Wednesday, 20 September 2017

USI TECH Is a Scam - Says Charles Scoville!

Not content with calling anybody who thinks Traffic Monsoon is a Scam, 'stupid', Charles is now calling his previous loyal followers, psychopaths.
He's also on a mission to expose USI Tech as a scam.
It reminds me of the countless times people have written on our facebook pages, or blogs and forums to say:
' ...hey, 'such and such' is definitely a scam, great work! But MY business is REAL!'
Like they're the first person to think of it. Insincereity at it's finest.

This first post was written by Charles for all of us 'haters' out there:

'Haters claim to want to protect people's money and get them their money back.. but they encourage people to contact the receiver who spends more of their money every minute she works on anything related to TM. They don't really care about you!
If people could only see how truly stupid these tara talks/refund groups types really are when it comes to TM... in reality it's truly not a ponzi, and the recently filed appeal brief clearly steps the logical thinker through the law and Traffic Monsoon's business model to display that there is no valid reason for this case and it should be voided.
It's people that are so stupid who refer to the law cited in the brief filed as "pseudo-compliance.." and I'm thinking how stupid do you have to be to think REAL LAW is just pretend? This isn't pseudo anything.. these are the real laws here with references to them too. Why would you try to tell people this is pseudo compliance when this is the real thing with citations to law that prove TM isn't a ponzi whatsoever by definition of law... no wonder the haters are trying to "hit back" by telling people to contact the receiver. The haters don't really care about anyone, just want to win an argument online regardless of how it impacts anyone, but they are wrong this time-- TM isn't really a ponzi.
They are not happy about losing this argument. They have been right about some ponzi schemes, but TM is not one of them they are right about, and the brief we filed 12 Sept 2017 clearly outlines just how right TM is.
The whole PayPal limitation started because of this online argument between haters and TM users, and haters desire to wreck our relationship with PayPal because they could see we had such a good one. So they combined and worked together to convinced PayPal of a lie, and PayPal believed their lie so well that they thought I had been deceiving them the whole time. So they limited the account and did all they could to get people to report me to the SEC and FBI. PayPal even pulled a bit of deception job themselves to make it look like things I said weren't true. Those have all been proven to be truly exactly how I had been telling people within official court documents supplied by PayPal themselves. The haters worked with the SEC to help convince them to file this case.
So if you think these people are really working FOR you, they are not. They are working against you simply to win an online argument about Traffic Monsoon, and by clear definition of law it truly isn't a ponzi, as has been clearly demonstrated through the appeal's brief. So all this destruction and impact on everyone's lives had nothing to do with anything I did, but everything to do with what the haters, PayPal, and the SEC have done and caused an injustice to fall upon every single one of us involved in TM, and none of us should partner with them-- but partner together to beat them at what they are doing to us, and simply using PayPal and the SEC as weapons against us.. to win an argument online.. and not having any concern about what they are doing and what impact it would have on any of the TM members' lives..
They don't care about the destruction in people's lives, in fact they cheer and want to have everyone believe I caused this, when it was actually them.. I would say they are "pseudo-caring" because they are attempting to fool people into believing they care, when actually they haven't dug into the actual business to see that there actually isn't any investment offered, and since no security exists the SEC shouldn't have gotten involved.
Since I know I wasn't doing anything wrong, and I wasn't offering any security, (I offered ad service, referral program, and rewards for surfing) and I know there was truly no ponzi involved within my business as a matter of law based upon legal definitions, I know we're going to prevail in this case eventually! Truth and justice shall prevail!'

And this is Charles latest post slating the Ponzi Scam USI Tech:

'Please share so that more people can learn the truth about USI-TECH. Just remember, the thing people say is the only problem I had is I trusted the wrong people. Trusting the right people is hard when psychopaths are involved, and it's hard to determine who in your life is fake and only using you for your money, or telling you nice things for their own benefit.
A psychopath will harm you and deceive you and feel no guilt or shame about what they have done... they think only about their own benefit... and will do all that it takes to get what they want, even if that means cheating, lying, tricking, manipulating, stealing, etc.. without thought of how their actions will impact anyone else.
they have no soul.. they feel no shame or guilt and they do whatever they want to hurt people and get as much gain from others as they want, and they walk away and do it again without even feeling anything about that at all.. emptiness, but they put on a mask of warmth, charm, charisma, and all that you want them to be while they take advantage of you.
NO ONE could possibly tell YOU to invest in a company without YOU being able to verify trades are real... without being a psychopath! They are taking advantage of your inability to see USI-TECH as the ponzi scheme that it is. No real trades! And they certainly wouldn't proceed without any proof FIRST!!
Spreading FALSE HOPE that trades are real is more destructive upon people than WARNING people that they are probably fake since no proof exists, except more destructive upon your commissions. If determining whether trades exist is a question, then again it's another clue for people to open their eyes.. a security exists, and regulators NEED to be in place to ensure trades are real, which is what the SEC does. The SEC even said they do this regardless if the security is traded in USD or bitcoin. Since this is what USI-TECH is offering to the USA, then they must be registered and licensed with the SEC, otherwise their offer is a likely fraud.
USI-TECH leaders and laywers appear to be lying and participating in the deception..They are trying to say there isn't a security involved, when there is certainly:
1. OFFER is for a placement of money
2. OFFER says the money is being managed by the company
3. OFFER claims money is being used in such a way to generate returns
4. OFFER owes any returns to their client.
That is a security by legal definition, and anyone following the TM case would know that, and would see for sure that USI-TECH truly is offering a security, and anyone who thinks differently is being lied to. Anyone who read's TM's website would see this is not something being offered on TM, which means a security truly isn't involved... and if you thought there was anything like this involved in TM, then you were lied to--
I agree with USI-TECH leaders about getting facts straight. I have a video with Ralf Gold where he described his business and his offer, and based upon his description the offer of USI-TECH is a security.
If someone is offering you to trade with your money.. YOU need to be sure they are really trading with your money, but so far they have resisted to provide truth and worked hard to deceive people why they don't need to provide proof.
Honestly, no one should be investing there until the facts are straight and the proof is provided. I 100% agree with USI-TECH leaders, people should get the facts straight. 100% agree with USI-TECH leaders about getting the truth before putting your money into USI-TECH..
When you recommend people to invest in a company that's not supplying any proof of trades, it's terrible advice. It's setting people up to potentially lose their money on a scam which isn't actually trading with your money!
Fact is, until now they haven't provided any authentic proof that all returns are coming from where they say, and 0% from new investor funds.. and since none of that has been provided, honestly-- anyone offering good advice would NEVER tell people to invest anywhere without full disclosure from the start. I'm just saying. No one should be investing over there without full authentic proof.
Yes, TM is not online because of this bogus case. Anyone can see there is no security involved in TM... but while this case is going on which has hurt all of us enough already, I want each of you to find a way to be happy and earning an income while this case is going on. To be involved in a business without proof of trades... I'm afraid it won't last for you, and the fall will be really bad for you and how people think about people who were involved after it goes down.
I truly love all my TM members. I want what's best for all of you and want to see you all happy in life, and find the happiness that will last and not build upon a foundation of a lie (no real trading activity).

And this is from the thread that followed: 

Sharon James Seriously Charles Scoville this is a fantastic business and I am not sure why you are slating USI I and many other TM affiliates are enjoying an incredible business model, we have supported you We are with TM all the way But to continually slate USI this is NOT GOOD and I am very disappointed... you do not have the facts you do not know the owners and there is a lot more to come when it comes to USI, I am so proud to promote the business its ethical and very credible and is a very serious business.

Charles Scoville Thing is, I haven't done anything wrong, so supporting me makes sense.. they haven't provided any proof of trades ever since day 1.. so why are people leading anyone to invest with a company no one even knows for sure is real?

Sharon James Charles Scoville They have an FX product they have been using for over 10 years Charles I have a trading acc that is just in my name IT IS Segregated and I get an EA that trades for me automated, I see evidence every day, Its incredible very very happy with it,more is coming too, so your choosing to slate the company on that fact that you think its a scam I thought better of you Charles especially on what has been written about you online, This is a credible business and since when did you become so bitter about another company.

Charles Scoville Sharon James but where is the proof of this 10 years they claim.. a year ago on their website it said 8 years.. so where can we go to see the facts with this?

Sharon James Charles Scoville I have friends who have used it for over 2 years for a start before the company was even launched this has been a credible product.

Charles Scoville Sharon James how long have you known these friends?

Sharon James Charles Scoville 4 years

Charles Scoville Sharon James anyone who pushes USI-TECH knowing there is no autentication by a well-known, reputable 3rd party accounting firm (and especially registered and licensed with a regulatory body somewhere in this world) has greatly disappointed me after all we have been through with TM, so you being a person I'm disappointed in and hope you turn away from such an obvious scam.. Sharon, I'm deeply disappointed because you push this probable scam.. not even thinking of the people who might get hurt by it.. because no one can see for sure whether the trading/mining/or whatever they claim is the source of money now is even real.
I have great disappointement with anyone referring anyone to invest anywhere which doesn't have any proof of source of returns established by any authority whatsoever, or lead anyone to believe they don't need to be licensed or registered with any authority.

Why would I want to gain approval among USI-TECH members when I think this sort of activity is criminal? Wouldn't I want to stand up for my principles and warn people? Isn't warning people and standing up for what I believe in a sign of integrity? Why would I want support from criminals (USI-TECH members) especially when I'm establishing myself as being innocent of the exact things USI-TECH are doing! I'm innocent of any wrong-doing because I actually am... so defending me makes sense...but anyone pushing or defending a blatant ponzi is someone I'm greatly disappointed in... especially since the false allegation against me is precisely what USI-TECH is doing, and you're either blind to that or simply pushing it for the money... and because of that, I'm disappointed. Because of this TM case everyone in USI-TECH should have known better.

Sharon James How dare you say that i am pushing a scam Seriously Charles What proof do you have, I am very disappointed in your comments I can not believe in your actions, You are truly showing your true colours Charles I have always loved you Charles and this is really giving the wrong message. Since when did you become the Police of Internet. Seriously, I can not believe you are in the position your in and you are accusing a credible company of the above ,These guys are Professionals and I believe if you had done half of what they have achieved in the past I do not believe we would have been suffering Now.. USI is NOT AN INVESTMENT USI IS NOT A SCAM USI is a fantastic business model and great Leadership, Charles why are you always comparing USI to TM they are nothing alike TM was an Incredible business and hopefully it will come back But I have had huge amount of messages from people saying they are disgusted by your behaviour towards USI and that they have lost respect for you and will not be donating from the incredible income they are earning with USI, I wish you all the best Charles but I can not have any further comments to make. USI pays on time without fail has a product that has been used for over 8 years has another product that is due to launch in October has opened multiple offices globally and we will celebrating their the anniversary in London in October this is just the beginning of an amazing journey and I am happy and so are thousands of others, All the Best

Curt Elbert I just cant believe this guy, i think he has lost his mind...smh he is insane Charles Scoville what a have just killed the little reputation you had left!

Charles Scoville Sharon James Curt Elbert Just remember claiming GetMyAds was legit and then it turned out to be a ponzi. Consider what motivated the sale and pushing that it was legit? Do you think maybe you didn't dig enough since it turned out being a fraud? What ifI told you it was a fraud before you figured it out through sad experience? Would you have listened before getting started? Would you have stopped promoting it before it crashed?

Curt Elbert Charles Scoville i never said anything about never even thought once about that program...what are you talking

Charles Scoville Curt Elbert RIght, I'm referring to many of the top leaders in USI-TECH also just promoted GetMyAds and it turned out to be a ponzi.. some of those same leaders promoted Banners Broker.. and it turned out to be a ponzi.. a lot of things these same leaders promoted turned out to be a ponzi... is it any wonder why people have a hard time seeing why TM isn't a ponzi when these same people constantly promote ponzis and then promoted TM? Those same people thought TM was one of those, but it really isn't anything like those. Sharon of all knew it the best because she tested and tried out all the services and knew it all was real.. so that's why it's so unbelievable when leaders who even came to the hearings for TM to learn from ground zero I ran a legit business which would never go into debt.. these same people go off and promote these scams.. so disappointing ..

Curt Elbert So thar mean TM was a scam too so you are contradicting yourself Charles...TM is just like Getmyads, its gone under and wont be back so are you saying TM was a Ponzi scheme too. Just because leaders are promoting something legitimate now doesn't mean its a scam like TM was...stop Charles the more you run your moutg the morr you make yourself look like a scammer and TM looks even more like a PONZI Scheme.

Charles Scoville Curt Elbert There's no contradiction. My business offered ad service and never offered a place to deposit money. TM has a winning case, and I think a lot of people will be shocked when I actually win :-D

Curt Elbert Your ad services was not a product because it had no value and 99% of the people bought ad packs and the ad services were junk and most ponzi scheme programs advertised on TM platform so you see the SEC saw right through it.

Charles Scoville Curt Elbert That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. If you look at the alexa rank of Traffic Monsoon, that represents more eyeballs than pass the busiest highway in the USA in a day. Traffic Monsoon had more in a day than those busy highways. You're telling me, having a banner on a site like that has no value? What brain do you use to think with?
Not only does this hold true value by definition of how many people actually were on the site in a day to see the banners, but additionally the traffic exchange services had been tracked and ranked by more than 1 traffic exchange rank site, which tracked Traffic Exchange services by their own metrics, and on 2 separate sites on a weekly basis for over a year TM ranked very well, and majority of the time #1. So you can't say there was no value in these services..
And not only that, in comparison with pricing.. Traffic Monsoon was very competitive among all these traffic exchanges, so your statements are weak and evidence is too strong to the contrary.

Curt Elbert Charles Scoville you are sounding really crazy right you have lost your mind and sound really insane and very unprofessional O alot of people money my freind AGAIN because this is not your first PONZI Scheme scam Were you lost millions of members money so stop calling the keddle black and mad and hating on a real legitimate business that makes real returns of capital and doing it the right way unlike you did...

Curt Elbert You see that Alexa rank stuff mean nothing because TM is shut down no more

Charles Scoville Curt Elbert Time will tell, and my "crazy" words will be seen a lot different later on down the road ;-) have fun with USI-TECH, but I really want you to understand that it's a ponzi scheme which will hurt people down the road, and since it's wanting to take a giant step into the USA, I'm pretty sure that authorities will not sit by and let a ponzi get away... and it will be clearly displayed as well that TM is clearly no ponzi.. if you've read the last brief filed in the courts, it's pretty clear in all the outlining of law that there is no ponzi involved in tm.

Curt Elbert You have already seen That TM was a PONZI we all no that and has hurt tons of people that lost will see 2 5 years from now when USI is still around and no more PONZI Scheme TM. Mark my word and all your hating will be water under the bridge. I know you are mad and upset that usi is doing huge things and is a legitimate business and TM wasn't but it will be ok.
Goodbye...TM no more and USI is thrieving good hater!

Charles Scoville Curt Elbert You're embarrassing yourself here Curt Elbert - Maybe if you read the latest brief filed with the courts you would understand by definition of law I wasn't doing anything wrong.. if you had the ability to dig in and see things for what they are, you would see that by clear legal definition, rewarding people for surfing using money the company already has does not constitute a ponzi.

Curt Elbert You have already embarrassed yourself Charles Scovilleand you are now making yourself look even worse. Your true color are showing bro! No one trust you.

Vincent Boutin So USI-Tech is an investment or not? If it brings real returns on capital, it's an investment right?
Just trying to follow here

Sharon James Vincent Boutin no it's Not .. we receive our initial capital on a daily basis along with profits on mining and trading up to 140% overall we receive around 6% a month in profits this is very achievable for traders in the crypto world. An Investment is very different to Return on capital when the company can not offer this going forward the product will no longer be available.

Charles Scoville Vincent Boutin Those USI-TECH leaders have people's minds all twisted up to believe that returns on capital isn't the same as a return on investment.. but what do people invest with? Capital :-P

Vincent Boutin The online world is full of psychopaths. People launching websites, trying to steal the most money, to every single penny possible from all naive victims. And we all go through the naive stage. I hope people won't lose much on this site. I would definitely suggest to everybody to just hold Bitcoin. Much safer, you are the sole owner of your money and it will grow immensely in value during the years to come.

Charles Scoville I'm hoping my posts help bring people out of the naive stage. Some already are.. others are not yet out of that naive stage.

Charles Scoville a lot of true colors being shown here. I'm definitely setting at variance my business as being real and USI-TECH as being false, and it helps identify types of leaders (who constantly push ponzi schemes that fail again and again) for people and sort of pulls the blinders back for helping people choose good leaders and not psychopaths. Sharon is one of those who doesn't care how anyone is wronged by USI-TECH down the road, as long as she's making money right now she's ok. Same thing with GetMyAds and anything else she's promoted before and since TM.. a ton of scams.. Who do you trust in.. the leaders who constantly jump from scam to scam or those who really dig in and find real companies. TM was a real company, and it lowers people's perception of me when leaders within my business just push scams. It's truly disappointing.

Charles Scoville Look, there were people pushing this bet-robot on Telegram. I knew it was a ponzi. I warned some people, and I was made fun of.. then, a month or so later it was finished. People see me differently now. People see those leaders differently now. Some people still follow them into those ponzis after ponzis.. and Sharon has gone from ponzi after ponzi time and time again.. telling her followers to jump into that next thing she's in.. and USI-TECH has no proof of trades, and is just like BannersBroker in that way.. confusing explanations which don't make sense, and people fall for that garbage. TM is a real company, real ad service, people earned real money.. and this case will prevail.. and in time USI-TECH will fail because it all really is a lie over there... and honestly, a leader who leads people into scam after scam and leads people to invest when no proof exists it's a real company.. well, leaders like this have no morals.. and if anyone is going to misdirect people away from legal regulatory and mandatory requirements for things like USI-TECH to be registered with the SEC, then they're just slimy too... and doesn't make me look very good to be associated with people involved in companies like USI-TECH while I'm fighting this case against the SEC.'

Charles Scoville People like you, Sharon, and Imy.. people pushing USI-TECH.. you might be good people, but I wouldn't trust any of you with business. 0%. Tons of deception and manipulation around all of you. I didn't see it when you were focused on TM, but when I see you pushing scams well.. it's very obvious the type of person you are, and I'm really not expecting this.. I thought you were someone better. I shared this whole situation with a Vice President of a company I sat down with recently, and as far as business acumen from an actual business professional and Vice President of a global distribution company.. he saw people like you as snakes and criminals over there at USI-TECH. I don't care what you think of me. I know who I am, and I know I tell the truth. I can't say the same thing about your manipulation tactics to get people to put money into USI-TECH. If that's how you promoted TM by lying to people about what TM actually is, then I'm really wondering how so many people in the UK thought TM was an investment.. maybe you were one of those who promoted TM in an ILLEGAL way.

Sharon James really Charles Scoville you are certainly scraping barrel enough this is not a good look for you at all...

Charles Scoville Sharon James I'm not nasty against you, I'm nasty against scams, and usi-tech is a scam. I think the world of you, but business acumen is not something you have, and usi-tech has manipulated and deceived you, and if you truly believe all the lies and perpetuate a scam, then you're part of that lie.. and I don't respect lies.
...The point is, many of these leaders inside USI-TECH have made a bad reputation for themselves promoting several scams but everyone can remember seeing how much they claimed they were legit. These leaders don't seem to have any business sense if they think it's a good idea to invest with a company which doesn't have proof of trades. Because of all the scams they have promoted over the years it really makes TM seem bad when in reality all it was is a company that sold ad service, offered an affiliate program, and offered customers rewards for surfing. It's hard to see the truth when there's all these people with masks on seeming so good, charming, charismatic.. telling you to invest your money in their scam so they can earn a commission. Tell me if this is the type of leader you really want to be following?'
Updated:22nd September 2017
Charles Scoville Anita Langley Any well educated person would know it's bad advice to invest anywhere which has no proof of trades. I have not lost the plot telling people NOT to invest somewhere that has no proof of trades. :-P 
In actual business sense, no one should be telling anyone to invest somewhere which is unlicensed/unregistered with the SEC, especially a place that has no proof of trades. People who do that have lost the plot for sure.

Charles Scoville well, i'm not saying Anita Langley and Sharon James didn't stand by me.. and I'm not saying they aren't standing by me.. all I'm saying is usi-tech is dangerous and anyone covering up need to be regulated or even need to provide proof of trades has got to be insane or intentionally trying to get money from others through telling a lie, and I can't support that.

Darren Protheroe Hear hear to that Charles 😉

Anita Langley Charles in TM you never actually declared your business model (and rightly so) hundreds of thousands of people trusted you!! It was only when the SEC got involved that you had to declare your business model for everyone to see. Why would you disclose it, if you didn't have too? So other companies could go any copy your business model which many did and failed !
They aren't doing anything different to you (even though they are a completely different business model) other than they had the forceit to obtain a legal opinion to ensure that what they was offering was not a security! 
Everyone has a right to there own opinion and I respect that, we are all adults and we will make that decision for ourselves but slandering people all over FB - IMHO is so wrong especially when we have been through thick and thin with you Charles and many, many people have been in touch with myself and others and we are concerned for you. 
In the meantime, perhaps your energy would be better focused elsewhere i.e. in your forthcoming new venture and on TM winning the case.
I am not prepared to discuss this any further on an open forum. All the best

Charles Scoville Anita Langley I appreciate your support through TM, and as everything has come out it has shown I haven't ever lied to anyone. The truth truly is I was selling ad service. This is not an investment. Using money the company already has to reward surfersdoes not constitute a ponzi, especially when there is no contractual obligation for those rewards to be anything at all. There is no obligation to payout more than the company has, so by law there not only isn't a security but also no ponzi. This case will prevail in our favor as a matter of law. So I'm grateful for you standing with me when I'm in the right.
The problem is, USI-TECH is lying to people and there's so much deception. I'm calling attention to it. I believe in honesty. I'm sorry that right now you're also supportive of such deception at USI-TECH while also wanting to show your support of me. If you can't see that USI-TECH is probably a scam, then does your opinion that TM isn't a ponzi truly going to carry much weight in the public eye? It does make TM and me look bad to see TM leaders promoting scams, or investment programs which do not provide proof of trades. It's just disappointing, that's all.. and it does weaken the view of what TM is when leaders go and push something like Tom Kent, GetMyAds, and now USI-TECH.. it's just disappointing...'

In conclusion, it looks like Charles has decided that part of his defence is that these people who hero worshipped him and recruited affiliates for him in their hundreds/ thousands have recruited illegally. 
What a truly lovely person Charles Scoville is. 

Friday, 25 August 2017

Tony and Lynne Booth - Update on Small Claims Court Case

The Claimant has received a reply from Tony and Lynne Booth's Solicitor in answer to a document they were sent which outlined the Claimants case.
Tony and Lynne were asked to prove that My Advertising Pays was a legitimate UK business, given that MAP have publicly stated that they employ a number of people in the UK and were therefore subject to UK Employment/Tax/VAT laws.
Not one of the questions asked were answered.
Tony and Lynne have instead quoted the Terms and Conditions that all members signed up to when joining My Advertising Pays and claim they are just ordinary members as well.


The Small Claims Court in the UK is specifically for ordinary members of the public to state their case in front of a Judge, without the need for a Solicitor or legal jargon.
The Claimant/Defendant need only present all the evidence they have (videos, social media posts etc) to the Judge for a (quick) decision to be made and a CCJ to be issued.

The Solicitors letter states that the Claimant has no prospect of success in this case.
We beg to differ. 

Friday, 11 August 2017

Tony and Lynne Booth - Defending My Advertising Pays In a Court of Law

On July 25th 2017, a small claims case was filed against Tony and Lynne Booth for the return of over £4000 paid to My Advertising Pays.

Tony and Lynne had 14 days (13th August 2017) in which to respond.

This response was received today:

Dear Miss ********
Booth - Litigation Matter Against *******
We act for Mr & Mrs Booth in respect of the claim you have brought against them.
We enclose acknowledgement of service that has been registered online.
It is our clients instructions that we are to defend the whole of the claim not least because any agreement you had was with a limited company and not our clients.

Yours sincerely,
Haworth & Lees Solicitors Limited'

So it looks like Tony and Lynne will be appearing in a Court room and will have to defend My Advertising Pays. All the evidence against them can be presented in a Court of Law and we can see what the Judge decides.

The lady bringing this case is keen for as many people as possible to show up and support her.
I will certainly let you know the Court date nearer the time so you can do just that.


The post below was published on our My Advertising Pays Scam Facebook page but has just been removed for not following Facebooks Community Standards.

Tuesday, 8 August 2017

Securities and Exchange Commission - Actively Seeking Ponzi Scams

An interesting report has been released today from the SEC regarding its investigation of Investments and Securities. 
Within the post below is a reference to 'unregistered offerings', which is why the Ponzi scams we expose regard the 'I' word with such horror and will do anything to avoid using it. 
Charles Scoville from Traffic Monsoon is currently going through the US Courts and has been charged with these offences:

Violation of Section 17(a)(1) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)(1)] 

Violation of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)(3)] 

Violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5(a) and
(c) thereunder [17 U.F.R. § 240.10b-5(a) and (c)] 

Violation of Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77e(a) and (c)]

Lets hope many more follow.

This video was released with the press statement:

SEC Staff Publishes Report on Access to Capital and Market Liquidity
08/08/2017 04:30 PM EDT

The SEC Division of Economic and Risk Analysis (DERA) today published a report describing trends in primary securities issuance and secondary market liquidity, and assessing how those trends relate to post-crisis regulatory reforms. The report was requested by Congress as part of the FY2016 appropriations process.

The report includes a survey and analysis of recent academic literature, as well as original analyses drawn from publicly available databases and non-public regulatory filings. The report examines the issuance of debt, equity, and asset-backed securities, as well as activity and liquidity in U.S. Treasuries, corporate bonds, single-name credit default swaps, and bond funds. Specifically, the report identifies trends for unregistered offerings, such as those under Regulation D and Regulation Crowdfunding, as well as fixed income transactions, fixed income quotations, and broker-dealer financial positions.

"The health of our primary and secondary markets is critical, and it is important for the SEC, as a key regulator of these markets, to engage in data-driven analysis of market trends and the range of issues that may be influencing those trends. This report both provides a current view of these topics, based on available data, as well as highlighting areas where future analysis could be warranted," said DERA Acting Director Scott Bauguess.

For more information about the study, and its findings, analyses and conclusions, follow DERA on Twitter, @SEC_DERA.

Monday, 31 July 2017

Charles Scoville - Why Traffic Monsoon Isn't a Ponzi

Charles Scoville is again telling us Traffic Monsoon isn't a Ponzi. He uses example after example to explain his reasons why. But in 2015, he contradicted everything he says here:

July 31st 2017:
Update on what's happening now in the case can be found at the end of this post below.
So the Howey Test is the legal instrument to measure whether something is an investment or not.

The Howey Test, let's go through the bullet points.
1. Is there an investment of money?
- Reviewing the website, it clearly and repeatedly makes sure the potential customer is fully aware that the offer is for ad service, and not any investment. There are no refunds. Therefore a purchase of ad service is a purchase of service, and not an investment.
- The definition of an investment is placing your money into someone else's management control, but the money still belongs to you. As specified on TM, a purchase of ad service is not an investment nor a deposit. Money spent on ad service no longer still belongs to the customer. After payment of service and being credited what was paid for, the money spent rightfully belongs to the company.'

Charles 2015:
'When our members purchase a service from TrafficMonsoon, the revenues from that purchase are held by the company. Then, you can qualify to receive share of the profits! Naturally there is cost associated with providing services. Each service provided generates a profit margin. We share those profits with you!'

2. Does TM promise returns using a common enterprise (investment project)?
- Reviewing the website, you'll find there is no promise for any returns whatsoever.
- When you look over the website, there is no description for placing money into TM and that TM will use your money in a way aimed at gaining returns through some investment project.
- There is no pitch to invest, no investment project mentioned, and no returns offered.

Charles 2015:
'When our members purchase a service from TrafficMonsoon, the revenues from that purchase are held by the company. Then, you can qualify to receive share of the profits! Naturally there is cost associated with providing services. Each service provided generates a profit margin. We share those profits with you!'

3. Is the money invested placed (or promised to be) into any common enterprise (investment project).
- There is no investment project/common enterprise, nor was there said to be. There was not anything that said that money from customers would be used in any investment project, and the returns from the investment project were owed to the customer.

Charles 2015:
'When our members purchase a service from TrafficMonsoon, the revenues from that purchase are held by the company. Then, you can qualify to receive share of the profits! Naturally there is cost associated with providing services. Each service provided generates a profit margin. We share those profits with you!'

4. Are returns on investment from the managerial or entrepreneurial efforts of others?
- There are no returns on investment
- Any money received comes due to an individuals own effort. Must surf to receive any potential reward for surfing.
- Reward given for surfing does not carry the same legal definition as a return on any investment.

Charles 2015:
'When our members purchase a service from TrafficMonsoon, the revenues from that purchase are held by the company. Then, you can qualify to receive share of the profits! Naturally there is cost associated with providing services. Each service provided generates a profit margin. We share those profits with you!'

Can it be more clear? No security (meaning investment) truly exists within TM. The sec really have no jurisdiction, and this case shouldn't have ever happened.

As you can see by legal definition, the SEC are wrong, and the case should resolve in our favor. Published February 19, 2014 and quoted elsewhere too, the SEC enforcement director Andrew
Ceresney told The Washington Post, "If you’re not losing cases, you’re not being aggressive enough."

The SEC are overreaching, and are simply being aggressive bullies.. and sadly, the impact of their witch-hunt (added on top of the impact of the PayPal limitation) has hurt so many people all around the world, and they are only doing it for career advancements, recognition, etc-…/SEC-fight-valentine-rabner-cor…'

As it says in this article, "Mr. Ceresney’s comment came as no surprise to us. Over our combined 23 years representing clients in SEC matters, willingness to push the envelope in close cases—to “regulate by enforcement”—has been a hallmark of the agency’s enforcement division."

*I highly recommend reading this article to understand more about the SEC and their history of misapplying the law in their accusations.*

Keep in mind, the notice of appeal on the preliminary injunction was filed 14 April 2017, and I've been advised by attorneys this appeals process can take about a year.. sometimes more, and sometimes less, so there will be little or no change in the case until then.

If for whatever reason we do not prevail on the appeal, then the case will continue forward through depositions, discovery, and other steps which can take years before a trial with a jury to determine whether TM is liable for what the SEC allege. I'm hopeful through this appeal we can display based upon the legal definitions why this case shouldn't have even been brought against TM.'

Thursday, 27 July 2017

Tony and Lynne Booth My Advertising Pays - Small Claims Case Launched

A Small Claims case against Tony and Lynne Booth from My Advertising Pays was filed on
July 27th 2017. 
The Claimants are seeking to recover in excess of £4000.
The County Court papers have been received by the Claimant and the defendants have until August 17th 2017 to respond.

Please watch this space for future updates.

Sunday, 23 July 2017

Tony Booth, Lynne Booth and Michael Deese - My Advertising Pays and Recodeit

Tony and Lynne Booth met Mike Deese in 2012. 
Tony used to have an online blog (now unavailable) in which he tells the full story of how they met:

'My wife and I first heard of Mike Deese back in 2012 when we started to look into the online world of advertising for our window installation company. We fully expected to find many online companies and network marketers ready to SCAM us and take our money.
Mike was at this time an expert internet marketer making a living online. He was an excellent unbiased network blogger offering genuine good advice of how to get the most from this new online world where you are more likely to find SCAMS first.
He never asked us as his followers to join a program he was involved in but was more than helpful in offering sound advice without charge. We soon began to trust him and his views and indeed joined a couple of programs he recommended but not under him at this timenasnwe wanted to see if this guy was for real.
Sure enough we found the advice to be good and started to make our first money online. Mike still althrough not earning any commissions from our efforts would still continue to offer his helpful advice and gain more of our trust.
We built on online relationship with him over the coming year until early 2013 when Mike called Lynne and announced that he would no longer be offering any more advice on internet programs no matter how good they looked and even if they passed his strict acid test.
He felt that the industry was failing him too much as so many companies were falling away and he did not want to be the person advising anyone to join any of these unstable opportunities. Mike did not want to put his name to a company and someone puts there last $50 only to find it gone three months later.
Lynne asked him what he would do instead his reply " I cannot and will not recommend another online company unless it is my own.  The only way I can trust and recommend another online company is to build my own."
He then disappeared from the market place for three months to do exactly this in March 2013.
June 2013 Mike Deese put out a call to action for his followers of which Lynne was one of the respondents. As a consequence of these email communications we arranged a meeting with him via Skype. This four hour meeting was to prove an incredible change of direction for Lynne and myself as he unfolded his idea of My Advertising Pays. We developed our business relationship and soon after fantastic friendship with him.
This is the sole reason My Advertising Pays was born, out of Mike's frustration of all the failed mismanaged and out and out SCAM companies.'

By Tonys own admission, both he and Lynne developed My Advertising Pays together with Mike. Mike even recognises their contributions in a video from the One Year Anniversary Event in London on December 13th 2014:


My Advertising Pays was launched in Dec 2013.
Tony's Official company title was 'My Advertising Pays Communications Executive'.

Lynnes Official Title at My Advertising Pays is Executive Secretary

This tweet from Tonys Twitter feed states an ROI of 120%

Tony and Lynne gave an interview in 2015 about the roles they have at 
 My Advertising Pays  



On 9th September 2015, Michael Deese registered a company in England called RECODEIT LTD.

On 27th October 2015, he appointed Tony and Lynne Booth
as Directors and terminated his own Directorship.  

This video was shot on 26th August 2017


As of July 23rd 2017, 'My Advertising Pays' is still registered at Companies House as an Active company.

As of July 23rd 2017, 'RECODEIT' is still registered at Companies House as an Active company.