Why Stormpay is Being Sued

[Cujolovesrosie]

I was surprised to find myself the subject of comments in a thread by TPJ yesterday. It's his opinion that the suit I've filed against Stormpay has a tentative cause of action, and I will be humiliated. I find those comments odd, since he has no idea what the cause of action is. So, TPJ, let me lay it out for you. Then you can at least offer an informed opinion, no matter how wrong it may be.

I am not an attorney, and connot give you legal advice. However, I can tell you what I've done and why. I have filed suit under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, claiming five criminal acts by Stormpay. They are: Theft of Property (T.C.A. 39-14-103; Theft of Services (T.C.A. 39-14-104); Extortion (T.C.A. 39-44-112): Committing Deceptive Trade Practices (T.C.A. 47-18-104; and Engaging in Identity Theft (T.C.A. 47-18-2103). Here we go.

1. Under the Theft of Property statute, "A person knowingly commits theft of property if, with intent to deprive the owner of property, the person knowingly obtains or exercises control over the property without the owner's effective consent." Let me say clearly that Stormpay is absolutely exercising control over my property (holding my money) without my consent. Unless they have a court order to do so, I believe they're committing theft.

2. Under the Theft of Services statute, "A person commits theft of services who: (2) Having control over the disposition of services to others, knowingly diverts those services to the person's own benefit or to the benefit of another not entitled thereto." I've been paying Stormpay for a service (specifically, to transfer money). It seems pretty clear to me that by keeping the money they've diverted the service to their own benefit. That would appear to be self-evident.

3. Extortion: "A person commits extortion who uses coercion upon another person with the intent to: (1) Obtain property, services, any advantage or immunity; or (2) Restrict unlawfully another's freedom of action." "Coercion" as defined in T.C.A. 39-11-106, "means a threat, however communicated, to (B) Wrongfully accuse any person of any offense." On at least three occasions Stormpay has threatened to prosecute for fraud any person who does chargebacks. Steve Girskey is an attorney, and knows that if we are not satisfied with his service, we have a right to dispute it. He can then dispute the chargeback if he wishes. By threatening to prosecute chargebacks as fraud, he is clearly attempting to obtain our property through coercion and restrict our freedom of action. He knows his threat is hollow. How many of us have been prosecuted for chargebacks? By making a hollow threat, he appears to be guilty of extortion. It might also cost him his law license if anyone complained to the Tennessee Bar Association, too.

4. Deceptive Trade Practices are defined as "Causing likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection or association with, or certification by, another." Did any of us know when we paid our $19.95 fee to Net IBA (through Stormpay) that they were under common ownership? Did we realize that Stormpay was certifying itself, and we were paying the bill? It was my understanding that a Net IBA certification meant something. Is it possible Stormpay "caused the likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding"? Seems pretty likely to me.

5. Finally, "Identity Theft" means "Otherwise obtaining, possessing, transferring, using or attempting to use for unlawful economic benefit, one or more financial documents of another person." "Financial document" means "any credit card, debit card, check, or checking account information." Let's face it. They've obtained financial documents from all of us, and it certainly appears they're being used for unlawful economic benefit (that would be Stormpay). (They're the ones benefiting by stealing our money.) If Stormpay wants to claim that all the unlawful benefits were conferred on the auto-surfs and HYIP's they ripped off, they may have a problem. They advertised them on their web site, advertised themselves and Net IBA on the auto-surfs, ran their own auto-surf (Storm-Clix), run their own pyramid scheme (a referral program with a down-line six deep), assured us through their TOS that they do not accept "pyramid or ponzi schemes," certified those same sites through Net IBA, and made a profit on every dollar that passed through their hands. And they made all those dollars by suckering us into giving them our financial documents and our money.

Now, TPJ, neither of our opinions matters in this mess. The opinion that matters is the Judge. He'll be giving it on March 15. I've bet $115.50 (the cost of filing) that I can get him to see at least part of this my way. I may be wrong, and I may be summarily thrown out of court. But I won't be humiliated, and here's why.

In order to prevail, Stormpay will have to prove that they had some real basis in law (a court order) for seizing our funds. If they do indeed produce one, I'll come to this forum and apologize publicly to Stormpay, tell you they acted in good faith, and ask everyone to wait patiently for them to work it out. I won't feel humiliated, because I will have forced Stormpay to at least justify their actions.

If they had no basis in law for their actions, I will obtain some type of judgment in my favor. I may not get my money back, but by virtue of the charges in the complaint, that judgment will be a decision by a judge that they acted criminally. In that case, I'll go straight to the county prosecutor with the judgment and ask for criminal charges to be brought immediately. I won't feel humiliated by that, either.

Does anyone remember Ken Lay and his merry men at Enron? They were a legitimate company, too. Are they in jail yet, or is the trial still going on?

Apologies to all for the fact that this has been long and boring. I couldn't find a way to shorten it. Now, TPJ, if you made it to the end you're entitled to offer an opinion. You might want to be a little better informed before you offer them in the future, though.

[sean_incali]

excellent post.

i am contacting an attorney with this once my disputes go through.

[putintangz]

Awsome Post !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RealEkid.]

Originally Posted by Cujolovesrosie

I was surprised to find myself the subject of comments in a thread by TPJ yesterday. It's his opinion that the suit I've filed against Stormpay has a tentative cause of action, and I will be humiliated. I find those comments odd, since he has no idea what the cause of action is. So, TPJ, let me lay it out for you. Then you can at least offer an informed opinion, no matter how wrong it may be.

I am not an attorney, and connot give you legal advice. However, I can tell you what I've done and why. I have filed suit under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, claiming five criminal acts by Stormpay. They are: Theft of Property (T.C.A. 39-14-103; Theft of Services (T.C.A. 39-14-104); Extortion (T.C.A. 39-44-112): Committing Deceptive Trade Practices (T.C.A. 47-18-104; and Engaging in Identity Theft (T.C.A. 47-18-2103). Here we go.

1. Under the Theft of Property statute, "A person knowingly commits theft of property if, with intent to deprive the owner of property, the person knowingly obtains or exercises control over the property without the owner's effective consent." Let me say clearly that Stormpay is absolutely exercising control over my property (holding my money) without my consent. Unless they have a court order to do so, I believe they're committing theft.

2. Under the Theft of Services statute, "A person commits theft of services who: (2) Having control over the disposition of services to others, knowingly diverts those services to the person's own benefit or to the benefit of another not entitled thereto." I've been paying Stormpay for a service (specifically, to transfer money). It seems pretty clear to me that by keeping the money they've diverted the service to their own benefit. That would appear to be self-evident.

3. Extortion: "A person commits extortion who uses coercion upon another person with the intent to: (1) Obtain property, services, any advantage or immunity; or (2) Restrict unlawfully another's freedom of action." "Coercion" as defined in T.C.A. 39-11-106, "means a threat, however communicated, to (B) Wrongfully accuse any person of any offense." On at least three occasions Stormpay has threatened to prosecute for fraud any person who does chargebacks. Steve Girskey is an attorney, and knows that if we are not satisfied with his service, we have a right to dispute it. He can then dispute the chargeback if he wishes. By threatening to prosecute chargebacks as fraud, he is clearly attempting to obtain our property through coercion and restrict our freedom of action. He knows his threat is hollow. How many of us have been prosecuted for chargebacks? By making a hollow threat, he appears to be guilty of extortion. It might also cost him his law license if anyone complained to the Tennessee Bar Association, too.

4. Deceptive Trade Practices are defined as "Causing likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection or association with, or certification by, another." Did any of us know when we paid our $19.95 fee to Net IBA (through Stormpay) that they were under common ownership? Did we realize that Stormpay was certifying itself, and we were paying the bill? It was my understanding that a Net IBA certification meant something. Is it possible Stormpay "caused the likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding"? Seems pretty likely to me.

5. Finally, "Identity Theft" means "Otherwise obtaining, possessing, transferring, using or attempting to use for unlawful economic benefit, one or more financial documents of another person." "Financial document" means "any credit card, debit card, check, or checking account information." Let's face it. They've obtained financial documents from all of us, and it certainly appears they're being used for unlawful economic benefit (that would be Stormpay). (They're the ones benefiting by stealing our money.) If Stormpay wants to claim that all the unlawful benefits were conferred on the auto-surfs and HYIP's they ripped off, they may have a problem. They advertised them on their web site, advertised themselves and Net IBA on the auto-surfs, ran their own auto-surf (Storm-Clix), run their own pyramid scheme (a referral program with a down-line six deep), assured us through their TOS that they do not accept "pyramid or ponzi schemes," certified those same sites through Net IBA, and made a profit on every dollar that passed through their hands. And they made all those dollars by suckering us into giving them our financial documents and our money.

Now, TPJ, neither of our opinions matters in this mess. The opinion that matters is the Judge. He'll be giving it on March 15. I've bet $115.50 (the cost of filing) that I can get him to see at least part of this my way. I may be wrong, and I may be summarily thrown out of court. But I won't be humiliated, and here's why.

In order to prevail, Stormpay will have to prove that they had some real basis in law (a court order) for seizing our funds. If they do indeed produce one, I'll come to this forum and apologize publicly to Stormpay, tell you they acted in good faith, and ask everyone to wait patiently for them to work it out. I won't feel humiliated, because I will have forced Stormpay to at least justify their actions.

If they had no basis in law for their actions, I will obtain some type of judgment in my favor. I may not get my money back, but by virtue of the charges in the complaint, that judgment will be a decision by a judge that they acted criminally. In that case, I'll go straight to the county prosecutor with the judgment and ask for criminal charges to be brought immediately. I won't feel humiliated by that, either.

Does anyone remember Ken Lay and his merry men at Enron? They were a legitimate company, too. Are they in jail yet, or is the trial still going on?

Apologies to all for the fact that this has been long and boring. I couldn't find a way to shorten it. Now, TPJ, if you made it to the end you're entitled to offer an opinion. You might want to be a little better informed before you offer them in the future, though.

and if you lose and SP lodges a counter suit against you? What have you got that you can lose..house for example?

[nano22]

Counter suit on what? The poster wanting answers? Please explain

Originally Posted by RealEkid.

and if you lose and SP lodges a counter suit against you? What have you got that you can lose..house for example?

[RealEkid.]

Originally Posted by nano22

Counter suit on what? The poster wanting answers? Please explain

You take SP to court and you lose your case I am sure SP will be able to think up a few valid claims against you ( your case)..and go for damages

[naughty]

Bravo!

I hope you find the answers and justice that you seek!

P.S. NetIBA is a farce. My son and my best friends downliner never received a phone call from NetIBA & yet they were still verified.

Probably not the best of ideas to tip your hand and reveal your game plan. Nevertheless may the force be with you ;-)

Naughty

[meth0dmeth]

Great Post and good luck. Keep us updated on what happens. Btw, there's absolutely no way Stormpay will bring charges against any one of us unless we've been making death threats against them or their families.

[RageStorm]

Good original post. Original poster, you should also be aware that Stormpay has "chargedback" money from Stormclix and other non-autosurf earnings and hence zeroed out many members' accounts of funds that were not involved with autosurfs. You should be sure to mention that to the Judge. I am 100% certain that there is no way that can be a legal thing for Stormpay to have done.

[sean_incali]

unless you can provide proof, that's an hearsay. OP needs printout of the history of transaction where SP has removed funds from stormclix/ other non autosurf related activities.