Receiver seizes Traffic Monsoon website, Scoville lashes out at SEC
The notion that Charles Scoville was going to “negotiate” his way out of the SEC’s lawsuit against Traffic Monsoon was absurd from the get-go.
With $207 million dollars of Ponzi fraud on the table what, a few chats and Traffic Monsoon would be open for business again?
Now, as the reality of the SEC’s allegations against him sit in, Scoville is increasingly voicing hostility towards the securities regulator.
Yesterday the Traffic Monsoon website went offline. As at the time of publication it remains unresponsive.
Coinciding with this were new filings in both Utah and New York by the Receiver.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 754, a copy of the Complaint and a copy of the Appointments Order must be filed in the United States District Court in each District in which property subject to the Receivership is located.
The filings don’t explicitly clarify whether the Traffic Monsoon website and domain are “property” identified in the Utah and New York filings, but the timing of the website going down certainly suggest so.
In any event, whether through court filings or otherwise, Charles Scoville has purportedly lost control of the website.
This, likely along with the realization the SEC aren’t prepared to budge on accusations of Ponzi fraud against him, has lead to an outpouring of misguided scam rhetoric.
Attempting to rally his investors with the only thing that matters to them, their money, Scoville (right) took to Facebook earlier today with the following:
The SEC is getting paid. Are you? The receiver is being paid. Are you?
The irony, evidently lost on Scoville, is that the use of payment to rally his affiliates completely undermines the pseudo-compliance of Traffic Monsoon affiliates not expecting to be paid.
Why would affiliates care about “being paid” if Traffic Monsoon’s ROI’s where never guaranteed (implied or otherwise). If one were to buy into Scoville’s flawed pseudo-compliance, then what payments are affiliates going to get angry about?
Central to Scoville’s failure to comprehend why the SEC shut him down, is an incorrect notion as to what constitutes securities fraud.
From the same Facebook posting;
I’ve spoken with a few lawyers lately. One thing is clear. Traffic Monsoon is not offering a security. It’s not offering an investment. That is one thing very certain through these communications.
A security is when someone makes a deposit or investment, and walks away. Does nothing. They rely upon the market to do its thing, and hopefully make a profit.
There is no service provided to these “investors”. Traffic Monsoon sells services.
A securities offering is when you solicit funds from the public on the promise of paying them back more than they deposited.
The return constitutes a ROI and the deposit an investment. And if you’re not registered with the SEC, in the US it’s an unregistered securities offering.
Whether your investors “walk away and do nothing” doesn’t matter. The ROI is funded by subsequent investment, and has nothing to do with attached products or services (which serve as pseudo-compliance).
Whatever “lawyers” Scoville is consulting are obviously unversed in securities fraud.
For the record, an attorney has yet to put in an appearance in the SEC vs. Traffic Monsoon case.
Every lawyer I’ve spoken to about this situation all believe the SEC is wrong in their findings, and especially wrong when they learn that there is more money available than what people have earned!
And this is another thing. Whether math is a strong suit of Scoville’s I can’t say, but when your ROI liability is over $812.35 million and you only took in $207 million, how the hell can you claim “there is more money available than what people have earned”?
What is their intention here? Is it really to protect you? Or to grab the money?
If multiple lawyers all say there is no investment here or any security… and the State of Utah Securities Division closed their file in the past finding no security.. what is truly going on here?
As to the Utah Securities Division purportedly giving Traffic Monsoon the all-clear, Patrick Pretty reports Scoville’s claim is a lie:
The PP Blog contacted the state Division on Aug. 1, after reading a Traffic Monsoon affiliate promo that in part read, “The State of Utah’s security division & Consumer Protection went to the offices of Traffic Monsoon to investigate their business model.
The result of the investigation was that Traffic Monsoon wasn’t committing any kind of investment scheme or security fraud.”
That simply didn’t happen, the Division said through Director Keith Woodwell early this afternoon in response to the PP Blog’s inquiry.
“[T]he Division has not investigated Traffic Monsoon,” the agency said flatly.
Make no mistake. Traffic Monsoon was a Ponzi scheme and Charles Scoville is a Ponzi scammer.
When the dust settles his victims will get back a fraction of what they invested, primarily owing to Scoville and Traffic Monsoon’s top investors stealing the majority of funds invested.
This is how every Ponzi scheme plays out, the only difference being the SEC has stepped in – meaning those who lost money in Scoville’s scam might actually get some of it back.