOL to hault investigations is anyone saying that?
u r questioning law of the land? because all the orders are given by courts of various places where is SAOL trying to hold up investigations can anyone answer.if SAOL would b doing it then any court would have given an harsh decision on the company.
if EOW could prove anything then court could have ordered a trial the it is not ordered by any court on any company official arrested by EOW, in any court EOW is not able to give any evidence against the company.
if there is really a case against the company then why pp has again not been able to give strong arguement why fictitious things are said in the court like ‘STAY APPLICATION HAS BEEN GIVEN IN APEX COURT’ dont u think EOW is tricking
BREAKING NEWS!!!!!
in today’s hearing of aispa writ 3611 the mumbai high court has put a STAY on the khosla FIR !!
NO investigations till the next hearing date of 4 th april !!
EOW has to go get permission for further investigations from the supreme court on the 2nd april !!
hip hip hurray !!
So much for co-operating with the authorities investigations then.
Ah well, there’s always the CID case tommorow. The EOW are just one agency investigating Speak Asia. I’m sure they can deal with a temporary hold.
Tommorow’s Supreme Court ‘please stop investigating us’ case against the CID could be interesting if there’s been a stay application filed.
@badshah
Unless you work for the EOW, how do you know what they’ve gathered?
The investigation is still open and AISPA and Speak Asia are doing everything they can to stop the authorities investigating the company.
And that means what? bail != innocent.
to settle the civil payment dispute. It has nothing to do with the criminal case. Otherwise why are AISPA trying to stop the EOW Mumbai investigation and Speak Asia the CID one?
No.
They haven’t had to yet, they haven’t filed a criminal case against Speak Aisa yet because their investigation is still open.
There isn’t (yet). As above, Speak Asia and AISPA are doing everything they can do prevent government agencies from properly investigating the company.
You mean:- They will investigate till 11.00AM, 21st December 2012.Please all these things to kids in your county not for Indian citizens.
@vnm
As has been mentioned numerous times, often ponzi scheme investigations go on for over a year. This is a scam run by multinational scam company Seven Rings International involving hundreds of millions of dollars. An investigation isn’t going to be concluded in a few short months.
And it will take even longer whilst the investigating bodies are tied up in the courts instead of carrying out their investigations.
Moneylife quoting the EOW on AISPA being funded by Speak Asia:
No surprises there. Crasto has already been arrested for taking $3000 kickbacks from Speak Asia.
That’s two independent sources now that have confirmed the FIR has not been withdrawn. As per the order, Kkhosla merely informed the court he wished to withdraw his complaint. The FIR still stands.
Bring on the CID court case tommorow!
He believes in the Mayan Prophecies
money life can stick it’s article because today the bench of the high court has stopped the investigations of the eow.
let them go to the supreme court .they will find an angry mediator with an angry report waiting for them.
also how come the eow is once again talking to the press when they have told the mediator that they have not been releasing any info to the press? so is money life lying?
You consider delaying of a case to be good news?
Most other panelists would prefer an ending of the case as soon as possible, even if it includes investigations. Any delay will be in conflict with their real interests.
You have had lots of comments showing interest that are in conflict with ordinary panelists interests, like the comment about “people can be sacrificed because of the huge amount of money involved”. Comments like that pops up from time to time.
I have also predicted different delays long time ago, as “wanted by Speak Asia’s management”.
eow has been ordered by the hon. high court to stop the investigations any further ,they can only continue if they are allowed by the sc.
and with the mediation meetings on they cannot do so because there’s nothing left in this matter as the complainant has already withdrawn his case !!
Watching Bahirwani crap on for nearly 20 minutes is a bit cringeworthy.
He seems to fail to understand that its standard policy to put the brakes on suspected ponzi schemes whilst they are being investigated.
We know Speak Asia doesn’t have dollar for dollar enough to pay out the RPs earnt, so this means the mass recruitment of new members will have to happen to pay off people.
Ultimately that will result in an even bigger mess and AISPA seem to continually fail to understand this.
@anjali
1.
I watched nearly 4 minutes of the press conference before I gave up. Bahirwani seems to never get to any points, anyway. I’ll guess most of the press conference was covered in the article you have linked to earlier.
A basic idea would be to address the real problems, not the problems as he sees them. The lack of real clients was the real cause of Speak Asia being shut down. This made Speak Asia become an illegal investment scheme rather than a real business.
Reports in media only showed the real problem, and they are not the cause of any actions against Speak Asia. Accounts being frozen and payments being stopped is only results (or symptoms) of the real problem, they are not the real problem itself.
The laws are not the real problem either. Being compliant with laws is a basic idea in real business.
Atleast I TRIED to watch the video, and it was the slow progress that made me lose interest that soon. The topic itself could have been interesting enough with some other actors.
2.
The mediation is about money, and the mediator doesn’t have any jurisdiction of his own, except for being a mediator between two parties. He mediates in the civil parts of the case.
Let’s repeat until everyone understands:
This is the key, the rest are just details
So you believe that just because they haven’t SHOWN proof (and thus, pre-judice the trial in public) they don’t have any? You are not the court. Their job is to convince a judge, not you.
So? Given bail does NOT mean not guilty. it simply means the alleged crime is not serious enough to warrant keeping the suspect(s) in jail.
You mean THIRDly, right?
That’s between the 115 panelists and SAOL, and does NOT involved the EOW except where EOW is asked to answer some questions.
No, because it’s not true. You clearly did not read any of the other Writs submitted by SAOL to quash other FIRs.
Which renders the remainder of your assertions moot.
And your proof of this is what?
Only ONE of the complainants, NOT being paid by SAOL, but by AISPA, with YOUR money.
If you are referring to 3611, that was filed by AISPA nee Crasto against EOW and Kkhosla. If that was “stayed”, that means AISPA can NOT pay off Kkhosla, which is BAD news for AISPA, not good news as you seem to think it is.
We need to see the entire order, not summaries.
WRIT 3611/2011 – “the Kkhosla case”
Affidavit filed on 19.03.2012 (found under “Office info”)
No order yet.
Last hearing: 21.03.2012
Next hearing: 04.04.2012
The stay order is probably related to the affidavit filed 19.03.2012, and the only one that has mentioned stay earlier is the Public Prosecutor (mentioned 15.03.2012).
A stay should normally not be in the interests of the party claiming something in a case, like asking the court to quash a FIR.
Is the affidavit filed by Bahirwani and Crasto, or by the Public Prosecutor? If it’s filed by the PP, then why are Bahirwani and Crasto celebrating a stay?
Any delays in this case doesn’t exactly seem to be within their interests?
And who told u this…ur MO M..
Where are your sources for “stopped the investigation”? Most of us have had great difficulties interpreting what a stay really means, so I will be thankful for more information.
The stay seems to be related to an affidavit filed 19.03.2012. Have Bahirwani and Crasto filed this affidavit? Or has it been filed by the Public Prosecutor?
Can you show me at least one company who said “I ordered surveys from SpeakAsia”?
That’s the key, the rest is just details.
Even because, if companies were ordering surveys from SpeakAsia, it was because those surveys were binging valuable information for them, so it’s logical to think those companies would be interested in clarifying the situation, to make possible for SpeakAsia to restart the operations, and for the companies to get their valuable informations(valuable information= PROFIT) again.
So, why until the moment no company went to public saying “The surveys weren’t fake. I ordered some of them”?
Did they leave SpeakAsia behind because they are afraid of “someone”? You must agree that it’s a little hard to believe in that.
@Lee
Here are some info:
Surveys were fake – Mumbai Mirror
Investors pocketed 1052 crore – Daily News and Analysis
I can probably give you some other links, too.
Note:
When most of us are talking about having real clients, we mean clients paying for the surveys each week. We don’t mean imaginary clients stated in marketing material. We know they had lots of imaginary clients.
@M_Norway
Because they’re putting all their chips on the Supreme Court 383 hearing in April settling everything.
Despite multiple criminal investigations open by multiple agencies in multiple states.
@Brazillian
Anjuspam has since changed the ‘having clients doesn’t matter’ (despite the fact that the absense of clients confirms it’s a ponzi scheme), to ‘Speak Asia have other unadvertised and not publicly known sources of revenue’.
I suspect these sources of revenue are just money shuffling amongst the many companies Harendar Kaur, Manoj Kumar and Seven Rings International own.
‘Of course we have other sources of revenue! Uh look… we shipped $100 million USD of uh… uh… pencil sharpenings to um.. er… Kaur Kumar Technologies last year… look!’
That kind of nonsense. That’s why they won’t go public with it beacuse it’d be torn to shreds.
@Lee
A. Here are some amounts from different sources:
* estimated number of panelists have varied from 12.5 lakh to 24 lakh
* total RP 30,000 crore Rs. ($6 billion USD)
* total revenue 2,200-2,400 crore Rs. ($480 million USD)
These 2 amounts are meaningless if you compare them to each other (they are fixed in some ways, and doesn’t reflect the real business model they used), but they will get more meaning if you add some info.
* if total RP includes reinvested RP
* if total revenue only covers subscription fee, and payment for additional panels isn’t included.
These amounts are from early in EOW’s investigation.
————————-
B. Here are some other amounts:
* 700 crore Rs. is the estimated amount laundered through Seven Rings International ($140 million USD). I’ll guess this amount must be much higher, but it can of course have been laundered through other companies.
* unknown amount laundered through other companies, including AdMatrix
* 1052 crore Rs. paid to panelists ($210 million USD)
These amounts are from other stages in EOW’s investigation.
————————-
C. Here are other amounts:
* $482 million USD amount in bank 28. May 2011
* 4,800 crore Rs. total assets ($960 million USD)
These amounts are from Harender Kaur’s statements about how able Speak Asia would be to pay debts and money owed to panelists, around 28. May 2011.
————————-
D. Another set of amounts:
* 68 crore Rs. paid in tax ($13.6 million USD)
* 134 crore Rs. frozen in accounts in India ($26.8 million USD)
————————-
All these different amounts are confusing, but there is actually possible to draw some conclusions from them.
* revenue is too low, someone has skimmed Speak Asia for money to reduce taxes or something. But some of the revenue becomes visible again as assets in the balance sheet (the 4,800 crore Rs.)
* total RP is too high, so it must include reinvestments in panels and subpanels
* part of the business has filed accounts much like an ordinary business, but another part has been “unofficial”. The unofficial part seems to be related to sale of extra panels and IDs (the binary compensation plan).
It’s possible to draw a conclusion that real clients must have been missing, or that real clients have been too unsignificant to show up in the accounts (because revenue and assets are too low).
It’s possible to indicate some upcoming tax problems, even if they haven’t been discovered yet.
It’s possible to indicate an upcoming debt problem, in the number of panelists and the number of panels they must have bought – in how much the company will have to pay in RP for surveys each week.
I have used a flat 1:50 ratio between Rs. and USD in all amounts here.
Norway..now i understand whu u r so confused. Pls see all court orders and tell me where the hell are des figures or where hv court stated that they hv found that surveys are fake..boss..
its now more than 8 months in court and u r still biting on media crap..
The surveys being fake doesn’t have anything to do with the civil action demanding payment.
Why would it be mentioned in an order? It’s part of the ongoing criminal investigations.
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_speakasia-got-e-surveys-done-right-in-mumbai_1593611
http://www.moneylife.in/article/speak-asia-advisor-finally-confesses-the-company-was-running-a-ponzi-scheme/20369.html
(this is the bit where you have a cry, insist that everybody is lying and I mark your comments as spam).
Although rarely I post here any comment I daily read this debate specially on “SPEAKASIA”.
In my deep heart I found that only M_NORWAY who is debating neutraly. I request OZ to do so because he own this blog.
Hats off to M_norway.
Watever..ur marking my comments doesnt change a thing…but the fact of the matter remains that apart from the mediation process by SC ( which is dealing with the payment of the panelist(s)) , all other agencies/lower courts are dealing with criminal investigations.
Exactly.
Glad to see you agree the SC civil action has nothing to do with the criminal investigations. Therfore hopefully you can appreciate why asking why fake surveys hasn’t come up in the civil 383 case is a bit silly.
OZ… how come all matter on the topic of fake/genuine surveys has been stopped up? Formerly media house (DNA,moneylife) & EOW was lift up the issue in Nayan Khandor’s cases on Sep – Oct 2011.
Which court’s order have mentioned, Can you give us the link?
So we don’t keep going around in circles, this is the final time I’ll address this:
The topic of fake surveys is part of the criminal investiations into Speak Asia. It’s got nothing to do with the civil case regarding payment (other than I suppose proving that a business restart would simply lure more gullible investors in because a lack of clients cements that Speak Asia is a ponzi scheme).
With the investigation ongoing (and AISPA and Speak Asia doing everything they can to prolong it by trying to stop police and the authorities from investigating Speak Asia with legal action), there hasn’t yet been a criminal case lodged against the company. Subsequently no court order addressing the issue of fake clients.
And it won’t until the investigations are concluded and the matter goes to court.
It’s not rocket science people.
Oz… It seems that you don’t have solid reply on my queries expect feeding your personal hypothesis & guess work, survey’s subject & your so-called write-ups was started from last year.
I’m asking you why court hasn’t issue order to continue do enquiry on Nayan Khandor’s case / fake surveys cases, if serious issue was raised on last year.
Till now, no other investigating agencies take serious steps to bust fake surveys booth, why?.
Because it’s part of the criminal investigation. An investigation that is still open and hasn’t been concluded.
Any court action as a result of the investigation will only occur once it’s concluded. As has been stated before, these investigations go on for a while as the money trails are often quite complex and well masked.
Dunno what a fake surveys booth is, but as far as Speak Asia goes it’s inoperational and has been for a year. That’s pretty well busted if you ask me.
Once the CID got involved it didn’t take long for the banks to put the brakes on the operation and then it all fell apart.
However, I interpret the recent news in above post some lady named ‘Anajli’ vigorously writing HC accepted ‘stay on criminal investigation’ there is no further investigation from eow sides.
As far as I know AP-CID was investigating from last year & same matter was in Apex Court. Is that ‘stay on criminal investigation’ topic is false?
You don’t accept a stay, you order it. And it’s a temporary stay until April (allegedly, I haven’t seen an order confirming any of this). The investigation hasn’t been dissolved.
Anjali is Bahirwani’s wife/daughter/lovechild/who knows and has inherent bias and a conflict of interest, so without a viewable order take what she says with a grain of salt until an order is made public.
The matter isn’t in the Supreme Court, Speak Asia launched legal action against the CID in order to try and stop them investigating the company. I don’t believe the CID have gone public with the status of their investigation since the Supreme Court action was launched against them.
The hearing for that action is tommorow so perhaps something will come out of that.
When a criminal case is lodged, it will be the authorities vs. Speak Asia (or defacto management AISPA), not the otherway around.
You’ve got AISPA (funded by Speak Aisa) trying to stop investigations in Mumbai and Speak Asia trying to stop investigations in AP. These are the guys who state they offer full co-operation to the authorities and welcome investigations into the company.
Without seeing the order and why the stay was ordered can’t really say either way. All we know for sure is that stuff happened yesterday and we’ve only had AISPA’s version of events released.
I try not to comment on specifics until I’ve seen actual orders or something more concrete than Bahirwani’s rants and go from there. Especially when AISPA are concerned as they have a history of only announcing what they can twist to look positive and waiting for the rest to come out in court orders.
aispa press conf part 2.
Thanks Oz for your valuable clarification on “Stay order” matter. Thanks for sharing video footage.
Now, it is quite clear what is the actual thing!. Anjali, that video footage’s welcome music is very nice..It’s like ulala..ulala… song !!
Let’s wait for further investigation of CID as says OZ, if have.
@oz
Here is a ticking bomb for you to write a new article.
As the Exit Option is coming to a close by March 31, 2012, SAOL alongwith active support of Ashok Bahirwani is on the verge of committing another huge fraud on the unsuspecting panelists who invested large amounts on subpanels.
SAOL has defined the panelists into following 3 categories for the purpose of Exit Policy:
•NO Reward points (henceforth referred as RP ) earned after becoming a panelist:
Very few panelists will fall in this category as the purpose of joining as a panelist was to earn survey income and recruitment commission.
•RP’s Earned lesser than Subscription Cost:
Again very few panelists will fall in this category. If a panelist has done surveys for more than 10 weeks, his RPs will be more than subscription cost. Very few panelists joined after May 11, 2011 when Star TV followed by other media exposed SAOL. However, the fake surveys were deliberately continued further for more than 10 weeks till July 2011 end to ensure that RPs earned by almost all of the panelists would exceed the subscription cost.
•RP’s en-cashed or used are more than subscription cost:
“You are welcome to participate in SAOL website since your participation has earned your RP’s more than your subscription cost. You can now utilize the RPs for various revenue generating activities of the company once restart of our services is allowed in India”.
Actually, the most relevant category is “RPs en-cashed or used are less than subscription cost”, which is fraudulently merged in the third category by SAOL.
Hence, the second category should be corrected as “RPs en-cashed or used are less than entire subscription cost” instead of “RP’s Earned lesser than Subscription Cost”
Ashok Bahirwani in his Update of March 3, 2012 on SAOL’s Exit Policy has clearly mentioned refund of “entire subscription cost including the cost of subpanels” in case of first category.
However, in case of second category, Ashok Bahirwani has very cleverly limited the refund to “subscription cost” and the example given is only for refund of main panel costing Rs 10,000.
Therefore, if a panelist invested Rs 101,000 for one main panel with 9 subpanels, he will at best receive Rs 10,000 refund which will stand further reduced by the extent of RPs en-cashed or used by this panelist. At a result, such panelists will forefeit their entire investment as well as RPs and will be left with negligible or nil refund.
No wonder, SAOL has put the condition for Exit Policy that “Once the decision to EXIT is taken, it cannot be reversed. Any rewards due to the panelists who exit will not be processed and will not be contested by the panelists”.
By acting as a rubber stamp for SAOL’s fraudulent Exit Policy, Ashok Bahirwani stands exposed as a willing tool of SAOL and working against panelists whom he claims to represent.
EOW may also like to discuss this matter with Bahirwani in next few weeks when he will be enjoying EOW’s hospitality.
The criminal case hasn’t been in court, yet. So far, most cases have been against individuals, and in the lower court system.
* Mehrotra
* Tarak Bajpai
* Dandona (some info can be found in the order here)
* Melwyn Crasto
* Ashish Dandekar
* Ashok Bahirwani
The confusion was because they obviously haven’t filed accounts for all business activities, and a part of the business seems to have been unofficial. Speak Asia and the surveys were only a facade for a Ponzi/pyramid scheme, were most of the money circulated never was registered in their accounts.
Lots of money seems to have been skimmed off and laundered through several different foreign accounts, instead of being registered as revenue or investments.
so just because star news ‘exposed’ saol, saol had to shut down it’s business? why should they stop giving surveys just because star tv cried wolf?
the costing with rs 10,000 as you said yourself was an EXAMPLE. about subscription costs including subpanels nobody is going to repeat it para after para just because you’re dumb.
you did read bahirwani’s disclaimer dint you ? you do know the meaning of a disclaimer don’t you?
first explain how by attempting to explain the policy of the company to the panelists does one become a rubber stamp.
secondly how is it that justice lahoti is calculating payable dues of panelists under the exit option if it is FRAUDULENT?
how do you know? or is this threat only from your side ?
your entire nonsense post means only one thing – bahirwani is leading the panelists in supporting saol so chop off his head. personal vendetta or what?
first got to court and prove which law saol has broken and only then target panelists.
Until I see an exit policy in detail as per court order or otherwise, I’m treating is as smoke and mirrors.
The website set up to host the so-called exit option is a joke and isn’t enough to take the idea seriously.
Dear Observer, you are moving in the wrong direction as ders no point of discussing exit option unless and until the mediator intervenes, till then let it rest in peace as i see no point in wasting time on it.
Dear Norway, i see some logic in ur argument. I think we will be in a better position to discuss this issue in the first week of april as i feel lot more would come out of courts.
I just can not believe simply on the stories of the media. In this case i would like to rely on court orders rather than any tom’ story…be it in favor or against..
@Observer
I have sent an e-mail to the Supreme Court 20.03.2012, asking whether the Exit Policy is known or unknown to them.
* sent to supremecourt@nic.in
* WHY I’m asking
* Short description of the problem
* ONE single question: “Is this Exit Policy a part of an official procedure ordered by the Supreme Court, and can it be verified somewhere on the Supreme Court’s websites?”
* 2 Links and 2 screenshots (the Exit Policy, the update 01.03.2012 where they stated a deadline)
The Exit Policy seems to have been made unclear on purpose, not by any accident. They have had several months to correct this problem, but it is still unsolved. A judge should have been able to detect this problem, unless he has been heavily misguided by someone. That’s why I decided to ask questions directly to the Supreme Court.
@ Anjali, dont you think that the hon. mediator should be asked to provide permission for executing exit option…or otherwise how to do justify it…
i doubt u wld be getting a reply..but yes SAOL sld approach the mediator for exit policy if they are really serious..may be anju can reply if she has got some clue on this…
according to the interim reports of the mediator, which were read out and deposited with the high court mumbai [in aispa writ 3611 ],it is clear that the mediator is looking to calculate the dues of the panelists opting for exit option.
Until we see something, that means little.
I recall the court ordered the mediator to calculate the amounts owing based off the EOWs data. Exit options were never mentioned and until it’s seen on paper, like I said – smoke and mirrors.
The exit option website alone (which as I’ve said is a joke) and your interpretation of the mediator’s report (which do not explicitly mention an exit option) are insufficient.
@anjali
Instead of trying to cover up the ambiguous and fraudulent interpretation of Exit Policy by yourself hopping mad with indignation, ask your husband Ashok Bahirwani and his employer SAOL to clarify the Exit Policy for second category of panelists as follows:
The direct question may be in conflict with the general rules for mediations (about secrecy), but I also gave enough information to show them that this particular procedure isn’t exactly a secret anymore.
We can’t claim a procedure to be secret when we have published it on the internet, and 94,334 people already have signed it. So my specific question shouldn’t be in conflict with any rules.
Most Governmental bodies will have a general duty to provide information, both to publish information and to answer questions from the public. This duty is usually built into their work-procedures.
This confirmation from an official source is highly needed, and so far Bahirwani and others haven’t been able to deliver it. They have only delivered information from “pretend to be officials” rather than the real thing.
WRIT 3611/2011, court order 21.03.2012.
K. Chang:- [If you are referring to 3611, that was filed by AISPA nee Crasto against EOW and Kkhosla. If that was “stayed”, that means AISPA can NOT pay off Kkhosla, which is BAD news for AISPA, not good news as you seem to think it is. We need to see the entire order, not summaries].
High Court ORDER visible publicly.
Now, you can freely set your sophisticated hypothesis. How can you announce it is BAD news for AISPA & GOOD news for you guys?
@M_Norway
From the sounds of it, the PP had their dates mixed and thought the next 383 hearing was on the 22nd. As such that’s what he or she told the court. Either that or was referring to the CID case (no idea why that would be but we’ll find out either way tommorow).
This sounds like the court isn’t sure what to do now. Bahirwani and AISPA seem to have shot themselves in the foot in arguing that that the matter is being handled by the Supreme Court (the matter of payments).
As such the High Court won’t quash the FIR… not without clarification from the SC (not the mediator, the court itself).
Sounds fair enough to me, the court is just covering their arse order wise. The matter of payment (including investigating the AISPA money trail) might be on stay till April, but the investigation can still continue (assuming the EOW investigation extends outside of the scope of ‘where is Navniit Kkhosla’s money?’).
Guess we’ll all have to wait till April now. Back to not caring for two weeks!
If this is really happens, i believe lot of innocent people would be relieved..All the best.
Dear Observer, You are requested to maintain decency while talking to some one. This language of yours indicates that your views can not be taken seriously. More over whatever is written in the exit policy, is very clear and could be understood by an ordinary english knowing guy.
So the question is not wats written in exit policy but can this be executed and do the concerned authorities are willing to do it.
soapbox
the eow’s investigation into saol was on the basis of rajmani PIL [now dismissed] and khosla FIR which has been stayed till the PP can get clarification from the supreme court.
so till this clarification is got from the supreme court the eow cannot further investigate.
how has aispa shot itself in it’s foot? it got the stay on investigation dint it? it got the eow to go to the supreme court dint it?
aispa wants investigations [harassment] to be stopped while the mediation process is on . once the mediation process [payments to exit optioners and business restart] is completed the eow can start investigating again and the company will cooperate fully i’m sure.
the matter of Kkhosla’s payment, specifically arresting Bahirwani under suspicion of dodginess as to where the money Kkhosla was paid off came from yes.
They’re still free to carry on their wider criminal investigation though.
If the Supreme Court (not Lahoti) turn around and say they don’t care as the 383 writ has nothing to do with criminal investigations (which it doesn’t), then there’s no recourse.
As has been explained many, many times before. Shutting down a ponzi scheme is standard procedure once an investigation is launched.
Today 1.2 million people are caught in the scam, in a few months that figure potentially doubles… and so on and so forth until inevitable collapse.
There are no clients and Speak Asia don’t have 6 billion dollars (or whatever the total RP figure is I can’t remember now). Luring new investors into the scheme to pay off the existing mob will only have disasterous consequences.
Can you stop only worry about your immediate hippocket and see this point?
Bahirwani was crapping on about his right to earn a living. Sorry champ, but you do not have the right to earn anything in a ponzi scheme
End of story.
Why is everyone Jumping the gun here. Let Supreme Court calculate the exit amount, and they will be the first ones to announce that in their orders.
Why are we trying to be judges here. What ever explanations are floating on the internet are everyone’s own understanding and this will be clear pretty soon.
At least you accept the same thing which we saying from the very first minute you created your presumptive post regarding who “they” are.
Again one more unnecessary assumption. When the court has ordered that no further investigation can be carried out, it will have to be accepted by EOW otherwise it will be taken as contempt of court
It wasn’t there when I looked at it and made my reply. Blame your court clerks for working slowly. 😀 (just kidding!)
Dealing with outdated information, that’s all. We didn’t know what exactly was “stayed” until now.
Furthermore, there’s some doubt as to what exactly does ‘investigations in respect to complaint by Khosla’ include (and thus need to be ‘stayed’)
Dear OZ, Please shed some light on your source of information that SAOL doesnt have money to pay the people or this is just your another crap.
Also it is requested that please do not loose your temper while writing.
How about this?
https://behindmlm.com/companies/speak-asia-online/speak-asia-to-pay-up-with-money-it-doesnt-have/
Thanks for well-mannered reply K. Chang !
If your wings unable to support to fly high during ten months of long journey in that case your greedy mouth will carry to scoff any more month?
Stay behind there by telling your MANTRA lines
…X million ppl are caught in the scam!
…doesn’t have clients!
…doesn’t have money to distribute!
…doesn’t have legitimacy sell product and services!
Which will help you to stay depressing & ashamed.
You can lie to anyone else in the world for sometime not all the time. Your hush-hush keeps you seek and your lies keep you alive.
You’re frustrating to reach their but you’re not come up to scratch to achieve your goal in future. So, don’t worry about what other’s accomplishment. You can give attention on organizing your worthless records every day.
Having real clients willing to pay for the surveys is the most important question. Without real clients, the rest of the business (recruiting people, selling panels and doing surveys) will be meaningless. It will be a recruitment/investment scam rather than a business.
And then the arguments about supporting day to day livelihood will also be meaningless, and also the Fundamental Rights argument.
Without real clients, the money they have for payments will last for less than 10 weeks, if they pay in money rather than in RP. Paying people in RP (or other methods where people pay to participate, but can’t withdraw money) is meaningless if we’re talking about day to day livelihood.
Using money from new investors to pay old ones is also meaningless if we’re talking about day to day livelihood.
All in all, having real clients paying for the surveys is the most important question. Without that, the basic idea of the business is meaningless. The lack of clients is why Speak Asia got into trouble, and why it hasn’t managed to get out of trouble, and why it will continue to have trouble if the problem isn’t fixed.
Do you have ANY proof to refute his assertions, which have ALL been documented in one form or another by newspapers?
It’s possible to calculate alot of stuff here, like weekly cost for surveys and for how long they will be able to pay, using different models for average number of panels per panelist.
The average number of panels per panelist were probably more than 10 panels, but:
5 panels per panelist * 1.2 million * $20 = $120 million per week (in unneeded expenses)
* the $482 million USD they had in bank accounts 28. May will last for 4 weeks max.
* total assets $960 million USD may last upto 8 weeks max.
Selling more panels won’t solve anything if they don’t have real clients. It will delay the time before the problem becomes visible, and the problem itself will be worse when it finally becomes visible.
Recruiting more panelists won’t solve anything. Real clients are absolutely needed if a business wants to do surveys. Recruiting will only mean some others will have to face the problem rather than you. If you’re accepting this model, then you should also be willing to accept that you were the victim this time, and accept your own losses. You’re not qualified for Fundamental Rights if you push a problem onto someone else.
A solution where people can be paid in products won’t solve a client problem. The business plan here has also been too vague to evaluate. Being paid in products rather than in money is meaningless if we’re talking about day to day livelihood, but this solution can be acceptable for some people.
However, this model is far less attractive as an income opportunity, and it isn’t very attractive as a buying opportunity either. Usually, people don’t like to be forced into spending money on products, and usually they will prefer different brands and models when they consider to buy something. Being member of a “YUG buying club” at a price of $200 per year isn’t very attractive.
Adding more income streams won’t solve the problem with real clients, but they will sure be able to pay for a longer period of time if they have additional income. Additional income means the panelists will have to spend money on other products and services. Then most of the idea of day to day livelihood seems to be pretty meaningless as an argument here?
@Sanjeev
I don’t blindly accept things from the get go. At the time there were a few distinct possibilities regarding the stay application, now there are less.
Only that wasn’t ordered. Only in regards to the Kkhosla FIR, which extended as far as ‘where’s my money?’.
Sorry, I couldn’t hear you between all that whining. If you’ve got nothing intelligent to add I think we’re done here.
The court stopped further investigation, for a short period of time – for the investigation related to the FIR (and that might mean alot).
The Kkhosla FIR is the basic document in the case against Tarak Bajpai, etc., etc., etc., the original complaint in this case. However, the investigation has revealed other criminal activity that is not directly linked to this complaint.
The question is why they haven’t separated different matters, whether they are directly linked to the complaint or have been discovered during an investigation. As an example, the connection to Mr. Colibri in Brazil isn’t exactly linked to the Kkhosla case, and neither is the money laundering.
They don’t need a complainant either to file a FIR. A FIR can be filed by anyone who has become aware of a criminal offence, including the investigating officers.
The Kkhosla FIR is more like a civil claim, where his primary interest was to get his money back, and be finished with the case as soon as possible.
He didn’t have any real interests in the criminal parts of the case, they were just added as parts of the case. All the extra parts have only created more distance between his real interests and what the rest of the case is about.
Which brings up an interesting question: can a public prosecutor bring a PIL to replace the Rajmani PIL and other FIRs?
I believe I read some police chief in AP brought his own lawsuits against MLM companies in his jurisdiction.
@M_Norway
So bottom line: The criminal case continues.
khoslas case includes cheating, conspiracy to cheat and running a money circulation scheme. it is definitely not an fir with a limited scope of ‘wheres my money’ as soapbox is trying to push here.
how can a criminal complaint be ‘like’ a civil claim ?
‘linking’ mr collibri to saol will not do any good without documentary proof.
money laundering charges are not investigated by the eow but by the ED and we all know of this famous ‘missing’ case which exists only as a press story.
Somebody. please tell me will speak asia will pay our money back within April 1st week as i have been told my some senior panelist…
I have invested 2 lacs (3 i.ds) in. may 2011 bt did’ nt got a single penny and i want to know is that how much i will be paid back according to the condition put by Exit Policy..
And if suppose company does’nt pay back our money what measures we ought to take should we file a complaint against the company or uplines..somebody please suggest me..
@anjali
So what happens next, EOW go to the Supreme Court and ask whether or not the 383 petition has anything to do with ‘cheating, conspiracy to cheat and running a money circulation scheme’, they say no and the EOW report back to the High Court?
To date the Supreme Court 383 petition hasn’t covered anything except payments to panelists (the signed 115 petitioners or otherwise).
Both Mister Colibri and Speak Asia share the same parent company Seven Rings International. This has been known for many months now, do keep up.
I said this last year but I’ll reiterate it again, until the ‘stop investigating us’ case Speak Asia launched against the CID is concluded, it appears the agencies investigating the company are satisfied to sit back and watch it play out.
Speak Asia has no business operations so effectively they can’t commit any more crime by luring more people into their ponzi. As much AISPA and senior panelists play the ‘agencies are out to get us’ line, the agencies are just doing their job – which in this case is stopping a Ponzi scheme from sucking in more investors.
Job well done thus far considering Speak Asia is coming up on a year of being shut down. If Speak Asia and AISPA want to prolong the investigations by launching cases in courts to stop investigations then more power to them.
Ultimately you can’t stop the authorities investigating you, and in the case of Ponzi schemes it’s standard procedure to shut them down. The only thing that’s not standard here is that management are hiding overseas. If they returned to India this whole mess would have probably been a lot more streamlined.
@Hotoi
To date there has been no public mention of exit policies in any court. All we have are AISPA harping on about how Lahoti is supposedly using an exit-option that is too vague to understand properly and applying to a list of panelist names that were supposedly submitted on a website that had no verification of the information submitted to it.
If I was in your shoes I’d wait till April, and if nothing happens then head down to your local EOW. Kkhosla got his invested money back this way so perhaps if you raise enough of a stink Bahirwani and friends will pay you off too.
Much faster then waiting to see if you’re going to get screwed in the SC (will they only pay the 115 petitioners or won’t they?) and you get your entire invested amount back rather than just your subscription amount.
Most likely come April you’ll just get the same ‘be patient, the business will restart tommorow, stay united, trust the company, everything is going our way 900% confirmed’ rhetoric so be prepared for that too.
As an afterthought, it’s kind of amusing that the only panelist to get all their money back is one of the first who went to the EOW and lodged a FIR.
Going by the sequence of events, I think you may get lucky and get your money but none can predict when?
Also i suggest you to follow only court orders for information rather thn following any self styled senior person or blogger…
@Oz
I am 59 years old now. I invested my company’s funds in Speak Asia on 23rd Feb, 2011 and 3rd March, 2011. I have fought Speak Asia with my heart and soul since then. I have drawn support from your blog and my will power has been recharged by visiting it again and again before sleeping and on waking up every time.
I still do it and realize that I must pay back. And hence the next few posting.
I have shown that investment of the panelists can be recovered provided they are willing to fight. After my repayment it will also not take long at all. It only needs a strong heart and lots of will power. Not too much money.
I am willing to be a guide. My email ID is speakasiainvestors@gmail.com.
Let me tell my story in parts:
I had to fight when I was totally sidelined by upline for demanding proper hard copy invoices for my tax records. I requested to Tarak, Dandekar, Kulshreshth and my entire upline including Dipankar Sarkar. Only on threatening them of legal action in this matter did SAOL pay 54 crore as service tax and invoices were issued by Dipankar Sarkar and Rajesh Enterprises issue invoices.
It was very hard emotionally particularly when so much money was lying invested and recovery of my investment through payment of surveys was totally at the whim of a non resident company with no base to drag them to any authorities. I died a hundred times in the process.
At best well wishers thought I was a fool to have invested so much money. And others ……… I did offer to quit the online survey scheme but I was bluntly told -“no way”. I was also told – “You are alone. What can you do?”
On the night of 11.05.2011 I informed my Director that our investment was stuck and it would be a long fight to get the investment back. I was not aware that delivery would be full term – nine months – 15th March, 2012.
The EOW have been most unhelpful for the recovery of my money.
I have attended bail applications to oppose any relief to the accused – irrespective. I provided the Court the Board resolution authorizing Dandekar to appoint an advocate and file a suit for damages for Rs. 500 crore against Star TV. His bail application was rejected.
I have appeared in the PILs in the Bombay High Court and submitted that in India SAOL was never selling any products or services and the stated business of the company was online surveys and getting investments from new panellists.
I stated in the Bombay High Court before the Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Ranjana Desai that a senior advocate was falsely submitting orally that SAOL was like a MLM company and was selling products like mobile phones. The PIL was withdrawn and the senior advocate has never appeared in the High Court thereafter.
To be continued
Welcome NK, it wld be intresting to hv your experiences shared here so that we can hv a deep insight of wat exactly had happened in courts.
@Navniit
I’m glad to hear you are well. I imagine it’s a great relief to be finally done with the Speak Asia scam and an even greater relief to have come out the other end with your invested money.
I think your story is worth putting up in an article on it’s own as to date you are the only panelist to have recovered their money from Speak Asia.
I’ll compile what you write into a seperate article when you’ve finished writing it all (no rush). Either continue to publish your story here as commentary or you can send it to me via the contact form.
It certainly makes for interesting reading and is a great counter-balance to the smear campaign that has been run against you since you filed the FIR. A smear campaign that has sadly now since shifted to the Mumbai EOW as they try to continue their investigation into the company.
Very True M_Norway: But do you think that Supreme Court would not have taken this stand in the first hearing itself.
As per my understanding Some concrete facts must have been produced before the honourable Supreme Court , otherwise case would not have come so far.
This is interesting..
@Hotoi Sema
As per Exit Policy announced by SAOL and subsequently clarified by Ashok Bahirwani vide his update of March 3, 2012, against your investment of Rs 2 lakh for 3 IDs you will get Rs 10,000 each for your 3 IDs subject to deduction for RPs encashed / used by you.
You may lodge FIR against SAOL and AISPA Officials (for running the show on behalf of fugitive management of SAOL and colluding with SAOL’s fraudulent Exit Policy offering negligible compensation and thereby acting against the interests of the panelists whom they pretend to represent exclusively).
Hopefully, AISPA will organise to pay your dues just like in case of Navniit Kkhosla.
Filing a complaint against your immediate upline will only divert the attention as your upline also has its own upline and they all are in the same boat as you.
Basically, you should target SAOL and its visible and hidden partners in the crime(including AISPA officials and panelists in the top few layers) who have the money to get themselves off the hook.
You may request Navniit Kkhosla for his assistance in the matter.
IMHO, Supreme Court is NOT there to evaluate the business model of SAOL, but to rule between whether SAOL owe the 115 panelists money, and can this be resolved through mediation.
That of course, does not prevent SAOL from presenting a business model that was never actually put into practice.
Obviously Kasey. I never said that SC is here to evaluate business model. I just carried M_Norway’s argument further that had it not been a Fundamental Rights question iN SC’s eyes, the case would have been dismissed at entry and would not have come so far.
No, I don’t think they have evaluated questions like that in the first place, unless someone has told them the importance of doing so. “Skilled profesionals” are worse than others in having a onesided viewpoint, and will usually see something from the side of their own professional skills.
Here’s one example: I have seen the importance of communicating what has happened in court and the mediation, and have sent an e-mail to the Supreme Court asking for information about the Exit Policy.
They have probably seen it from their professional viewpoint, and I’m sure their method is correct and within the law. But it isn’t exactly very functional when lots of un-named parties are involved – the 1.2 million other Indians who haven’t had access to the information.
There have been lots of poor communication skills from the Indian court system in this case, and it hasn’t exactly impressed me. Most of us aren’t even sure whether the WRIT 383 covers all panelists or only the 115 petitioners.
I’m talking about motives rather than laws here. The main interest in Kkhosla’s claim was to recover his money, and the criminal parts of the claim was only “methods”, and most of the methods were outside his real interests.
If you’re analysing your own motives, you will probably be able to see lots of differences between your real motives and the methods you are using, and some of them will probably partly be in conflict with each other.
I’m sure you can agree in that monthly meetings in court isn’t within the interests of someone who primarily wants his money back?
I have asked for information / verification of the Exit Policy, in an e-mail sent to the Supreme Court 20.03.2012. It was sent to the email address I found on the Supreme Court’s website – supremecourt@nic.in – sent 06:50:20 UTC+1 (local time in Norway, India is UTC+5.5 = 11:20:20 India time).
This should make the Exit Policy safer to use. If they’re cheating someone, they’ll have to cheat the Supreme Court too.
Here’s the e-mail:
@ Hotoi Sema – I hope you have read the above line of Navniit Kkhosla before making up your Mind on observer’s advise.
@ Sanjeev Khanna
EOW may have been the most unhelpful to Navniit Khanna but AISPA has been the most helpful in recovering the amount invested by NK.
This is good enough motivating factor for recovering the full amount invested while Exit Policy vaguely promises refund of a small fraction of the amount invested with no assurance of time frame involved.
if i go in the course of FIRs, It is advantageous for me?. I heard even Nivniit kkhosla received his amount after long time fighting on court & he is saying eow was not paying attention en route for revival of his money.
Can anyone suggest me the quick steps for recovery of my investment?
As something good was expected today our company Speakasiaonline communicated with all of us and showed its intention for RESTARTING the business soon…And also thanked all the panelist for the same which is a great positive sign for all.
Regarding today’s hearing as we all were expecting the case to get quashed it did not happen as the Case got adjourned to the next date for reply of affidavit from the respondent which is showing 27th April in SC website now…this date might get PREPONDERATED. So, have faith in judiciary system things are in fast track mode…
The hearing which was scheduled today was about AP CID case and because of this case the Franchisee account got free-zed by AP CID and the FIR done by Shyamsunder corporate fraud watch an NGO…
As per me AP CID case will not impact in WRIT 383 which will be heard on 2nd April…
AP CID case refers to freezing the accounts of Franchisee holders in Andhra Pradesh and other states…
So, today’s hearing was important but it might not impact the payments and website login…however it might impact the restart of our operation at the earliest…As we all know the next hearing that is coming on 2nd April which is for WRIT 383 for payment and restart and before that there are certain mediation meetings scheduled in this month…Expecting a positive outcome from the mediation meeting which will take place in this month…
Don’t worry or get frustrated by the legal procedural delay by the Judiciary, Great outcome is expected in coming days.
Yes, by actually PAYING Khosla with money RAISED FROM AISPA members.
So now AISPA members are out even MORE money.
Some thoughts:
1. Regarding the EOW and KKhosla. The EOW might not have been entirely helpful in getting back Kkhosla’s money, but he still filed a FIR with them. I suppose you can file an FIR with someone else but if you’re wanting a payout from AISPA/Speak Asia it would seem best to duplicate Kkhosla’s course of action.
To date, the fact remains that the only panelist to get their money back was one who filed a FIR with the EOW. Everybody else has just been left in limbo, and has put their entire trust in not getting shafted in the SC despite the last order clarifying that the mediator is to establish the amount owed to the signed 115 petitioners.
2. Regarding exit options, and this mostly applies to anjali, unless you’ve got proof this is even being used please stop trying to drag the argument back to the use of exit options.
As it stands the exit option website is a joke as it accepts any and all data from anyone. It is not verified with member’s data nor is it checked against any database. It’s quite silly to suggest this is being used to calculate what is owed to people.
To date the exit option has not been mentioned anywhere publicly in writing, until that happens I’m shitcanning all responses that point to it as a resolution as it’s there’s no foundation other than ‘some guy apparently heard something in court’, which ultimately is not good enough.
If you mention exit-options as a solution I’m going to read the comment, it goes straight into the spam bin. This is in place until someone gets official confirmation the SC is even entertaining the idea or it appears in a court order.
3. Regarding the Speak Asia/AISPA press release, I can’t be the only one who noticed they suspiciously came out within 20 mins (or so) of eachother?
This strongly indicated co-ordination and/or AISPA’s involvement in the running of the so-called Speak Asia blog. That and the same Photoshopped signature was once again used to doctor up the letter.
As to the release itself, the Speak Asia one is pretty much a personal congratulations and thanks to Bahirwani. Perhaps they’ll give him a promotion?
4. The Speak Asia vs. CID case hasn’t got an order published yet but the next date is the 27th April. If this is the case it looks like we’re back to another 6 weeks wait (and not caring).
Corporate Frauds Watch aren’t panelists so there’s no hope of Speak Asia paying them off via AISPA. This is an entirely different and much more threatening investigation as it’s not about recovering a panelist’s money. That’s why you don’t hear so much about the case and Speak Asia have thrown Phoenix Legal at it.
As has been mentioned many times before Ponzi scheme investigations usually go on for at least a year and the court action even longer.
With AISPA and Speak Asia trying to stop investigations from going forward, this will add even more time to the relevant matters.
In early April I doubt much will happen barring any surprise announcements. Bahirwani might finally get arrested and the details of his involvement with Speak Asia management might finally be made public but that’s about it. We also might get some concrete clarification as to whether or not an exit option is being used or not.
That’s about it really. Both of Speak Asia’s defamation cases appear to be dead in the water and all the other cases are just noise.
Till then take the PR going around now mentioning preponing of the 27th April CID case date with a grain of salt. Cases aren’t preponed unless there’s an urgent enough reason to, and given this case has been going on for months now it’s clear the courts are working within an acceptable timeframe as far as they’re concenred.
Probably not want panelists want to hear as they’ve been led to believe Speak Asia website would be functional by the end of March, the business would restart in early April… but that doesn’t look like it’s going to happen (the reality is that it never did).
Ponzi schemes require new members to pay off the old, and letting even more people get recruited into this mess is just going to create a legal, logistical and investigative nightmare so don’t expect that to happen anytime soon, if ever.
Which brings up an amusing thought… If AISPA sues SAOL, is AISPA going to pay itself?
Nice suggestion ‘Oz’ anyway thanks. After all I’ve decided willing walk off by creating chaos anymore by means of filling supplementary f.i.r’s for the reason that my subscription money is just 50k box only & me residing out of Maharashtra state.
For small amount settlement process of court is quite time consuming as Kkhosla’s money arrived after a year. As i don’t have any professional legal representative connections that will make arguments at court towards money affair.
There is no further alternative for me either has to stop thinking about that or tag along the steps as ‘Arvind’ says. if you really desire to support & have any other alternatives after that please enlighten me.
BehindMLM isn’t an advocacy site, and I’m not here to support people in the recovery of their funds. I only look at what has happened thus far offering commentary and analysis as Speak Asia is a MLM company that falls within the niche this blog covers.
Senior Speak Asia panliests are running around telling everyone they will be paid via the Supreme Court, when the only order referring to payments explicitly mentions ‘the petitioners’, who are 115 in number only. These same panelists are also calling on Speak Asia’s members to not file their own FIR’s to recover their money.
Navniit Kkhosla in the meantime filed a FIR with the EOW and has since got his money back.
Make of that what you will.
I am really impressed with your quick response. Thank you very much for the consideration & support !
How can I lodge FIR with my people against speak asia ? please suggest me ? If possible provide the email ID of Navnit Khosla along with his mobile number.
At least 300 panelists of speak asia from Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh want to lodge FIRs against he company. They are fed up with the false assurances of the company and lastly they all decided to move to some other way to get their money back like Navnit Khosla.
If you can suggest or advise us please reply as earlier as possible.
Bahirwani’s interpretation of the Exit Policy will be fair enough for you, if they don’t cheat you with the meaning of “Subscription Costs”. You will only lose the registration costs $20 (per subscription, or per ID ???). You haven’t earned much RP either, so it should be acceptable enough if they return most of your money (minus $20 or $60 or whatever the registration fee was).
The best strategy should probably be to WAIT for a few days, and see if the Supreme Court will give any answers to the e-mail I sent to them – asking them to verify the Exit Policy as an official part of a payment solution. “A few days” means Monday next week, 26.03.2012.
The party offering the Exit Policy have failed to fulfill its duties in getting the solution verified, so it’s not an official solution yet. The methods used here are simply too unprofessional to be believed in. They are NOT what we should expect from any officials like the Supreme Court or retd. Justice R.C. Lahoti, nor from any lawyers connected to the parties.
The lack of professionality will probably make the Exit Policy safer to use, since it will also make it less defendable in court. It has gradually become more difficult to use it as a tool to cheat someone. The risks of using it as a tool to cheat someone has also increased.
As far as I can see, the Exit Policy is no longer defendable in court as an agreement between the parties involved, in case they are trying to cheat you. I will consider it to have become alot more safe to use now than it originally was, because of all the questions raised against it.
Suggestion
My suggestion is WAIT A FEW DAYS, THEN USE IT, but I can’t guarantee you anything whether they will try to cheat you or not. The only thing I partly can guarantee you is that the Exit Policy isn’t useful as a cheating tool anymore, and that no lawyer will recommend it used that way (if they analyse the situation).
To feel safer, you can download, print out or make screenshots of information related to the Exit Policy (the Exit Policy itself, and a few other documents).
By means of your suggestion Exit policy is beyond doubt waste of time like another cheating instrument right? So, we’ll hang around till your email communication appears.
“WAIT A FEW DAYS” indicate that after few days we’ll catch several retrieval tool & technique from your sides or something else?. So, you have confidence you’ll get reply from Hon’ble Supreme Court & expected everyone should tag on your direction.:-)
I have some questions about Navneet Khoshla payment and speakasia’s future business model
Navneet Khoshla has been paid 606,000 so it is confirmed that you can invest this much amount in speakasia. So
(1) the subscription cost is a pure lie?
(2) can someone explain how anyone can invest so much in speakasia?
Speakasia and AISPA claims that speakasia was building consumer base in its first phase of business model.
(3) how can you explain the same investment amount in this context?
(4) if speakasia wants to sell products like television, mobile phone, etc. can someone give details regarding YUG brand. Which company is building these products under YUG brands, its location, whether it’s a public company or pvt. Ltd. And who owns the company?
@ Andy
Navniit Kkhosla had invested in 6 IDs, each having one main panel (compulsory) and 9 subpanels (optional). Thus his total investment was Rs 6,06,000 {(11,000 + 10,000 X 9 subpanels) X 6 IDs}.
Had he opted for Exit Policy terms, he would have hoped to be promised to be refunded Rs 60,000 subject to further deduction for Reward Points encashed / used by him.
The fact that Exit Policy does not provide for payment of RPs lying in the panelist’s E-wallet confirms worthlessness of RPs earned from fake surveys.
@Rohit Singh
The Exit Policy isn’t useful anymore as a tool to cheat someone, so it has become more safe to sign.
If Speak Asia tries to use the Exit Policy to cheat, they will have big problems defending the agreement in court in case someone sues them.
Speakasiamarketing.com is either real or fake, set up by Speak Asia itself or by a third party.
* If it’s fake, then an unknown third party can’t make agreements on behalf of Speak Asia, so the agreement won’t be useful.
* If it’s real, then using it to cheat will be less easy now, because of all the questions raised against it and all the attempts to verify it. Using it to cheat is no longer defendable in court. The parties signing it have done more than their duties in their attempts to verify it and in questions about the unclear conditions.
I have asked for the unclear conditions to be corrected directly in the agreement, and I have even asked the Supreme Court to verify it as an official part of the mediation.
Using the Exit Policy to cheat will be an obvious attempt of cheating, and it will make the agreement illegal and not defendable in court. On the other hand, the agreement can be real, and you don’t have any other choices than to sign it before the deadline if you want your money back.
I haven’t been able to verify it, but I have been able to make it more risky to cheat.
“2) can someone explain how anyone can invest so much in speakasia?”
Kkhosla invested 5,43,000 Rs. as far as I remember from court documents. The difference between 606,000 and 543,000 is probably related to some expenses or something. Or they may have given him a discount when he invested.
606,000 sounds like 6 IDs (main panels) plus 54 subpanels.
Initial investments between 1 lakh and 3 lakh Rs. were not uncommon, and this becomes understandable if you check how these investments really were sold. I have read about investments up to 14 lakh Rs. from one investor.
“(3) how can you explain the same investment amount in this context [as a consumer base]?”
It makes no meaning having more than 1 panel per family in any real business contexts, unless they have real clients paying for all the extra surveys.
All the extra panels will only create trouble for a real business. Having one panel per family doesn’t make much sense either, since most businesses won’t need 2 weekly surveys from the same group of people.
Extra panels makes sense in a Ponzi scheme, both as a vehicle for initial investments and for reinvestments. It will also make sense in a recruitment driven scheme, as an additional stream of income for the recruiters (and for the organizers).
That’s why anjali and others prefers to avoid questions about real clients and all the extra panels. It doesn’t make any sense for a business to pay for 60 surveys per week from one family (3 IDs, 27 subpanels). It doesn’t make any sense if the RP is used as discount (for buying products) either.
Most businesses simply can’t afford to pay their customers $600 per week in discounts or in real money, and most customers simply can’t afford spending thousands of dollars each month on products.
People can do something to verify it themselves, but it will be of little use if they drown others with the same questions repeated from different sources.
It’s possible to send an e-mail directly to Speak Asia (or Speak Asia Marketing Team), asking a direct question about what the Exit Policy really means (the “Subscription Costs”), and whether or not it is an official part of the mediation process ordered by the Supreme Court.
It’s possible to ask their lawyers the same questions.
It’s possible to repeat the questions I sent to the Supreme Court, from a different viewpoint than mine (as a party directly affected by the agreement).
It’s possible to check if I have made any mistakes, like if I have used an incorrect email address or something to the Supreme Court.
Hotoi Sema ASKED for a suggestion, or else I wouldn’t have been making any suggestions, either. Suggestions are only some kind of “second opinions”, they are not to be considered as “professional advise”.
@ oz / M_Norway
Spoke to a high ranking ex-official of SAOL. He was frank in telling the factual position as follows.
1. SAOL is dead and the scamsters and officials are absconding or lying low.
2. SAOL scamsters don’t mind spending a fraction of the loot to save their skins and their other businesses by dangling peanuts by way of a mischievously ambiguous Exit Policy for the panelists.
3. Ashok Bahirwani’s family and a group of “senior panelists” are doing a lucrative assignment involving pretending that SAOL is alive and will come back while also managing AISPA, Court cases, SAOL related blogs and Speakasiaonline.marketing website.
4. EOW officers openly refer to Ashok Bahirwani as Agent of SAOL.
@observer: High ranking can u tell us what was his position in SAOL when he was in SAOL
@M Norway…Thanks a lot for your suggestion…
one more question arising is that who are the representatives fighting on behalf of Speak Asia in SC whether Tarak Bajpai or Manoj kumar..please do inform…if you have any information.
Hello Mr. M_Norway,
I’m following your posts and comments from longer period but till this date I haven’t commented anything. For the first time I’m posting my comment here..
Since I’m a lawyer I know something more than you regarding approaching the court in this regard. Even though I appreciate your eagerness in knowing and also your keen interest for giving suggestion to fellow readers who follow the latest news about Speak Asia Online in your blog.
In order to know any kind of information regarding a company’s policy, already having a case filed which is in process or still pending, you need to file an RTI to the appropriate department whoever you want to ask.
First of all, they won’t entertain you in any form through email. It is not the procedure to follow in Indian courts. Even if you go through proper channel in filing an RTI, they will be very strict in entertaining your questions, it has several restrictions here, it is not like in Norway.
Surely, you might be knowing and having some of your friends in India who can help you in this regard.
I’m sorry, You have sent you query to the wrong email ID: supremecourt@nic.in from which you won’t get any form of reply or information.
Moreover, I follow your blog information which has to be appreciated in certain areas and at the same time so many wrong information / misinformation and unnecessary explanations and details which i persoanlly feel is not at all required.
Till this date, I have read & followed all those writings of Oz, K. Chang (Kasey) and many others in this blog, I don’t want to comment regarding that since there’s nothing special to comment.
Wishing all the writers of this blog specifically who support the properiotor of this blog:
“All the Best!”
And
Wishing all the readers of the blog specifically whoever fights against the interest of the bloggers and their supporters:
“Best Of Luck!”
Thanks & Regards,
Subramani.
@Hotoi Sema
The case in the Supreme Court is WRIT 383/2011 “Solomon Jemes & Ors”, the 115 panelists. You can find information about this case in the article “The particulars of WRIT 383 Solomon James & others” from December 2011 (use the search tool, and search for “Solomon” or “WRIT 383”, or use any other method you like).
Petitioners are “Solomon Jemes & Others”
Speak Asia is respondent no. 3 in this case. Haren Ventures is respondent no. 4. Government agencies like Reserve Bank of India and EOW are respondents 5 and 6. Tax department and State of Maharashtra are also respondents, 1 and 2 I’ll guess. I may have mixed some of the numbers for respondents other than 3 and 4.
My strategy has been to reduce the risk of being cheated (by the Exit Policy), by increasing the risk of cheating – by asking questions directly to the Supreme Court. I don’t know anything about IF or WHEN they will answer it.
Kkhosla’s gmail address has been posted several times here. Look for it in one of the recent SAOL updates.
Ravi,
Via an association the legal expenses can be spread out and case can also be filed with recovery of all costs.
I am from Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. I too want to lodge an FIR against speakasia. Could I join your association? Or is there a similar association in Lucknow who want to lodge an FIR.
MR NAVNIT why are you trying to become a hero being loosing the case against SPEAKASIA
anyways u dint get your money wih the help of EOW you got by AISPA and even the judge in this told you to opt for exit option or wait for company to restart I think you have a very bad job taking your money back and leaving the company you should have instead waited for the company to restart
and plz plz dont become a willain for us we trust the company and we believe the company is awaiting restart and we will be paid by the company soon so plz dont try to bcum a hero and advice other panelists to do what u did and also dont make others jump in d well like u did, dont advice others to hit axe on own foot
MR MISHRA plz dont lodge an FIR the company is going to restart plz have little patience plz plz its a request
@ Ravi Shankar Misra
My email ID is speakasiainvestors@gmail.com
My phone contact no. is 08652154000
Regardless of your opinion, he’s the only one that has received his money back. So for people who wants their money back he’s their hero.
And where is SAOL or AISPA going to get the rest of the money to pay off the REST of the people who want exit option like AISPA is paying off Khosla?
Remember, SAOL haven’t paid a penny besides putting down 50 crore as requested by Apex court. AISPA paid off Kkhosla with AISPA member’s money.
@Ravi Shankar Misra
“Be prepared for action” and “Be organized in what you’re doing” is my best ideas.
A big problem in this case is the huge number of panelists, with lots of different ideas for what their real interests are and how to protect them. And often their ideas will be in conflict with other groups.
“Being organized” should include identifying methods or “principles” that is common for groups with similar interests, for not having to fight each other.
As an example, “people wants their money back” should possibly work as a common description for what each and everyone wants, regardless of which group they belong to. This description won’t work for ALL panelists, but it should work as a general principle most people can agree in.
There will be lots of disagreement in exactly what each and everyone wants, but the general idea should work.
Use a forum to communicate with your own group and other groups?
Senior panelists in Speak Asia use blogs to communicate with members, but a forum will be more useful if you want some work done (in addition to the communication).
Blogs are very often primarily one way communication, and comments made there can also be difficult to keep a track of (what’s important and what’s unimportant). “Work done” can be all from gathering and analysing information to other kinds of work.
I consider forumposts and blogcomments to be “temporary workstations on the internet”, most often used to communicate something to people with special interest in a specific topic.
With a few people with special skills you can extend the functionality a bit further. The “special skills” are rather ordinary skills, like being able to organize information and other related skills.
Anyway, you will need a communication solution (like a blog or forum) to be able to avoid conflicts with other groups. And I will need a solution like that if you want me to contribute with something, like identifying where to find the important information.
As an example, I consider the 60/40 deal between Seven Rings and Speak Asia to be important, in case people wants to recover their money. Other information about the economics may also be important, and I will also consider some “strategy analysing” to be important.
By the way, at this stage I will believe groups of people eager to sue someone (or file FIR) will create chaos. “Being organized” should also mean being able to avoid chaos.
I believe the right strategy now will be to organize a communication channel, where you will be able to extend the communication to other groups than your own. Any forum should work, as long as the owner allows for this kind of specific use on a temporary basis.
This blog can’t be used in a similar way, since it only allows comments in English. Your solution must allow people to communicate in their own language (in addition to English). This blog isn’t organized as a “communication channel” either, it’s organized around the idea of “sharing information”.
Supreme Court order for the Speak Asia vs CID Friday 23/03 hearing is out:
Must be some detailed heavy allegations (backed with proof they are willing to bring to court nonetheless) for the Supreme Court to give Speak Asia a whole month to try and reply to.
Then again, the CID have always been the heavy-hitter investigators Speak Asia have been worried about.
Also regarding the stay application, it looks like it was indeed filed in the CID case:
Obviously not sure as to the exact nature of the letter filed by the CID, but it would seem it’s in support of the stay application (?). If the EOW are referencing this stay application then it appears the CID and EOW Mumbai are working quite closely together.
I appreciate the info but you’re going to have to put a name to that.
Panelists should ask speakasia to provide additional facilities with the exit option.
This will also help the mediator to calculate the dues of exit option easily. It will be faster for speakasia to collect the data regarding exit option otherwise calling each panelist one by one (heard somewhere on AISPA or speakasia mobi). And panelists don’t have to ask someone else how much refund they will get.
It will also prove that exit option is real, the data collected is real and 90k+ number is also real.
I was expecting reply from speakasians who comments here.
also additional source of income?
Sorry, Guys I’m unqualified to shore up your association who are going to booked another existing case against SAOL for the reason that it is throw away of my additional money.
I’m residing at Chandigarh & I might not be able to visit Mumbai regularly during cases period because ‘Naviniit Kkshola’ had lodge his complaint on the year exactly may 2011 & he has retrieve his amount on this month only. Did you obtain subscription amount including your entire expenditure of whole period (like fare an all)?
If we file case in the course of your association then SAOL will cover all expenses with subscription cost after winning the cases?
I must be timely visit Mumbai court to surrender my credentials (like deposit slip or anything if I have). So, my up-down fares including fooding & lodging charges all goes from my pocket as I heard Mumbai is very costly place (onetime hotel charges is minimum 5K ).
Who will bear my entire expenses & pay back after cases period finished?
If the whole thing including expenses & all thing will cover up by your association afterwards I will follows straight away your decision or else I should keep quite or stop thinking about my investment because it is not a big amount (only 50K).
‘M_Norway’ told on the top of post he will bring-up most excellent way of track down our money after few days, I’m waiting for that.
@oz
“I appreciate the info but you’re going to have to put a name to that”.
Revealing the name will put the source in an embarassing position and will make further information flow dry up. The important factor is genuineness of information.
Some more information revealed by the source:
1. Haren Kaur was just a figure head. She was not kept involved in crucial decision making which was done by masterminds from Mumbai.
2. SAOL did not have any genuine client base for surveys. As such only fake surveys were being done to keep busy the panelists whose numbers were growing like a wild fire.
This case is a good example on why all investment scams limit the amount you can invest. If the amount that you had at risk was low enough, it would be a deterrent from pursuing legal remedies on an individual basis.
One more thing I fail to remember to add together in above my observation. I had made conversation with professional legal representative & discussed with him on the subject of all preceding history of SAOL matter.
He directed me to file supplementary writ at Supreme Court if similar writ of 115 panellist is going to come up final result for which hearing is scheduled on 2nd April 2012 & their monies is about to approve from Hon’ble court.
If we file additional writ at Supreme Court with writ 383 it is quick way to recover our invested amount. At the end of the day I have decided by filling fresh FIR is very long process to retrieve our money & also additional charges like fees of new legal representative, regular visiting fare expenditure will be save from our pocket.
Furthermore, if anybody has further suggestion & clarification on this subject matter, please feel free to give us your valuable comments.
Hello Mr. Rohit Singh,
I’m damn sure, Going with new FIR against the company might be useless for getting back your money, it is a lenghty process too.
Also it’s unaccpetable under certain circumstances in the law if court comes to know status or present condition of all the other cases filed against the company at this present scenario, anyhow those people who don’t want their money back – but, wants to give more pressure or nuisance to the company can go forward with that idea.
That too they can make a try or attempt by spending their money (if they have more) but there’s no guarantee for the outcome result and also 100% damn sure they won’t get back their money like Navniith Khosla’s way.
Allegation is there against AISPA like they are associated with the company, but still it’s an allegation, not proven in any court, if it’s proven none of AISPA’s case will be entertained in the court (which is happening now).
So, Mr. Rohit, instead of going this way you can choose the above option what your legal representative has told, it is worth but even there you need some adjustments to arrange & finish the matter as early as possible, surely your legal representative can guide you in that regard.
Wishing you All Luck!
Regards,
Subramani.
Dear Mr. Rohit, I suggest this is the only best thing to do. Just wait for the final outcome of Writ 383.
Thanks for your important clarifications ‘Mr. Subramani’. My legal representative has suggested me to submit an appeal to the Hon’ble Supreme Court without interruption.
I ‘m going to submit my application by this week anyhow for the reason that earlier than the next hearing of writ 383 my appeal should be arrive at & heard in same day.
I’m praying to the god & expected in the same day of judgement my appeal’s conclusion will come out.
Thanks to the author of this blog who has provide me the space to express my speech & take guidelines for you individuals.
Thanks to ALL & hope each and every one will tag on in the similar route to pull through his/her investment.
@Badsha
1. Terrible English. Could you understand the so called “Surveys” sent to panelists weekly in the language of English?
2. Who would want surveys done in English by a fraudulent company called SpeakAsia filled with English-illiterate panelists like you?
I have been getting such threats by email for attempting to form an association of panelists wanting to file a collective FIR against this company run by goons. Only thing is that we do not have the required numbers yet and, therefore, asked Mr. Mishra if one could join his association from Allahabad.
And, Mr. Badshah, SAOL is finished. It started with a ponzi model to make wealth and then thought of online marketing of electronic goods under a garbage brand!
In other words, it stole crores of money from lakhs of gullible Indians to start a business of their own. SAOL and its supporters like yourself are just plain thieves. Pl restrict yourself to Ashok Bahirwan’s site, AISPA or/and speakindiaonline.com
Mr amit i didnt ask your opinion about the company, the matter is sub-judice so let the court decide and there are many positive signs that company will restart.
If you are a indian citizen and law abiding then you should not comment on subjudice matters, as the law minister himself many a times told to media reporters the matter is sub judice so no comment.
If anyone here is going to court for getting his payments then i will assure you the company or aispa will not bow down in front of you and pay you, navnit khosla was paid but none after him i promise.
and also if u have followed the navnit khosla case many times the judge told navnit khosla to wait for company restart or opt exit option. no FIR no COURT will help.
only company will pay you because cases in many courts are in process & no court has said anything against the company so i dont think anyone will succeed
How do you know that OZ…. Many of our downlines who are actually in need have also get funded by their up-up lines on a need basis. The question here is not how the money is coming or where the money is coming. Question here is to why the money is being paid?
It is being paid by panelists because company is unable to do the same in want of proper legal banking channels.
It is being paid by panelists because they are dead sure that business will resume soon
It is being paid because we INDIANs are here to help our fellow indians who are in dire need of the money…
Because it happened, right infront of everybody’s eyes. Kkhosla filed a FIR and got his money back.
Nothing in your comment changed that fact.
But It nowhere means OZ that whatever happens in your knowledge is the ONLY fact and rest all are assumptions. Things are moving pretty fast now and is confirmed by the fact that Mr. Navniit Khosla ji have taken his FIR Back.
All people who want to Lodge Fresh FIRs or are willing to be part of SC Orders by filing Supplementary Writ may please be assured that whether or not you take such steps, if you have a legal Speakasian ID you are member of AISPA and AISPA is here to take care of all of us Panelists. All speakasians are part of Solomon james Writ no. 383 . Don’t be confused. Be a part of AISPA and you need not require to form a seperate association of your own.
Remember friends, if we work in haste, we loose the long term benefits. Be calm and cool and you will be rewarded soon. Economies of Scale always pay. Whenever you are large in group, you are bound to be heard better than when you are alone.
Dear Oz, You are very right that NK filed an FIR and got money. But let me make a little correction here that NK was the first to file the FIR and got paid. I strongly feel that filing any FIR now can not be compared with NK’s FIR filed nearly an year ago, and thus can not be met with the same fate.
Now the matter is surely sub-judice and im afraid any fresh FIR cld be entertained now by any agency AND same applies to any fresh writs. He had an advantage of being first to start the investigations so he got rewarded.
I say this because none has nothing new to this case. But yes once the final verdict on writ 383 comes up, it can surely be used as an citation..
In due course, I understand your point of views Mr. khanna & Mr. Lee I did petite error while doing verbal conversation between legal representatives other than it is not my mistake, few individual are making argument with each other in prior post & most of the people are talking about only 115 panellists was the petitioners of writ 383.
In addition to they are only become certified to claim his/her monies and legal representative also says facts.
If that writ covers each and every one panellist afterwards there is no require to file supplementary writ.
So, as I read you’re all pervious older comments in next article & I feel you are the older most people who are chatting informative & positively all over the forum concerning SapeakAsia matter.
Accordingly, I will acknowledge your point of views & stop filling supplementary writ.
I also strongly accept you suggestion & I will wait till the result of final verdict of writ 383 comes.
Thanks you very much for giving clarification on my small doubt.
As says:
I do believe I suggested before that you can try to “implead” yourself into the case. Indeed, EOW has been asking why had SAOL only refund the 115 (out of 1.5 million) when over 2000 crore had been put in by various panelists.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-02-10/mumbai/31045772_1_investment-firm-return-money-investors
So the court asked EOW to provide a good list, and that’s the last we’ve heard of it. Presumably EOW had done so, so is SAOL going to put up additional money? And is there anything the average panelist can do to improve their chances of getting money back?
Your choices, again, are as follows
* file a new FIR and work its way through the courts (expect AISPA and SAOL to fight to quash your FIRs), while various members call you Judas (like many called Khosla here, “pleading” him not to be a “hero” and not to make SAOL pay)
* file a pleading to “implead” yourself into the existing case (preferably the more the better, share lawyer expenses) and see if the Apex Court can order SAOL to pay you along with the 113/115/whatever.
* form a competitor to AISPA to rally your forces first, then implead your group into the existing case, and see if SAOL and AISPA will offer you and your members a settlement (or sue you in court, but over what, I have no idea)
* or you can always do nothing, and *hope* SAOL can be restarted somehow, but clearly, their model means no more surveys, they really want you to SPEND money for TVs and such, instead of MAKING money. And we haven’t seen other government agencies’ moves, such as SFIO, ED, Tax, and CBI/CID.
Unless you are a betting man who enjoy playing very “long odds”, you should not rely on the final option. Remember, every bit of $$$ spent on the lawyers means less money to pay you. Time is NOT on your side.
Yes, you are a part of AISPA which is raising money from the ranks of AISPA to pay off Khosla. So you are basically paying yourselves. You have gained NOTHING except shifted money from members to other members.
Furthermore, where is AISPA in the case? There are only six parties in the Writ 383 case: Petitioners (Solomon James & pty), Union of India (2), SAOL (3), Haren Ventures (4) EOW (5), Income tax dept (6). Where is AISPA and “all panelists” and Sanjeev Khanna is referring to?
Proof:
http://judis.nic.in/temp/3832011317102011p.txt
How can all “SpeakAsians” be a part of the suit when they are not listed as a party?
AISPA have been floating this assertion ever since 383 was filed back at the end of 2011. The court order is VERY precise: if you are not listed, you are NOT IN IT.
Why would AISPA and its fans insist upon something that is NOT TRUE?
Is AISPA legal representative of all the more than 2 million panelists? Have all these people signed any kind of document authorizing AISPA to act in their names?
Is there any law in India that makes AISPA authomaticaly representative of all panelists? Or the sentence I highlighted is just figurative?
Dear friends, I Ravi Shankar Mishra, telling you all that after visting New Delhi from Allahabad (Uttar Pradesh), came to know that there was nothing to be worried about regarding Speak Asia, matters are going really positive and in our favour.
The proper interaction between up liners and down liners has caused the chaos , there is no need to lodge any FIRs or to file any supplementary writ further.
Thanks to my legal advisor who is the senior advocate at Allahabad High court and who was also with me in New Delhi. Now, I’m waiting for the company eagerly with all my 300 friends.
Mr. Navnit Khosla, thanks a lot for giving us your email ID and also the mobile number.
And special thanks for the learned people of this site who have been provoking innocent people regularly to do such the things as they wish.
Again thanks a lot to Mr. Sanjeev Khanna and Mr. Badshah for their suggestion and advice for the people of Speak Asia.
Yes. Wait till 31st March and you will have some better clarity on what is AISPA and how it is working for all us panelists.
17th October being listed as a proof!!!. 😀 Kasey this is Outdated now….
@Sanjeev
Sorry, Kkhosla filing a FIR and being the only panelist to get his money back didn’t just happen “in my knowledge”, it happened in real life.
If you want to talk about assumptions, here some:
Yeah, real fast. Just look at the Supreme Court CID case (which also has a FIR tied into it). Next hearing date is 27th April.
One might say it’s moving at lightning speed. With no chance for
Speak AsiaAISPA to pay off Corporate Frauds Watch however, there’s no chance that case isn’t going to play out.With the court giving Speak Asia over a month to reply to the CID’s stay application and allegations (which they have filed with the intention of proving them in court should it come to that, as the court has noted), it must be some pretty heavy stuff.
Don’t forget, this is the agency who wanted to bring interpol in before Speak Asia shat itself and filed a ‘stop investigating us!’ case.
AISPA can’t just declare that anymore than you or I can.
You need consent and an agreement to act for and represent people legally. AISPA has no such thing from the majority of panelists (they do have it with a few, now that they’ve started charging for membership).
This is the same nonsense as asserting that the writ 383 petition covers everyone, when clearly the only mention thus far in any order has referenced ‘the petitioners, of which there are only 115.
Doesn’t change the fact though that he filed a FIR and got paid. First, last, thirteenth – …what’s your point?
I suppose those who didn’t file FIRs or join Kkhosla (he did extend an open invitiation multiple times to panelists to contact him, which senior panelists and AISPA at the time advised against) are kinda wishing they got in on the refund action when they had the chance.
But anyway I digress, this isn’t an advocacy site and what individual panelists do or don’t do is their business.
I was merely amused that despite all the ‘don’t file FIRs! Navniit Kkhosla is ‘the paid agent enemy’!’ smears conducted by AISPA and senior panelists, ultimately he is the only one who has recovered his money and is done with the scam.
Let’s leave it there.
thats wat my point is. There was an opportunity and now its not there. I dont think now any one can do the FIR’ s or writs.. The matter is already up in the courts and with investigation departments. People who kept slept, i suggest them to please stay slept for some more time now…
Do u think u hv some other choice?
Why not,
Speak AsiaAISPA seem to be filing them every other day.As for “the matter”. The matter in the courts, as per their order covers payments to the petitioners. As per the order it has nothing to do with anyone other than the petitioners, that being the 115 signed petitioners on the writ.
Till there’s public acknowledgement that payments to anyone else, that doesn’t change.
Considering I’m not personally interested in advocacy and payments, of course I do. This isn’t Facebook, deal with it.
Simple logic any wise person can understand is, if SpeakAsia was not involved in fraud online surveys, then why did Manoj Kumar who announced in May last year press conference that we are ready to assist and will cooperate in any enquiry the govt wants and after announcing this, he runs away and also Haren Kaur dissappears.
So if Manoj and Haren wanted to cooperate then why did they ran away?
Also why are Speak Asia trying to stop the CID investigations in court? (and EOW through AISPA?)
@ K. Chang
“Just for comparison, BurnLounge, which claimed to be a new way to distribute music, was charged by the American FTC in 2007 being a pyramid scheme. The case was resolved only a few days ago (14-MAR-2012), when a judge ordered the company to repay 17 million $USD to its members.
Furthermore, several of the most senior members were charged and ordered to repay much of their “earnings” as well”.
SAOL’s Exit Policy is intentionally ambiguously worded to cheaply get rid of 10 lakh panelists who joined after March 2011 and could not encash or use the Reward Points which were credited from May 2011 onwards. SAOL’s game plan is to drastically reduce the liability when the courts finally order SAOL and senior panelists to repay its members who joined later and suffered losses.
If AISPA is really working in the interest of panelists then it must force SAOL to postpone Exit Policy deadline of March 31, 2012 and ask SAOL to get the official website released through Supreme Court so that the panelists can properly exercise the Exit Option through the official website in a tranparent manner:
1. In July 2011, some products were ordered by the panelists by burning RPs. As these products were never delivered, the equivalent RPs must be credited to the panelists’ Ewallet.
2. There should be provision for surrendering unutilised Pins and the equivalent RPs should be credited to the panelist’s Ewallet.
3. Before exercising the Exit Option, the panelist must know the amount to be refunded to him.
4. Since SAOL has proposed not to pay for unutilised RPs, the Exiting panelist should continue to be a member even after he is paid the interim amount under Exit Policy. Ultimately, the courts will decide the amount to be repaid by SAOL against outstanding RPs.
In case AISPA does not bother to take any action in the matter before the Exit Policy offer expires on March 31, 2012, the aggrieved panelists should take up the matter at AISPA General Body Meeting scheduled on March 31, 2012.
In case AISPA does nothing in this vitally important matter for the panelists, AISPA may also turn out to be a co-accused along with SAOL. No wonder, EOW officers are already calling Ashok Bahirwani an Agent of SAOL.
In the connection with TOI news of 10th Feb, they might wish for hype by get it wrong between company & its panellist.
I understand writing of all news & verified from dependable source from panellist (petitioner) of writ 383.
BASED UPON EARLIER NEWS, THEY EXPLAINED TO ME IS AS FOLLOWS:
Generally the news of TOI (especially Mr. Hafeez reporter) was a misguiding report concerning Speak Asia matter all the time;
The earlier order of Hon’ble Supreme court (to be read along with the mediators report) clearly talks about returning of money of the 115 petitioners and all other panellist.
Either the reporter has not study the reports or has zero understanding of legal matters or reporter is only sensationalising the matter by concealing the truth.
Might be they’re not collecting and write the correct information, that news has so many misleading information.
They should confirm first subsequently publish & must know that already Intervention Application is accepted at Supreme Court. Means this decision is applicable to all the panellists.
They’re trying to become extinct image among the readers by publishing artificial news against company because every person who is associated with company knows concerning the real fact even much better then reporter of this news.
BASED UPON YOUR THOUGHTS:
You shouldn’t try to ram your off thoughts into other’s throat & the facts is that choice is only to recover my hard earn money within peaceful mode.
I understand you individuals will not acknowledge that mode because you guys are fit to convince in another mode to create a panic situation by posting indiscriminately whatever thing comes on mind.
I would like to say, all Journalists were bound by professional ethics and they should bear in mind that freedom of the press does not mean a license to write anything. This freedom is precious and it has to be used judiciously. When this freedom is misused, public respect for this profession will diminish.
Look forward to; journalist will preserve his decorum & his freedom all the times or in future.
After all, I would like to ask if company is willing to pay to his all panellist then what is the problem with you guys can you explain?
“A RISKY ENTERPRISE IS JUSTIFIED SO LONG AS IT TURNS OUT WELL IN THE END”
They being one of the signed petitioners?
Well yeah, of course they have nothing to gain by pesky panelists asking questions or seeking clarification. I mean they’re covered by the writ… y’know, being one of the signed petitioners and all.
Yes, yes – we’ve heard the ‘everyone is lying argument’ before. Not buying it.
Yeah so… I take it you’re new to the whole reading thing. Well, the first step is choosing what to read. That’s a pretty big step and you take it from there.
Hafeez in particular is usually quoting the EOW. Meanwhile you’re essentially saying ‘some random who has a lot to gain by convincing me I am included even though I’m not a signed petitioner is right. Everybody else is wrong’.
The small problem of not having the money. Speak Asia don’t have 30,000 cr to payout. End of story.
AISPA fanboys strongly believe that SpeakAsia has those 30,000 cr hidden somewhere
The EOW have gone over the backend and on the books Speak Asia only have a recorded 2,200 cr or something in revenue (from memory).
The only way they can generate 30,000cr is to rope even more people into the scam. Why do you think management and senior panelists are pushing the ‘business will start again soon’ line for the last 8-9 months.
I have no idea whether he is signed petitioner or not but I have faith & i think he is my well-wisher in tough moment in time & my colleague saw his name is listed in that petition.
I say self-confidently they have submitted appeal towards court for revival of funds.
I familiar with him as of lengthy time he is not a pesky, he is archetypical panellist. Expect he has recommended me for the best of upcoming surroundings.
However, you individuals are compelled me for filling of fresh FIR & we are being familiar with that added FIR is not a quick solution to pull through our money. It is a waste of time & extra funds. Our funds were previously safe and sound in the supervision of Hon’ble courts.
I bound to point out Mr. Hafeez stories for the reason that Mr. Chang give an example of that news write-ups as “writ 383 will cover only 115 panellist funds”. After all, I get clear cut answer of my doubt for which those writs cover all panellists’ liability from various source.
Again & again you are redirecting the entire issue in the wrong direction & you have put round seal on your proclamation of conclusion as “SAOL HAS NO MONEY & END OF STORY” & Granted ! Other than you’re not capable to enclose the proof of not having money on Speak Asia account.
I think they have enough money or not later their balance sheet will illustrate. It is useless to thrash out my observation & colours the banners to answer back.
As we know your entire blogs are rescuing stuff & discussion board also wrap-up with Speak Asia’s topic only.
It will confirm that you have depth relation with Speak Asia’s issue & you would like to cut off the whole thing at some point of view.
Now, you can edit my observation but later on you can’t edit Hon’ble court orders. So, I’m waiting for that day, hope we’ll get the judgement in favour funds allotment & company will reimburse our hard earn money earliest.
So, for the time being, all the best you guys for your dedication & endeavour in opposition to Speak Asia happening. Look forward you’ll unable to succeed in your route. If you talk at least in favour of public afterwards our respect will enhance rather than diminish.
“BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER”
The amounts reported by Harender Kaur around 28. May 2011 were:
* $482 million USD in bank accounts, $200 million reserved to pay panelists, $282 million for other uses.
* 4,800 crore Rs. in total assets (bank accounts included). The other assets will usually mean money invested into something.
These amounts were found in the article “Speak Asia fights back” or something, from the end of May 2011. I’m not sure I have pointed out the exact source here, but the date should be correct (27. or 28. May).
The amounts found on the server makes very little sense. 2,200 crore in revenue is far too low to be real, but it may be real if it only covers the 11,000 Rs. subscription fees (and other investments have been skimmed off by Seven Rings and other companies). 30,000 crore Rs. seems to be too high, but it may be real if it also covers reinvestments in additional panels and subpanels.
Most of the money invested by panelists seems to have “disappeared” from Speak Asia, into different foreign accounts other than Speak Asia’s own accounts. In the long term, claims should probably be directed against the person in charge of the money laundering rather than Speak Asia itself.
3 of Manoj Kumar Sharma’s companies were probably directly involved in transferring of money, as an important part of the chain:
* Money was paid from panelists to franchisees, either directly or in a chain.
* Money was collected from the franchisees regularly (once a week or something), by 3 of Manoj Kumar Sharma’s companies.
* I’ll guess money was sent from there to different locations, but they might have had some additional solutions (other companies involved).
* Only a fraction of the amount is registered when it arrives at Speak Asia in Singapore (the 2,200 crore Rs. is far too low to be real).
The main company is Seven Rings International (registered in UAE, and maybe in Italy too). This company is probably the organizer for the rest of the companies.
It has been confirmed to be the organizer for Mister Colibri in Brazil. In Speak Asia, it had a 60 percent share of the revenue (money invested by panelists), officially from February 2011.
People who still believes in Speak Asia should check the economics, and make their own calculations for how able Speak Asia will be to keep any promises.
It should be possible to get the Exit Policy partly confirmed, by one who claims to be company official:
Source: speakasiaonline.mobi
But people shouldn’t overload other people with work (e-mails or other work), so it will be better if someone finds an “organized method” to ask only a few important questions, easy to answer and not too time consuming.
So far, the Exit Policy hasn’t been confirmed by any officials, and they haven’t corrected the misleading conditions either.
@Rohit
So not even that, just some random.
Well then he’s a petitioner, isn’t he.
Come on mate, you asked and you got opinions and suggestions. Your silly attempts to paint BehindMLM as some group of people trying to destroy Speak Asia is about as transparent as Anju and Bahirwani’s relationship.
The EOW have complete access to the website backend, including all recorded revenue of the company.
Oh absolutely, there’s no other companies or topics discussed here. It’s just Speak Asia, all day every day.
Good point, and to date the only mention of payments in the 383 case has been that of ‘the petitioners’. There are 115 signed petitioners on writ 383 – you are not one of them.
Until this changes, best of luck assuming it covers you.
Unfortunately this isn’t a popularity contest. I analyse MLM companies, of which Speak Asia is one of them.
Nonsense, much easier to just listen to some guy who may or may not be a petitioner and has a shot at getting his money back if he can convince non-petitioner panelists to shutup and be quiet for a few more weeks.
@Subramani
Since you have identified yourself as a lawyer, you should probably identify whether you represent any specific group, viewpoints, etc. – or if you are neutral. This will make it easier for people to evaluate your viewpoints.
You are the first one who have identified a specific profession in your comments, directly related to some of the topics being discussed here. Then you should also be able to identify whether your comments are from a neutral and professional viewpoint, or if you have interests in any specific outcome (on behalf of a client, or because of personal interests).
M_Norway,
I won’t stand with anyone at this point. I’m not respecting or accepting any specific group in regard with Speak Asia Online at this point of time.
Each and everyone have their own right to form a group or association whatever they want and it is up-to the individual group or association to arrange for a meeting and create or develop public support.
Our community always have special respect to Hon’ble Retd. CJI Mr. R C Lahoti Ji and we consider his work will be the best at this time. Meantime, I don’t want to reveal my case details against the company Speak Asia Online, Union Of India which includes EOW & RBI (i don’t want to give even correct names of both Respondent and Petitioners of my case).
Sorry, I have to follow certain terms and conditions strictly with my client. The problem with all of us is no one wants to be calm and show their patience. We should not forget that every-time getting a justice in India will take more time. We need to show our real patience.
I have revealed my identity as a lawyer not with proudness or showing my ego, it’s only for the information. Nothing else. Even I don’t want to give advice to anyone or give my viewpoint here asking them to do like this or to do like that.
At this final moment i should not do that. I’m not eligible to do that, even coming out in public forum like this is also not good for my profession. We have to wait for the outcome..!
Once this matter gets settled we can discuss freely. At that time, you can ask me whatever you want and I can give information or my personal viewpoint regarding all. At present situation I can’t give my viewpoints publicly.
Thanks & Regards,
Subramani.
Dunno if it’s the same guy, but I wrote about a ‘Gopal Subramaniam’ acting as senior counsel for Speak Asia back in October last year.
Subramaniam was the guy who told the Supreme Court that Speak Asia was like eBay, but that it
Given that members have never been able to buy goods and services via the company and there’s never been consumers as part of the Speak Asia business model (the one they used, not a hypothetical or planned one), I put forth that Subramaniam at the time committed perjury.
@Subramani
Thank you for the answer. The question wasn’t meant as a “trouble-question”, it was only meant for analysing “neutrality” vs. “specific interests”, like having a client. You have partially confirmed that you have a client in this case.
You have also shown you are professional enough to detect the possible conflict of interests here, and to recognize WHY I was asking the question.
@ Oz,
I won’t think for the status of Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, senior advocate of the Supreme Court of India, who was appointed as the Solicitor General of India, the second most important law officer of the country after the attorney general, in 2009 at the age of 51 will come and write or participate in Behind MLM.
This might not be that gentleman. Please don’t create publicity by using his name. You shouldn’t have criticized him by writing an article against him! For his name & his fame.. That was a bit uncalled-for suggestions in Behind MLM!
Thanks, Mr. Subramani Ji, at least some legal representative decides to surface in the open forum to protect our interest.
Or else, other individuals will hammering tack on our head & bury our head into sand. Now, we don’t require setting helmet on our head.
Hats-of ! Either way, your views is reinforced
Put simply, this means that SAOL can improve the way we think and fell about them by improving the way we act.
If we always try our best, never give up and always act with integrity, then sooner or later success will come in our way.
With that success, it come higher levels of self-esteem, which will bring the further successes that generate even higher levels of self-esteem.
Once SAOL’s dealing begins, this self reinforcing feedback loop will build their self-esteem automatically over time which is why it is often said that success breeds success.
We all will face challenges in our life, and sometimes, we make choices that we proud of, and other times, we make choices that we will not be disappointed.
The thing is that really counts are not whether the choices we make are good or bad, but rather, what we learn from them.
Sometimes, the things that seem really bad turn out to be a blessing in disguise and end up improving our life in ways that we could have never imagined.
If one wishes to improve their downfall circumstances, they must also work on improving how they fell about Implementation so that they stand for the best chance of adapting to, and making it in, this ever-challenging world in which we all live.
What is the work of Mr. Gopal Subramaniam here? Is he a innocent child like this?
No way, a person of his status or publicity will not come to this open public forum for giving his comment! This is someone else..!
Might be some other lawyer or person belongs to legal team (just a guess!)!
EOW announce they are going after Seven Rings International (Speak Asia’s parent company) and the Ad Matrix.
I wonder if AISPA will pay off those involved in these two FIRs too.
I also wonder how many scams Manoj Kumar has to be involved in before things get really serious. Hopefully the CID investigation is allowed to go ahead.
With the overlap between Seven Rings, the AdMatrix and Speak Asia – with Speak Asia’s management hiding overseas I guess it’s open season on Speak Asia’s senior panelists again…
Seven Rings and AdMatrix were both scams… and Speak Asia is legit? Please.
@Oz
You don’t understand the revolutionary business model of Admatrix . In the initial phase Admatrix was building its customer base by collecting huge investment money from people (promising huge returns).
In the next phase it will file various cases in Supreme Court to quash fir against it. This is called precision … whatever it is.
Here is a 2008 review of SeverRings International
Aptech Limited was also got scammed by SeverRings International
Source
Aptech is a well-known business entity – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptech
I had filed an intervention application in Civil Writ Petition no. 383 of 2011 in the Supreme Court on 01.03.2012. On 28.03.2012 I have received a letter from the Supreme Court Registry that my intervention application has been numbered as IA no. 9 of 2012 and is listed for hearing on 02.04.2012.
At 6.00 pm on 13.03.2012 I went to attend the meeting of the Lahoti Committee headed by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice RC Lahoti at the India International Centre in New Delhi but was not permitted to participate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lahoti explained to me that the meeting for the mediation proceedings was only for the parties in Civil Writ Petition no. 383 of 2011. I explained that I had filed an intervention application in Civil Writ Petition no. 383 of 2011 which was pending. I also explained that I was the complainant in FIR no. 153/2011 later renumbered as CR no. 60/2011 by the EOW of Mumbai Police. My pleas were not accepted and I came back to Mumbai.
This clearly indicates that WP 383/2011 is only for 115 panelists not only for all the panelists, as Navnit Khosla was also a panelist of speakasia.
I had filed the Intervention Application no. 9 of 2012 in person without any advocate. It cost me only Rs. 1,350 as legal fees. Travelling, food expenses, etc were extra. I reached the Supreme Court at 12.15 pm and left by 5.15 pm after serving the advocates on record and filing my application.
This happened because I know my way around the Supreme Court having lived nearby for 44 years. I had also talked to the registry earlier and printed all the details from the Supreme Court website totaling over 100 pages. I had to make some minor changes on three pages and in the affidavit.
I was paid the investment by the advocate of AISPA (and confirmed in the High Court) only because I had filed this Intervention Application containing the truth about Speak Asia and the fact that I was not allowed to attend the Lahoti Committee meeting.
Further in Mumbai in CrWP 3611/11 I have been submitting the facts about Speak Asia in the proceedings to the Court. The expensive Senior Advocates found it difficult to counter the facts about the fraudulent online survey scheme of Speak Asia with legal posturing.
The Division Bench was also most cooperative and always heard me fully and understood that I was submitting the facts that the State of Maharashtra / EOW should have submitted immediately on commencement of the proceedings.
This can be done by any other investor also.
Remember FIR, Intervention Application in Supreme Court, Bombay High Court, Lahoti Committee and you get your investment back.
Good luck to all!
That is exactly what Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lahti said –
Lordship was very kind and heard me fully. I said all that I have submitted in my Intervention Application and thanked him for hearing me out and came away.
Rise all you sleeping investors. You will not get relief if you do not act.
My question is whether you will sell toasters, vacum cleaners, water filters for Speak Asia to recover your investment through sales commission? Who will pay for the sample piece? And where will you display it?
And will Samsung, Whirlpool, LG, Godrej, etc just step aside for the Speak Asia investors to recover their dues?
You can easily recover your money if you invested in PINs from your upline. They should pay you. No need to go anywhere and spend any money.
I have commented earlier that we need to check the intentions of the party rather than the actions.
In AISPA case we can clearly see that Navnit Khosla was a prime threat to speakasia and bahirwani and his gang.
He was supplying evidence against the AISPA/speakasia claims (by his statements above) and that’s why bahirwani and gang tried various methods to silent him and finally paying him the money he owns.
Why we can trust Navnit on this? Because he is the only one got paid and by this AISPA confirmed he was right. His arguments can be crosschecked with various sources and court orders.
About the exit option
=========================
AISPA claims to resume business of speakasia stating the outcome of WP 383/2011. But as you can see
# only 115 panelists does not represent 1.2M+ panelists.
# it’s a civil writ between parties involved and does not include criminal part whereas WP 3611/2011 was due to FIR filed by various parties
# new cases are registered against the operators of speakasia (including Seven Rings and admatrix) by various authorities
# exit option or business restart is never mentioned in any court order till now
# not a single authority from speakasia is verifying exit option for truth and are silent over business restart and other matters
# the business model used by speakasia is never explained properly (proper documentation of the same is missing and YouTube videos can’t be used as business model)
# all the questions about speakasia clients or income source are avoided and no clear answer is given by the speakasia
=========================
The panelists should act by themselves using their own understanding and knowledge instead of trusting someone else that is not an authority or cannot be hold responsible for their actions.
I don’t know if it is possible to recover your money or not but you should follow the steps mentioned by M_Norway in this case. He has mentioned so many options, guidelines regarding the situation and various possibilities.
If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. So think at least a hundred times before investing your hard earned money in *anything*.
No, he won’t. He’s representing a client, in the meaning that he will be disqualified (inhabil) in “protecting interests” (unless YOU are his client). He is following this topic because a client pays him to do so, or because it’s needed in a related case.
Lawyers representing a client have other rules to follow than witnesses or expert witnesses. You can’t expect a lawyer to “tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth” when he’s representing a client in court.
The above quote is key here. It’s what Kkhosla was told when he, a regular panelist and not one of the 115 signed petitioners attempted to join the mediation proceedings.
Anyone who is not one of the 115 signed petitioners currently has nothing to do with the mediation proceeding or court case unless the court decides otherwise.
Anyone who says otherwise is making up their own interpretations.
@Andy
Missed this before:
The exit option to date has not been mentioned in any court order anywhere.
I had visited the EOW of Mumbai Police 33/34 times over a period of about seven months and met many officers including the IO Inspector Shelke, the Sr. PI as well as the Addl. Commissioner of Police Shri Rajvardhan. Remember I am the original complainant in FIR no. 153/11 renumbered as CR no. 60/11 by the EOW. My visits were to recover the investment from the accused and / or the company SAOL. I could not have shown more desperation or tenacity.
The Bank accounts of the two persons who had sold me their PINS – Deepankar Sarkar and Vijender Singh of Rajesh Enterprises both of Raipur had been attached by the EOW, Mumbai Police.
After fighting me for some time Speak Asia paid Rs. 54 crore as service tax in March end / April and thereafter invoices were issued to me by both these persons after they presumably had received invoices also from SAOL.
I was informed by the IO Mr. Shelke that Vijender Singh of Rajesh Enterprises of Raipur was not at the address on the invoices. I had asked IO Mr. Shelke for the current address / last address on the record of EOW of Vijender Singh of Rajesh Enterprises as I had to make them a party in my application for repayment in the Court of the 19th ACMM, Esplanade, Mumbai. Even this address was not given. It has to be part of the record of the investigations. But it was not given.
I conveyed this to the Addl. Commissioner but it was still not given. I gave up and in Court submitted the address on the invoices. This matter was pending in the 19th ACMM Court and in the meantime I was paid through Shri Sachin Midha the advocate on record of AISPA in 3611/11 on 15th March, 2012.
I had visited the Mediation Committee of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lahoti on 13th March, 2012.
Everybody who has invested in SAOL will not be able to do what I did. First I have invested an immense amount of time, effort and some money to recover the investment in the fraudulent online survey scheme of SAOL.
I think someone who has invested Rs. 50,000 and above should be able to recover the investment with some efforts and very little expense in a small group. Anybody with an investment of over Rs. 1,00,000 will not be wise to lose his investment.
It is doable. Do not listen to anybody. Just ask for your money. You owe it to yourself and your family. Period.
Speak Asia will never be able to run this survey scheme. Do you think an absconding management can run a MLM selling toasters, hair dryers, geysers, TVs, etc.? Can you sell consumer durables? To whom? In competition with LG, Samsung, Whirlpool, Godrej, etc.?
Recover your money. It is doable. Do not listen to anybody. Just ask for your money. You owe it to yourself and your family. Period.
@ oz
“Anyone who is not one of the 115 signed petitioners currently has nothing to do with the mediation proceeding or court case unless the court decides otherwise”.
If the mediation proceeding is limited to 115 petitioners, why SAOL is trying to push through an ill-defined Exit Policy using an unofficial blog. Why not get the official website released from EOW through Supreme Court order and then carry out the Exit Policy implementation in a transparent manner?
It appears that SAOL’s game plan is to incite applications from panelists seeking stay orders thereby putting on hold implementation of the current slip-shod Exit Scheme. This is a delaying tactic. Besides, having opted for the current Exit Scheme expiring on March 31, 2012, many panelists may prefer to wait for refund, if any, through Exit Policy.
You are permitted to join the mediation proceedings of the Lahoti Committee headed by Hon’ble Mr. Justice RC Lahoti after you have been made a party through an intervention application in CWP no. 383/11 or otherwise on the orders of the Court.
So with the filing of an intervention application for 1000 rupees or so, rather than wait around in the dark any panelist could demand their money back in person as part of writ 383 rather than be kept in the dark by senior panelists?
Kinda makes you wonder why this was never suggested to panelists by Speak Asia, AISPA or any other senior panelists. I imagine getting your money back and having an actual voice in the mediation proceedings sure beats being misled that it covers you when all signs point to the opposite.
Hell, even the mediator himself said that until the court decides otherwise the mediation process is solely for the 115 signed petitioners… and the same was directed in the Supreme Court order when they asked Lahoti to work out what was owed to the ‘petitioners’.
What more evidence or motivation do you need?
Until the exit policy appears in an order I’m refraining from entertaining the idea of its inclusion in the mediation process.
To date it’s only ever been referenced by AISPA and Speak Asia themselves (through, as you put it an unofficial blog anyone could have set up).
Will they create some kind of “All Indian AdMAtrix Panelist Association”?
The only reason AISPA exists is to PREVENT regular panelists from asking for their money through official channels.
Thanks Navniit on the information provided and expense on filing an Intervention Application. Surprisingly, AISPA is neither one of the 115 panelists to the writ 383/2011 nor has filed an intervention application.
Also though one can login at http://www.aispa.co.in, but the “contact us” function is disabled. Could Navniit be kind enough to tell us the email ID of the Society under which AISPA is registered so that I can write to them of the bogus claim of Ashok Bahirwani/AISPA of “automatically” representing the 12.5 lakh panelists via more of a personal blog then website of AISPA, and that it is just a mouthpiece of fugitive management of the erstwhile speakasiaonline.com.
So, Amit, just go and file your intervention application or that of your association if the latter was registered locally. Forget that association of Allahabad that developed cold feet after it was dissuaded by one of the leaders of speakasia.
I am also surprised that EoW, Mumbai is not aggressively pursuing the case on SAOL, but rather timidly relying on AP CID to do the needful. The EoW, Mumbai was earlier going piggyback on Navniit via CR no. 60/2011 that was closed by the Mumbai High Court on Navniit having stated in the court of having been paid back his money.
The EoW had been stating through the press of coming up with a “water tight case”, but now seemed to have shut this matter water tight.
And where is Anju, Anjali, Badmash (or was it Badshah?), etc. since revelation of intervention application has come to light?
Kkhosla has been kind enough to provide me with a copy of his intervention order, I itend to take a proper look at it Sunday and put together an article around it then.
BehindMLM isn’t an advocacy site but hopefully if all the information around Kkhosla’s recovery of funds is in one place that gives panelists something to go over and I can direct people who are asking me what to do there.
Especially if the 2nd April hearing is just another ‘nothing much happened except we got a new date’ hearing. or worse still, if it only deals with payments to the petitioners as has previously been indicated by court orders and the mediator (quoted by Kkhosla who spoke to Lahoti directly).
Badshah has just been sprouting mostly incoherent Jai Speak Asia crap and Anjali can’t help herself with the ‘everybody is lying’ conspiracy theories and just being abusive in general. Nothing worthwhile to contribute other then the usual ‘lol wait and see’ line so I haven’t let any of her/his/its comments through.
i have seen some forum,wait & watch from leader now latest scenario
EoW seems to have opened another front with this Speak Asia scam. As per report in ToI dated March 29, 2012, EoW Mumbai has registered two cases against SevenRings International and Index Admatrix Pvt Ltd.
“We have proof that SpeakAsia promoters ran these two companies,” said a police officer. Read all about it at http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-29/mumbai/31254316_1_fraud-cases-police-officer-eow.
Those named in the two FIRs include SpeakAsia’s Indian head Manojkumar Sharma, Ramnivas Pal, Priti Pal, Suhas Shirke etc. Police said investors and panelists lost Rs 2,276 crore in SpeakAsia’s schemes. The police is also stated to have said that SpeakAsia laundered over Rs 700 crore from India to Singapore and then transferred it to SevenRings account.
Surely the Supreme Court may not be ignorant of such happenings. Let us see what SC has to state in its judgement on April 2nd when Retd. Justice Lahoti presents his mediation report to it. May be the EoW opens another front at that time.
We already knew the AdMatrix, Speak Asia and Seven Rings were connected, but the EOW claim to have proof and have added Elia De Prisco (currently scamming people in Brazil through Mister Colibri (owned by Seven Rings)) and Antonio Grasso to their crosshairs:
I hadn’t however heard of Red Carpet before, apparently it’s an investment firm (money laundering?)
Not sure how Red Carpet are linked to Speak Asia, but I’d assume it’s another Seven Rings/Manoj Kumar connection.
Lol, these scammers will try and lie their way out of anything. Are they seriously going to deny Manoj Kumar isn’t on the management of Seven Rings and together with his other Seven Rings execs hasn’t orchestrated multiple scams in multiple companies?
What a joke.
It’s been good to see some insight into the EOWs investigation and hopefully they present what they have to the SC on Monday and get back to investigating Speak Asia directly.
Sidenote: Wonder what this email is and who it was sent out to. Nothing appeared on the unofficial Speak Asia blogspot site.
Speak Asia seems to have some communication problems between different parts of the organization. Often it looks like two different parties living in separate parts of the world.
* Speak Asia Marketing Team are usually poorly updated when it comes to news, facts and other stuff.
* AISPA and related sites are better updated, but seems to have poor connections with the Marketing Team. It seems like an one way connection from time to time (from the Marketing Team to AISPA).
* It looks like AISPA is accepting orders from the Marketing Team, rather than being an equal party (in some specific cases).
“Poorly updated” and “one way communication” relates to the statement about their relationship with Seven Rings. They haven’t been updated on the 60/40 contract between Seven Rings and Speak Asia from February 2011.
Most of the AISPA-related personnell are company officials, like “district managers”, “area managers” or something similar. I’m not sure which company they are officials for, whether it’s Seven Rings or Speak Asia (or both).
This is not totally guesswork, since someone released a list of company officials on Speakasiaonline.mobi yesterday – with Melwyn Crasto as one of the names, the Pal brothers and a few other familiar names (Bahirwani was not on the list). The list was hastily deleted, and they advise people not to post any lists like that in comments.
Here’s the advise from Speakasiaonline.mobi about NOT posting lists like that in comments:
One of the other familiar names in the list was Deepankar Sarkar, one of those arrested in relation to FIR 60/2011, the one responsible for making the fake surveys (as far as I remember).
In total, the list contained 15-16 names or so, and the officials were listed as “area managers”. The most interesting name was Melwyn Crasto, the “I’m only an ordinary panelist” guy who’s out on bail.
from speakasian powers
since aispa has some new actions up it’s sleeve it was necessary to be completely legal and hold this AGM.
Deepankar Sarkar sold me his PINs in the fraudulent online survey scheme of Speak Asia Online Pte. Ltd. and was one of the first persons to be arrested.
I had begged him to send me invoices for the investment made by my company and he informed me that he was on holiday in Hong Kong and I was disturbing him. Later after Speak Asia paid service tax he issued hard copy invoices to me for most of the investment made by my company.
What (unofficial) position did Manoj Kumar get elected to? Or does he just continue to run things at AISPA from behind a curtain?
The investigative agencies of India took Deepankar Sarkar in custody for a tour of some unusual and out of the way tourist spots in India but I believe the night halts were not similar to Hong Kong.
@Navniit Kkhosla
@jutamaro
is it true that the Supreme Court has ordered all the investigation on SpeakAsia to stop?
If it’s trus, is this kind of order common in India?
Very good, but I prefer to stick to the original ideas where Justitia is blindfolded and uses a weight – where I can focus on the case itself rather than the persons or institutions involved in it.
I’ll guess I would have had a different viewpoint if I had been a part of the same “foodchain” as the institutions involved, but so far I have only used them as “information sources”.
The Speak Asia case involves the interests of more than 1.2 million Indians, and most of them have had great difficulties understanding the communication from official sources.
Most of them don’t even know for sure whether they’re included in the mediation process or not, or if the Exit Policy introduced by “half officials” is an official part of the payment solution (or a tool to cheat them).
How many members do they have?
I don’t need any exact numbers, only a well informed estimate. And I’m not very critical either if the number is below 5 percent of total panelists, since I know most people will use some time to decide before they join something.
THE HIGH CURT OF BOMBAY
The High Court of Bombay has ordered STAY in WRIT 3611/2011, and this will also mean a temporarily stop in the investigation from 21.03 to 04.04.2012 – when they have the next hearing in the case.
WRIT 3611 is Kkhosla’s case, where they have made a settlement with payment of Rs. 606.000 from AISPA-members to Kkhosla.
The current stage of the case seems go in the direction of being deemed as “settled”, with no further actions needed in court after the next hearing.
The part that involves the Supreme Court was related to the Public Prosecutor, where he should seek clarification from the Supreme Court in something 02.04.2012 – 2 days before the next hearing in the High Court.
SUPREME COURT
The Supreme Court case WRIT 383/2011 and the mediation by R.C. Lahoti is about Fundamental Rights in general. We can boil it down to whether or not participating in Speak Asia is a Fundamental Right – “the right to choose any profession you like”.
The case involves some payments, but we’re not sure whether this applies to all panelists or the 115 petitioners. It also involves business restart, formulated as “allowing the panelists to participate in Speak Asia’s daily operations to be able to support their day to day livelihood”.
The Supreme Court has the power to direct lower courts and Governmental agencies (like: to stop investigation or court proceedings), so they have the right jurisdiction. However, it’s close to impossible to predict any outcome of the case, other than some of the parts related to payment.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this case continues for yet another month in the Supreme Court. Actually, I won’t be surprised by any decisions here, since there hasn’t been released much information from reliable sources.
aispa.co.in website is hacked by some bangladeshi people.
if you ask questions allow an answer too.
manoj kumar is already the ceo of the company aispa supports. he doesn’t require any positioning in aispa.
this may surprise you, but indians are fully capable of forming and running associations on their own.in fact we excel in such things.
for yesterdays AGM to be successful and legal even if 20-25 active members had been present and 3/5 th voted in favor of a member that member would be deemed officially elected.
yesterday around 600 people from ALL OVER INDIA gathered in mumbai for the AGM. there were around 500 active members present.the support was deafening.
well popular websites will be attacked now and then! but the database is safe and the website is now rescued.
@anjali
Just forget the part about “Well informed estimate”, “qualified guessing” and similar expressions. I should have known it was a mistake, making the question close to impossible to answer. 🙂
How many members do they have, if you use a method more familiar to you?
If anyone was waiting for the article on Kkhosla’s payments and his intervention, that’ll have to wait till tommorow as I got busy yesterday (rode 80km to buy a dog trailer for my bicycle lol).
Probably best to see how today’s hearing goes in any case. I read one of Speak Asia’s lawyer’s father died yesterday and that it might have an effect on the hearing (adjournment).
harish salve’s dad expired yesterday [saol counsel].
mukul rohatgi is also not available today [panelist counsel].
chances for adjournment are high.
dashed bad luck.
Somebody please tell me current updates of speak asia..31st march was the last date for Exit Option we all applied and waited but no news regarding Exit Option also want to know today’s hearing…
We are all fed up with company’s false promises..AISPA only post comments posted by panelists and all my comments were deleted i don’t know why? I wonder what is the need of AISPA ? What has AISPA done for us ..
Simple thing is that we want our money back..why is company unable to manage some method to pay the panelist who have not got a single penny..we are all total 550 panelist here and lastly we have decided to file a complaint against the company..
Hotoi tommorow I’m going to publish that article detailing what Kkhosla went through, including his intervention application in the James writ 383.
As I understand it anyone can file an application and if it’s rejected, that’s when Speak Asia and AISPA pay up as they want to maintain the idea that everyone is covered by the 383 writ, even though they’re not.
As for today’s hearing, as I’ve maintained the criminal proceedings take precedent and always will. AISPA pushed so hard for the criminal proceedings to get mixed up in the civil case and well that appears to be what’s going on now.
I’m waiting to see the full order before commenting further (hopefully it’s out tommorow), but I’ll get around to publishing what Kkhosla did to get his money back as that might help those who’ve woken up to the fact they aren’t covered by writ 383.
After a wait of 10 months, this court jester, Ashok Bahirwani is proclaiming at his blog, AISPA, today:
His idea of battle is restart of the ponzi/pyramid/MLM/money laundering/loot scheme of Speak Asia that goes against the basic tenets of law. He is not in support of panelists getting their monies back the civil writ 383/2011 way, but only via restart of business.
For this very reason AISPA is not a petitioner in the stated writ nor cares to file an intervention application on behalf of panelists of his so called association.
This joker is having a nice livelihood working for SAOL which is paying him from the accumulated monies of the panelists. While majority of panelists having invested anywhere between 11k to 55k, just to earn that “livelihood” by doing surveys, maybe no downlines, remain in despair.
May be Navniit and/or oz may be able to inform as to whether a registered association under the Indian Societies Registration Act can file a single intervention application by paying just that Rs1400 for all the members of the association?
@Oz
I went for the hearing today as I had received the summons from the Supreme Court in Civil Writ Petition no. 383/11 as my Intervention Application no. 9 of 2012 was to be taken up.
The matter was adjourned. Let me read the final order when it is posted before I give some more details.
I am trying to organize a method to enable many panelist / investors to file an intervention application in the Supreme Court in CWP 383/11 in a cost effective manner to recover their dues. They should also be represented before the Lahoti Committee. The method will be clear in a week.
The annual legal expenses of all the supporters of Speak Asia can be paid for from the interest received on the money that EOW Mumbai and the ED, Mumbai have alleged has been taken out of the country.
Calculate the annual interest @ 6% per annum on the sum taken out of India as alleged by EOW/ED and reported on this blog.
There is a need for insight into the documents of WRIT 383/2011 and any report from Justice Lahoti, but I don’t think the Supreme Court will allow RTI into an ongoing case. This information is needed to be able to make the right decisions.
There’s little need to file a complaint in a “best case scenario”, the scenario where panelists who wants their money will get most of their money returned through the Exit Option (and other panelists will be allowed to continue in Speak Asia).
In other scenarios, more likely to happen, there will be a need for different actions depending on which scenario we’re talking about.
A general advise is to use professional help (a lawyer), and to prepare the information he will need to fully understand the case, to be able to act as a skilled advisor. A lawyer will need approx. the same information as we need to fully understand a case, but I’ll guess he will be more interested in court documents than we are.
A specific advise is to use the lawyer as an advisor, let him inform you about different possible actions instead of being fixed to one specific action. He might know some better methods than the ones you will suggest. As an example, a lawyer might possibly have right to insight into documents you won’t have access to.
Joining Kkhosla’s intervention in WRIT 383/2011 can seem like a good idea, but I haven’t analysed this method. Here we have two cases that interferes with each other, so I’m not sure how the outcome of WRIT 3611 will work here.
PROVE the above sentence. words are mere fluff.
For this very reason AISPA is not a petitioner in the stated writ nor cares to file an intervention application on behalf of panelists of his so called association.-juta
aispa has very much filed an intervention application.when we want it to be heard ,we will have it heard. see, we follow the advice of senior lawyers about which would be the BEST TIME to intervene and chest beating by you or anyone else will not interfere with HOW we play out OUR case.
hey, are you aware that with the aispa AGM a full committee has been put in place . are you aware that there was a full committee in place even before the AGM? are you saying saol pays all these JOKERS?
you see bahirwani, and probably your enviousness blinds you to the fact that there are teams and teams of people working behind the scenes.
anyway, seeing that the eow has not made any application for clarification in the supreme court [they did not even attend court on the 2 nd april] i worry about the fate of the writ 3611 and subsequently mr khoslas new avatar as savior of the the people.
So what’s the gameplay? Tell everyone their covered by writ 383 even though their not, wait and see if any of the signed petitioners get any money and them have the intervention application heard and hope for the best?
What’s the backup plan if the courts don’t accept the application? What are AISPA going to tell everyone then?
my heartfelt condolences to you for not having access to court documents. writ 383 though filed by 115 panelists covers all panelists.aispa may not need to intervene at all except to show support and ‘espouse the cause’ as mr abdi says.
aispa withdrew it’s PIL in the mumbai high court on the courts direction to take our matter to the supreme court mediation. seeing that aispa has moved the supreme court on instructions of the high court the intervention will definitely be allowed.
news!
in bahirwani anticipatory bail hearing today the court has stayed his arrest till may 3 rd, seeing that the next supreme court hearing is on the 30 th april.
in castros bail conditions relaxation matter the court has set the next date of 21 st april as the eow needed yet more time to ‘prepare’.
In informal discussions, when pointedly asked to spell out actual refund amounts due under various categories, officials of AISPA and SAOL have admitted to the cleverly hidden fact that panelists who invested large sums of money in subscribing for subpanels but could encash/use reward points either party or none at all will be refunded only the main panel subscription cost (Rs 10,000/-) subject to further deduction for the reward points encashed/used by the concerned panelist.
SAOL has defined the panelists into following 3 categories for refund under the Exit Policy:
•No Reward points (henceforth referred as RP ) earned after becoming a panelist:
Very few panelists will fall in this category as the purpose of joining as a panelist was to earn RPs through survey income and recruitment commission. Here, as clarified in Ashok Bahirwani’s Update of March 03, 2012, the panelists are promised refund of “entire suscription cost including the cost of subpanels”.
•RPs Earned lesser than Subscription Cost:
Again very few panelists will fall in this category. If a panelist has done surveys for more than 10 weeks, his RPs earned will be more than subscription cost. Very few panelists joined after May 11, 2011 when Star TV followed by other media exposed SAOL. However, the fake surveys were deliberately continued further for more than 10 weeks till July 2011 end to ensure that RPs earned by almost all of the panelists would exceed the subscription cost.
Here, “subscription Cost” is brought in instead of “entire suscription cost including the cost of subpanels” in case of the first category. This is a clever trick to limit SAOL’s liability to Rs 10,000/- (subscription cost of main panel).
Ashok Bahirwani has very cleverly limited the refund to “subscription cost” and the illustration given is only for refund of main panel costing Rs 10,000. Therefore, if a panelist invested Rs 101,000 for one main panel with 9 subpanels, he will at best receive Rs 10,000 refund which will stand further reduced by the extent of RPs en-cashed or used by this panelist.
As a result, such panelists will forefeit their entire investment as well as RPs and will be left with negligible or nil refund.
This category should be corrected to “RPs en-cashed or used are less than entire subscription cost including cost of subpanels.”
•RPs en-cashed or used are more than subscription cost:
“You are welcome to participate in SAOL website since your participation has earned your RPs more than your subscription cost. You can now utilize the RPs for various revenue generating activities of the company once restart of our services is allowed in India”.
This category should be corrected to “RPs en-cashed or used are more than entire subscription cost including cost of subpanels.”
Both SAOL and AISPA are partners in the fraud.
SAOL collected huge sums of money (Rs 11,000/- to Rs 101,000/- each) from 20 lakh panelists for carrying out surveys which had no clients to pay for them.
After the scam crashed in May 2011, the scamsters could not vanish with the entire loot in a carefully planned exit operation. Their bank accounts were frozen and top executives based in India were arrested. The scamsters brought in legal luminaries and created AISPA to manage an orderly exit with minimum damages to SAOL scamsters.
The Exit Policy was very cleverly designed to cheat the panelists. As Exit Policy does not allow any payment for RPs lying in the panelist’s Ewallet, it shows that the surveys were fake as the accumulated RPs do not carry any monetary value.
Ashok Bahirwani’s Update of March 03, 2012 was meant to close loopholes in SAOL’s Exit Policy. AISPA’s Intervention Application (IA) to Writ 383 limits the panelists’ refund amount to the range zero to Rs 10,000/- as per Exit Policy terms. The idea is to use AISPA’s platform to get Supreme Court’s approval to absurdly low refund amounts due under Exit Policy.
Panelists who invested large amounts by subscribing to subpanels should now form groups to file Intervention Aplications to Writ 383. It may turn out to be a big mistake to depend upon AISPA’s IA to Writ 383. AISPA’s actual members are less than 1000 whereas there are 20 lakh panelists.
AISPA is working for SAOL and not for the panelists.
Why are you wasting your energies Kkhosla ji. Why are you trying to reinvent the wheel. AISPA is already there and has provided a platform to all of us aggrieved panelists.
Your motive here just seem to remind me of one Mr. Aneesh Sharma who came in and tried to collect monies from panelists
in name of getting their money through SC Writ 383/2011. Where is he now ??? No where.
You have already got your money back and remember it is not because you had filed an application that money has been received back by you. It is because you were becoming a hindrance in getting the legal proceedings to conclude faster.
It has always been your motive to keep yourself first. Eat the cream first and then think about some one else. Where were you when 383/2011 writ was filed. Why didn’t you came up and filed an intervention at that time itself.
Your current Intervention application is not going to benefit any of the panelists except you. You had got your monies back. You were clear in your mind that you will go and help panelists then why did’t you wait for some people to join you before you went and then file the intervention.
Clearly because you again want to become a hindrance in the proceedings.
Awaiting your valuable comments..Kkhosla ji…
I would probably have choosed a different expression than “organize”, because of all the routine work related to organizing something. 🙂
@Hotoi Sema
Kkhosla’s intervention in WRIT 383/2011 will be one of the documents of highly interest for a lawyer. It also gives a clear description of the case, and can be used as an “overview” for the case.
Any advise from me will usually reflect that I’m not very eager to solve something in court, that I prefer “being prepared for action” rather than action most of the time. I seriously believe people will manage better if they follow their own ideas rather than mine, or if they modify the ideas.
I wouldn’t exactly call it “cleverly designed”. 🙂
“Clearly designed to cheat the panelists” should be a better expression.
@Hotoi Sema
The Exit Policy is one area where a lawyer can be useful, but he will probably be more skilled in identifying what to do than I am.
Some examples:
Sending an official request for information to Speak Asia Marketing Team, or to Speak Asia or to their lawyers. Terminate the agreement if it isn’t what they said it would be (in the same letter).
“Our clients have been led to believe that the Exit Policy is an official solution ordered by the Supreme Court, and needed to get amounts refunded from Speak Asia. They have been led to believe that the agreement will cover …”.
A letter from a lawyer is a “legal action”, and lawyers will usually have lots of rights that you don’t have.
********
Another thing a lawyer will need to know is that it seems like money have been skimmed away from Speak Asia, to Seven Rings, AdMatrix and different other companies. We have only partial information here, but I can probably identify what we have. The original source for the information is EOW through information to the press, in different articles.
I was waiting for an order to come out but it appears one isn’t forthcoming. AISPA writ 444 was quietly disposed of on the 9th April with no expalantion given.
Given that AISPA like to trumpet anything they can twist into the positive, one would assume this didn’t go well for them.
WP218 is a little strange in that it lists AISPA as the petitioner, with Kkhosla acting as their advocate. The case was disposed on the 4th with the order stating that nobody was present to represent the petitioner (who appears to be Kkhosla).
Because nobody appeared the matter was dropped and disposed. Dunno what the specifics of the petition were.
As far as Speak Asia’s defamation cases go, both appear to be dead in the water and quietly dropped.
The Laxman tv show case – chamber summons happened on the same date, but nothing significant appears to have resulted from it.
Speak Asia vs Star News – nothing since 22nd of March
It appears both cases were just posturing on behalf of Speak Asia, most likely for the sole purpose of hollowly keeping panelists subdued with “positive news”.
Meanwhile today is the continuation of Speak Asia’s efforts to stop the EOW from investigating them in the Raigad/Thane Districts. We’ll have to wait and see how that goes.
@Oz
I did not file Writ Petition no. 218 or was / is the advocate of AISPA in any matter.
I had filed an application in WP 3611/11 submitting some facts to the Court such as the fact that SAOL had not named any clients for its survey scheme in India, etc. The Registry of the Bombay High Court had raised objections.
I had to make the corrections for the application to be heard by the Court. Then the application could not be located on two visits in the registry. Owing to financial difficulties I did not have time and hence I did not go to collect the application. Next I heard that a matter was listed for hearing which was filed by me.
I was in the Supreme Court on 02.04.2012 but was unwell and could not appear in the High Court on 04.04.2012. Orders were passed in my absence. I will go to inspect the case file in the High Court to ascertain the facts.
I am not aware of WP 444 as I was not served the petition.
This clarifies the matter at my end.
Oz,
I could not locate WP 444. Pl give a link to the case.
Thanks for the clarification Navniit.
WP 444 (or 666?) is here http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/casequery_action.php?auth=bV9oYz0wMSZtX3NyPVMmbV9zaWRlZmxnPU9TJm1fZmlsX25vPTAxNTYwMDA0NDQyMDEyJm1fc2tleT1XUCZtX25vPTQ0NCZtX3lyPTIwMTI=
They use another case number – SL 202/2012 or S 791/2012
Lol July! …on and on things drag.
Speaking of dragging, one case I forgot to update this morning is the Bajpai and friends attempts to quash a FIR and stop investigations into Speak Asia.
http://csis.ap.nic.in/MainInfo.jsp?mtype=CRLP&mno=10782&year=2011
Next hearing date has been set for the 17th April.
LiveMint (Wall Street Journal) cite scams like Speak Asia as the prompt
So when can we expect Speak Asia to start launching lawsuits to prevent investigations by this as of yet unformed regulatory agency?
They will claim that the Indian Government is part of a conspiracy against their beloved company
The first and most effective defence is Consumer Protection Acts – using “low level methods” instead of criminal laws, administrative methods rather than courts. General rules about misleading marketing and unfair commercial practice can be very effective at an early stage (if they are used).
If they can ban the marketing (at an early stage), they will also effectively stop most of the recruitment.
I have “tested” different authorities in Norway. The higher level they have the more slowly do they respond with actions.
* The Consumer Ombudsman released a warning within 3-4 weeks, but the case was outside their jurisdiction in the most serious parts.
* The Gaming Board released a warning after 4 months, and used more than a year before they had any serious action.
* The centralized Economic Crimes Department never had any action (the case was too small).
The most useful tool to slow down recruitment was the warning from the Consumer Ombudsman. It’s alot quicker to evaluate marketing than business models in detail.
@M_Norway.. Will April 30 hearing in Supreme court will decide regarding speak asia’s Exit Option…I approched to lawyer he suggested me to wait till April 30.
@Hotoi Sema
I guessed so, but atleast the lawyer is now prepared and know what the case is about – and is able to ask for more information if he needs it. And the group will probably feel more relaxed.
@Hotoi Sema — are you *sure* Exit option is on the Supreme Court’s agenda? Who told you that? AISPA / SPAI / Anjali / Bahirwani? I hope you are right, but hoping doesn’t help without solid proof.
Given that AISPA has consistently misrepresented the truth, keeps telling everybody that Soloman James case is for ALL panelists, instead of only for the 115 petitioners, I hope you are NOT PLACING TOTAL trust in their interpretation of things (despite Sanjeev’s claim that panelists will buy bricks to help SAOL).
What is your contingency plan, if Exit option was NOT offered for the rest of the panelists?
WP666/2012 basically says: Court will NOT issue order to restrict the government’s investigative role into possible crime (i.e. a blanket injunction, against EOW). If AISPA has specific claims of abuse (presumably by EOW), then file complaint through normal channels. Case dismissed (disposed of).
In other words, AISPA spent the members’ money filing frivolous motions through Abdi and was tossed out of court.
If this is the sort of actions AISPA considers “helping the panelists”, and paying people like Khosla off, perhaps AISPA members should sue AISPA and pay themselves off, and save the lawyer fees.
Speak Asia appear to be upset they haven’t been able to surpress all the information regarding their court cases and investigations into the company:
Obviously it’s easier to control your members when they don’t have open and free access to information that directly affects them. Aww, poor babies…
@Oz
At http://www.telegraphindia.com/1120426/jsp/nation/story_15420499.jsp I have posted feedback to Telegraph, Kolkata, as under:
The Editors Guild of India is opposing the restraint that the Supreme Court is thinking of putting on reporting of court proceedings. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/editors-guild-opposes-restraint-on-court-rep/930149/.
So Ashok Bahirwani is soon going to be told to shutup as he was hoping through Aabad H.H. Ponda to get the SC to put restraint on media in reporting sub-judice matters.
Would not his own blog, AISPA, that lies through its teeth and misleads also come under the broad term of media?