Back in March Darryle Douglas was arrested for failing to comply with a September 2015 court order.

The September 2015 order in question saw Douglas required to

• return any copies of the Zeek Rewards database he has in his possession
• appear for a deposition by the Receiver and
• produce all financial records from November 1, 2011 to the present for his personal and business-related accounts (prior to being deposed)

In April the Zeek Rewards Receiver indicated that Douglas had been or was about to be released, meaning he’d complied with the order above.

In a recently filed motion for summary judgement against Zeek’s top net-winners, Douglas’ deposition is confirmed to have taken place recently (the deposition document states the deposition took place on August 30th, 2016, which is obviously a typo).

While we only have excerpts of the full deposition (the complete transcript is over 100 pages long), what the Receiver has included in his motion is still pretty eye-opening. [Continue reading…]

There is no information on the DreamHouse International website indicating who owns or runs the business.

The DreamHouse International website domain (“dreamhouseinternational.com”) was registered on the 29th of October 2015, however the domain registration is set to private.

The default language for the DreamHouse International is Spanish, suggesting whoever owns the company might be based out of a Spanish-speaking country.

That said Alexa currently estimate that some 98.6% of all traffic to the DreamHouse International website originates out of South Korea, so that’s a possibility too.

As always, if an MLM company is not openly upfront about who is running or owns it, think long and hard about joining and/or handing over any money. [Continue reading…]

In contrast to Paul Burks’ criminal trial brief, the Zeek Receiver’s facts make it abundantly clear Zeek Rewards operated as a Ponzi scheme.

Like all classic Ponzi schemes, the vast majority of the Zeek winners’ money came from the Zeek losers rather than legitimate business profits.

Of the over $900 million that was paid in to Zeek, only approximately $10 million (1.1%) came from actual retail purchases.

More than 97% came from the sale of “VIP bids” and “subscriptions,” which were the currency of the scheme. And, nearly all (93%) of those payments came from net losers.

Two of the primary creators and operators of the ZeekRewards scheme have already admitted it was a Ponzi scheme and pleaded guilty to criminal conduct in connection with the scheme.

In sum, the evidence that ZeekRewards was a Ponzi scheme is overwhelming.

Even the Defendant class’ expert has acknowledged finding no evidence that “disproves that the business as a whole operated as a Ponzi scheme.”

Long-time readers will remember Zeek’s victims had to cough up $35,000 to pay for the net-winner’s expert witness analysis.

As above, that analysis failed to disprove Zeek Rewards wasn’t a Ponzi scheme. Armed with that conclusion, the Zeek Receiver has filed for summary judgement against Zeek’s net-winners. [Continue reading…]

Prosperity Community initially began life in 2014 as “Dollars Want Me”.

The company was then renamed and relaunched as The Prosperity Community about ten months ago.

On the Prosperity Community website, Matthew E. Alleyne is identified as Founder of the company.

The Prosperity Community itself claims to be ‘owned by Dwmas Ltd from Cyprus, a company within the self-help education industry‘.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Matthew Alleyne (right) is based out of Oslo in Norway. This is likely where The Prosperity Community is actually being run out of.

Prior to The Prosperity Community, Alleyne was selling local furniture store franchises. Through Alleyne Consulting, he then reinvented himself as a business and success coach.

Alleyne Consulting is a 360 degree consulting firm!

The world of business is evolving and Matthew has an essential global network of business contacts to assist your company with all services you need to be profitable and successful. (alleynemrfix.com)

The Prosperity Community appears to be Alleyne’s first MLM venture.

Read on for a full review of The Prosperity Community MLM opportunity. [Continue reading…]

Hasn’t BehindMLM covered this story already?

Back in June of 2014 Lyoness announced a ‘new prepaid Lyoness Mastercard for European members‘.

In an attempt to justify Lyoness’ Ponzi-like AU investment scheme business model, the Mastercard announcement saw “legitimacy by association” marketing begin shortly after.

By January 2015 Mastercard had had enough, and affirmed they had “no direct relationship” with Lyoness.

So Lyoness and their affiliates stopped using the Mastercard brand in their marketing and that was that?

Not quite. Turns out over a year and a half later, Lyoness and their affiliates are still misusing the Mastercard brand. [Continue reading…]

One of the bolder moves we’ve seen in the ongoing DOJ litigation against TelexFree and its owners, are motions by James Merrill seeking to suppress seized evidence against the company.

Not bits and pieces or a tidbit here and there… but all of it – the whole kit and caboodle.

Supporting his motions, Merrill argued that

the search warrants behind the seizure of evidence, supported by an affidavit by Special Agent John S. Soares, contained false statements and/or reckless misstatements of fact, as well as material omissions of facts, all of which ultimately render the search warrants invalid.

The DOJ’s opposition to Merrill’s motion was inevitable, with a response in opposition filed yesterday on July 1st. [Continue reading…]

One of the more interesting aspects of Jeunesse’s lawsuit against former President Darren Jensen, is Jensen’s discovery requests.

In particular, Jensen’s demand that Jeunesse hand over information pertaining to regulatory issues and attempts to illegally sell products in Asia, South America and Europe. Jensen also sought information on Jeunesse’s Chinese MLM license and ‘documents concerning Jeunesse’s termination of Matthew Nestler‘.

Jeunesse opposed Jensen’s request and sought a protective order. The company argued that disclosing this information would cause “irreparable harm”.

On June 30th the matter was ruled on, with Judge Baker denying Jensen’s request for discovery. [Continue reading…]

As part of their lawsuit against Wakaya Perfection, in May Youngevity filed for a preliminary injunction against Total Nutrition Team, Inc., Todd Smith, and Blake Graham.

If granted, Youngevity’s preliminary injunction would compel ‘Todd Smith, Blake Graham, TNT and their agents to cease further use of 1-800-Wallach and delete wallachonline.com and Yteamtools.com.‘

In a decision filed on June 29th, Youngevity’s request for a preliminary injunction has been denied. [Continue reading…]

When Vemma, BK Boreyko and Tom Alkazin filed their defenses to the FTC’s case against them, one of the more disturbing defenses raised was that somehow consumers were to blame for their losses.

The FTC and/or the consumers it purports to represent have failed to mitigate their losses, if any.

Any losses sustained by the FTC and/or the consumers it purports to represent were caused by the acts or omissions of third parties over whom the Corporate Defendants had no control or right to control.

Consumers represented by the FTC knowingly and voluntarily, and possibly unreasonably, exposed themselves to any claimed losses with knowledge or appreciation of the risk involved.

The above is how Vemma worded the defense. Boreyko and Alkazin filed similarly worded defenses.

The FTC objected to this shirking of responsibility onto consumers (many of which were/are Vemma affiliates).

The FTC argues that these are not valid affirmative defenses because relief under the FTC Act is equitable and dependent on the amount of gain by Defendants, not loss by consumers.

The good news is the court has agreed, with neither Vemma, Boreyko or Alkazin permitted to defend themselves by blaming Vemma consumers for their own losses. [Continue reading…]

Last October the FTC filed a motion asking Judge Tuchi to “clarify or reconsider” the Vemma preliminary injunction.

Specifically, the FTC sought to ‘enjoin Defendant Tom Alkazin from engaging in certain business activities.‘

The FTC argued that while the court intentionally excluded Alkazin ‘from the injunctive provisions relating to pyramid marketing‘, it might have

unintentionally excluded him from the provisions related to deceptive income claims, furnishing materials that contain false or misleading representations, and submitting new marketing or sales material to the FTC for review before publishing.

In addition to requesting the court clarify if this was the case, the FTC also asked it to

reconsider its finding and ruling as to Defendant Alkazin’s injunctive liability for marketing a pyramid scheme based on his participation in (rather than control of) the scheme, and place him under the provisions of Section I.A of the Order.

Inclusion of Section I.A of the order would see Alkazin subject to the same restrictions as Vemma and BK Boreyko.

Now, roughly eight months after the FTC filed their motion, Judge Tuchi has finally ruled on the matter. [Continue reading…]