Complaint

+1
Debra M. Persiano
Country: United States
I got a call today at home from a man stating he was a process server for Collin County DA's Office and he is with the Sheriff's office and needed to come serve a warrant on me.  I was shocked and asked why?  He stated do you live ....are you still at this address are you now at this address and I stated who are you?  He again, stated he was from the county going to serve court papers on me today. He gave me a toll free number for what he stated was the county's office which is 1 866.872.6116 gave me a case no. which he called a Cause No. 008307-TX. I called the number was transferred to a Mr. Fisher's office who stated that law suite in the amount of $6,214.24 was filed in Collin Co., Tx and that warrant was out for me.  He then after back and forth said let me get more information from my secretary and state this was for an outstanding debt in from Capital One a credit card that I obtained several years back and had disputes over interest charges etc.  He stated that if I did not want to go to court or jail that I could pay $1,951.00 in full by end of business today and this matter could be cleared up.  I explained that I recently lost my job etc.  Anyway, he stated that I needed to call him back by EOB today or they will serve the papers.  Ok, so that was a heads up for me.  I called the DA's office nothing is filed on me as of today, after searching PMG it is clear that they do not practice best practices for collections and have been in trouble for this before back in 2004.  I need someone to give me advise. I want to pay off my debt, I don't want this type of collections to continue this upset me, made my blood pressure raise, this type of collections are not the right thing to do.  Had they called and ask to make arrangements or give me an opportunity to clear the matter, rather then threaten me by taken legal action, or harassment stating they are sending a sheriff over today.  This is wrong, bad business, and should not continue this company is bad news.

Comments

  • 0
    Very inventive
    You make a total of 3 different deceptive claims:
    1)  This is a company with some "reputation".  No, just a bunch of disposable shells.  Next month, you could have a new name, maybe you already do.

    2)  The FTC is "a little tired of the deadbeats".  No, complaints against debt collectors are the largest and fastest rising group of FTC complaints, FDCPA violations don't depend on whether any debt is even owed or not, and the lawsuit is proceeding.

    3)  The posts are by the "competition".  No, your competition wouldn't want to call further attention to the same scam they are running.  In fact, more likely they are pissed at you for stirring up so much interest, as you have now threatened their little racket as well.

    You just keep making it up.
  • 0
    SLANDER
    Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. This can be also any disparaging statement made by one person about another, which is communicated or published. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).[1]

    In common law jurisdictions, slander refers to a malicious, false,[2][not specific enough to verify] and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images.[3] Most jurisdictions allow legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. Related to defamation is public disclosure of private facts, which arises where one person reveals information that is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person. "Unlike [with] libel, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy."[4][not verified in body]

    False light laws are "intended primarily to protect the plaintiff's mental or emotional well-being."[5] If a publication of information is false, then a tort of defamation might have occurred. If that communication is not technically false but is still misleading, then a tort of false light might have occurred.[5]

    In most civil law jurisdictions, defamation is dealt with as a crime rather than a tort.[6]

    A person who harms another's reputation may be referred to as a famacide, defamer, or slanderer. The Latin phrase famosus libellus means a libelous writing.
    Contents
    [hide]
  • 0
    POLICE
    File your lawsuit now I'm taking his threats to the police don't be scared of this loser you have a case read above information
  • 0
    DO IT
    Winning a defamation of character lawsuit can pay off in two types of compensation: general damages and special damages. General damages covers emotional trauma while special damages covers economic loss. In the case of a slander lawsuit proof of specific special damages might be required before general damages can be awarded. Unfortunately, special damages can be hard to prove.
  • 0
    Yeah!
    3X Damages. That can REALLY cut into a scam's profit. We need to take this into our own hands. The FTC is only interested in companies with a certain number of complaints against them, so the responsibility falls on us to shut them down ourselves. How many lawsuits before they are too broke to keep up the shenanigans ? If we want the calls to stop it is up to all of us to stop them. We will prevail.
  • 0
    One more thing...
    Slandering Julia Forte is a bad idea. I think she kinda runs this joint, and my guess is she is probably happy to see you all so scared (of the legal problems resulting from your illegal actions). Michael Peterson is a legitimate businessman. I think it is YOU who are guilty of libel against HIM. I say sue everyone. Sue the website. Sue Michael. Sue the ISP's who allowed everyone to tell the truth about what you do. Sue Me. Sue your parents for not having the skills to keep you from a life of crime. Most importantly, sue yourselves, who have damaged your own reputations and lives more than any of us ever could.
  • 0
    Last thing...
    make sure that your super-duper-awesome attorney Sammy Liehard represent you. That way we know you will get exactly NOWHERE.
  • 0
    DDOS attacker located
    I read on 800 notes that these sites were indeed DdoS'd last month. I have now located the offending company, who's website actually lists 800 notes as a reason for it's tactics.

    http://www.searchenginepartner.com/First-page-placement/reverse-seo.html

    This is who PMG has hired to "Protect" their "Good Name". They use illegal computer based attacks to disrupt legitimate business's and websites.

    Google is just the best, ain't it?

    So now I am bringing THEM into the light. Seems like this site is now secure compared to last month, so I feel confident that their attempts to disrupt will be inconsequential from here on out.
  • 0
    Concerned Citizen  # 42
    I hope they DO call the police. All of those fictitious and libelous    postings related to Julia Forte and Michael Peterson came from someone's IP. PLEASE get the police on the hunt for these people. I have a feeling that a few of the more creative posts even came from the lawyer these bad people hired to protect them from the FTC. Should be fun to see him brought up on charges. You will not win. You will not even be in business once these lawsuits hit. The people you have victimized will continue reporting you to the proper authorities until you are no longer a threat to the general public.
  • 0
    Corona websites
    There was evidence with the Corona websites (.BIZ & .NET) of an attempt to elevate their rank in searches, by establishing links to them from other pages, usually free "listing" or "review" sites, as well as their own cookie-cut "blog" sites.

    This pattern appeared with the batch of "Filing Services" shells created and rolled out in the final several months.
  • 0
    These guys..
    apparently knew that, so they broke their operation up under a lot of different LLCs, to try to appear "small".

    FTC knows that game, also, since they have shut down scam operations using over 50 names to try to hide.
  • 0
    Camouflage
    The LLCs were just legal "camouflage", designed to protect the assets of the owners.

    The forensic accountant noted that they were operated to be technically insolvent, with all the money drained out of them, just transferring in amounts needed as expenses came due.

    They were designed to throw away.
  • 0
    Yes.
    Every person who googled them was seeing what liars and scam artists they were. They then hired an "Online reputation company" to help them continue scamming people. That is when they added the new websites (.NET) and even set them up for future shell LLC's.
  • 0
    Also a "law firm" website
    FTC also documented that they had set up a batch of new websites that weren't yet fully active, one of which tried to appear to be a "law firm".  The name used appears to be the actual last name of an attorney in Riverside, but one who practices non-collection law.

    The various sites looked like they were just made for appearances, without anything set up to attract business clients or even allow people to pay.  They typically had boilerplate generic "consumer debt advice", often the same on many of the sites, combined with vaguely implying that they somehow assisted their "clients" in collections, including "suing".  

    Probably just constructed to catch people who might search on the name or phone number, to try to convince them they were "legitimate".
  • 0
    Exactly.
    These sites were created for the sole purpose of misleading the public. Note all of the shill blog posts...the work of their "Reputation Defenders". The sites themselves are just further proof that deception, false threats and lies are the only things these jokers can produce. I just hope they have lots of fun this month, because once the next batch of lawsuits hit their doors I don't think they will have their doors open very long. :)
  • 0
    Pertinent Information
    If you or someone you know has been contacted via telephone by anyone claiming to be a "Process Server" or other Law Enforcement Agent please contact the Federal Trade Commission directly. Below is a link to follow to the Official Website, containing contact Email Links and Telephone numbers. All reports are confidential.


    http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/10/rincon.shtm
  • 0
    Información Pertinente
    Si usted o alguien que usted conoce han sido puestos en contacto vía el teléfono por alguien reclamando para ser "un Servidor de Proceso" u otro Agente de Aplicación de la Ley por favor póngase en contacto con la Comisión Comercial Federal directamente. Abajo es un eslabón para seguir al Sitio Web Oficial, conteniendo Eslabones de Correo electrónico de contacto y Números de teléfono. Todos los informes son confidenciales.
  • 0
    Like you really give a damn about it...
    Slander and defamation was your daily bread and butter.

    In every call you made to a relative or employer, playing "process server" or "deputy", pretending you were "serving papers", you defamed whoever you claimed to be "suing".  Deliberate third party disclosure of a fake, nonexistent "lawsuit" is nothing but defamation.
  • 0
    Nothing to say
    Nothing,

Post a new comment