What's up with AgencyScams.com (Marriageagencyscams.com) and JimsLists.com?

[Jack]

Anyone know what's up with Honest Jim's site?  :noidea:


http://agencyscams.com/

 

[kievstar]

On the other board I caught him in a lie.  No need to bring it up here but Jim gets paid. 

[Admin]

Anyone know what's up with Honest Jim's site?  :noidea:


http://agencyscams.com/

 

Hmmm . . . looks like it is offline, or maybe even closed. It seems the JimsLists.com site is still operating, but there is a note that the site is now owned by "Kostya."

Those are interesting developments.

On the other board I caught him in a lie.  No need to bring it up here but Jim gets paid. 

If you mean his affiliate commissions, yeah - that seems pretty clear. If you mean some other form of payment, I'd be interested in learning about it.

- Dan

[Admin]

This is looking more and more interesting.

I just looked at www.JimsLists.com and tried to find the 'Blacklist' - and especially, the 'Shit Kick List' that Jim has maintained for . . . years. There is no sign of the 'Shit Kick List' and the 'Blacklist' has now become the "Hell No List" - *however* - Anastasia (a/k/a A-Web and other variations) is NOWHERE to be found. The only remnant I could find (others may be able to find some things I missed), was on the 'Hell No List A-F' there is an entry for "Anastasia Affiliate" - but when clicking on the "Why" link, it returns a missing page error.

No listing for A-Web in the Blacklist at the site that apparently replaces AgencyScams.com - now at MarriageAgencyScams.com either.

I haven't checked other previously blacklisted agencies, as Jim was always so outspoken about criticizing A-web.

Something is clearly underway. Jim appears to be scrambling and *something* has him moving sites around and altering content.

I wonder what's up?

Anyone?

- Dan

[facetrock]

  The home page on Jimslist was written by a non native English speaker. I dont have any idea who this Kostya guy is. It looks to me like Jim sold the site.

[Jack]

I don't think Jim sold his site.  More than likely trying to hide/shield/protect certain assets.

[Manny]

Jim has had a few legal problems the grapevine tells me. The old agencyscams domain is gone forever.

He is up and running again at a new domain. I do know it, but I don't know Dan's feelings about publishing it here, so I wont for now.

[kievstar]

Jim is in it for the money and if you pay him enough he puts you on the good list.  I do know some people who are suing a certain Czech agency and Jim is known to take cash payments from.  This Czech agencies owner also sells human hair on facebook and other avenues.   Human hair and Czech girls for marriage is a good business model. 

I wonder if Jim is caught up with these lawsuits?  I know he sent me a phony letter from this agency as the Czech agency owner confirmed it.

[Jack]

Jim told me that he would be honored to add me to his list of recommended agencies,.... for a monthly fee. 

I told Jim such recommendations should be earned, not bought. It was this type of lack of business ethics that got Jim and I off on the wrong foot.  I think his cause would have been noble if it were not for the "pay to make recommended/Gold list" and stealing scammer photos from my site and Elena's Models and posting them on his site as his own.

One agency in Lugansk that I had busted for scamming about 2003 made Jim's Gold list, because they were paying Jim, every month. For some 3-4 years, every year, I would write Jim and tell him he was recommending one of the most efficient scam agencies in the industry. Jim said he did not agree and would continue to recommend this agency. I told Jim he was probably responsible for leading hundreds of men to the slaughter house.  :burnedup:

Finally, I guess after so many complaints Jim could no longer ignore them, Jim finally wrote me and said I was correct, the agency was involved with scam BUT the owner who was scamming all these years was now gone and the agency was now legit.  Sure Jim.

With Jim it was, it is, all about the money.

[wicheese]

Jim has had a few legal problems the grapevine tells me. The old agencyscams domain is gone forever.

He is up and running again at a new domain. I do know it, but I don't know Dan's feelings about publishing it here, so I wont for now.

Manny,

Does it have anything to do with HRB/RLM as it seemed like when the supposed CEO of HRB was posting on your site he was angling for more than just free publicity?

[Manny]

Manny,

Does it have anything to do with HRB/RLM as it seemed like when the supposed CEO of HRB was posting on your site he was angling for more than just free publicity?

I haven't heard exactly who is behind the lawsuit that actually hit Jim. I gather there were several large agencies who felt they had been libelled.

I don't see the connection between the postings of HRB's CEO on RUA, and Jim's List/Agency Scams. I don't recall they interacted, unless I missed that.

It was this type of lack of business ethics that got Jim and I off on the wrong foot.

The pot calling the kettle black methinks.

[Admin]

I haven't heard exactly who is behind the lawsuit that actually hit Jim. I gather there were several large agencies who felt they had been libelled.

I don't see the connection between the postings of HRB's CEO on RUA, and Jim's List/Agency Scams. I don't recall they interacted, unless I missed that.

The pot calling the kettle black methinks.

>>I haven't heard exactly who is behind the lawsuit that actually hit Jim. I gather there were several large agencies who felt they had been libelled.<<

Was it a libel claim? For some reason I was under the impression there might be other actionable torts that were 'in play.'

>>The pot calling the kettle black methinks.<<

I don't think it is the same thing. Jack evokes strong reactions mostly due to his VERY strong personality and frequent clashes with people who do not subscribe to his way of doing things.

In that respect, and stated in that way, I suppose some can draw a parallel between Jack and Jim - HOWEVER - there are major differences that clearly separate the two.

One is - Jack was one of the 'pioneers' in terms of 'outing' scamming behaviors. Jim openly admitted that he stole Jack's work to start his (Jim's) blacklist site. He (Jim) also stole the publications of Elena Petrova (Elena's Models) at that same time - and there is no doubt that Jim acted in a manner that most reasonable persons would conclude is 'out of bounds' - with Jack holding an actionable claim against Jim.

Moreover, on multiple occasions Jack has pointed out the enormity of the hypocrisy that Jim has posted on his sites. Putting aside the issue of payment for the Gold List - these hypocritical actions range from legitimate and sincere women who were reported as scammers by jilted suitors - including one who later married a western guy - but Jim refused to take her off his scammers listing. The hypocrisies included Jim openly condemning specific actions by some agencies - such as proximity to the pornography business, while at the very same time, promoting an agency known to be deeply involved in pornography. And these are but a very few examples - the hypocrisy of Jim is staggering.

Now returning to Jim's 'Gold List' and reported payments to be listed there. Jack has reported that he was approached by Jim with a request for payment to be included in the Gold List. Jim claims he has NEVER charged a fee to anyone to be included on his Gold List.  Now for the really FUNNY part:

* Jim has on occasion (when he and Jack are not in the very midst of one of their innumerable squabbles) made complimentary mention of Jack and fairly often refers to Jack and FirstDream as being one of the "honest" agencies - and yet, Jim refuses to list Jack on his Gold List.

* Jim acknowledged at one point that he was exasperated with Jack and that he did, indeed, make some wisecrack about requiring Jack (only Jack) to pay Jim for a Gold List entry. Was it truly a sarcastic comment? My bet is that it was, indeed, just that - and I further believe that Jim does NOT demand payment for the Gold List entries - though that is not the end of the story.

* The fact that agencies offer affiliate commission payments - that is, revenue sharing, with sites like Jim's that send traffic to them - means that Jim does, in fact, receive payments from the agencies on his Gold List. While not quite so blatant as just outright charging them a fee for the Gold List link - it is, nonetheless, payment for a Gold List entry. Jim claims he does not allow those payments to influence his Gold List agencies - but I think anyone who earns tens of thousands of dollars from a single agency in that list is going to be influenced. Let me state that again. Jim has a number of agencies on his Gold List. At least one of those Gold List agencies (and I'd wager others as well) has paid Jim tens of thousands of dollars in a fairly short timeframe. Does anyone REALLY believe that does NOT influence who Jim has on his list?!?

* And of course, there are the couple of Gold List entries that Jim is adamant do not pay for their position on the Gold List - and the owners of those agencies confirm it. Once again a bit of sleight of hand, IMO. The best way to deflect criticism is to have plausible deniability. To achieve that, Jim needs a dupe (or two) who he can legitimately claim "prove" he is not guilty of that which he is being accused of - in this case, payment for a Gold List entry. Well, Jim has that dupe and it has served him well over the years in allowing a deflection. Does the dupe know he has been used this way? Perhaps not - but IF not, then that dupe is dumb as a rock. And if he DOES know about his role in Jim's deflections, then he is at least partly culpable for perpetration of a fraud - if not legally, at least ethically.

So what to make of all this. Here are a few of my 'take-aways' - FWIW:

* Jim and Jack have more in common than either will care to admit. They both are active crusaders to attack scamming behaviors. They both are extraordinarily outspoken and opinionated - even when their opinions are fringe or dubious. They both are intractable and prone to engaging in what Brasscasing (a member/moderator at RUA) called a "bunker mentality" - a VERY apt description, IMO.

* While Jack and others have attacked Jim over the payments from his Gold List agencies - I find that rather odd. I 'get it' that the way Jim has positioned the Gold List seeks to convince guys they should do business only with those agencies based on Jim's endorsement of their credibility and honesty ALONE. Jim's rigid adherence to this 'line' is a VERY large part of his problems now. As an acknowledged point of controversy, let me state with emphasis - There is NOTHING wrong with Jim charging for an agency to be on his published Gold List. Nothing, NADA, zip - period. Assuming Jim does not characterize that Gold List as something it is not. For that matter - let me take it a step further. Over the years I have seen many MANY *MANY* guys who come to RWD (and/or elsewhere) screaming at the top of their lungs about how bad agencies are because they charge a 'fee' for a taxi or an apartment or a cellphone or . . . you get the idea. The simple facts are - a bunch of guys, and I do mean a BUNCH, are cheap. Pure and simple - they are CHEAP. They expect to get something for nothing - and they scream bloody murder if a service provider charges the most modest of mark-ups. This happens ALL THE TIME. Get a clue. There is probably nobody in this business who is in it for altruistic reasons. Everyone is in it to make a $$. Everyone. That is really bad news for the cheap bastards who count every penny and agonize over every dime. While there is nothing wrong with being frugal and responsible - the ones I am referencing (and like I wrote - there are a BUNCH of them) take this way over the line and are irrational and unrealistic about the financial aspects of this pursuit.

Look - profit is good. The more profit the better. It is ONLY because RWD has been able to turn a 'profit' that we have been able to provide this venue and commission such projects as the Survey of Cross-Cultural Marriage and Divorce (among others).

The long-winded point being - Jim making a profit by receiving payments (or charging) for a listing on his Gold List is NOT condemnable behavior as some would have you believe. Let's get over THAT for once and for all.

Finally - one last take-away. As I am learning about some of the things affecting Jim (and others BTW), I believe we are witnessing the beginning of a sea change. There are going to be massive changes in the near future now, and I do not expect this to be protracted in timing. It will be sooner - much sooner - rather than later.

Stay tuned. Things are about to get REAL interesting.

- Dan

[Faux Pas]

Finally - one last take-away. As I am learning about some of the things affecting Jim (and others BTW), I believe we are witnessing the beginning of a sea change. There are going to be massive changes in the near future now, and I do not expect this to be protracted in timing. It will be sooner - much sooner - rather than later.

Stay tuned. Things are about to get REAL interesting.

- Dan

Can you elaborate? There's plenty of us that do not have any knowledge of the MOB website business and the subculture involved in it. Luckily for me I deduced early on about Jim's list but, I know many didn't, took his word as the holy grail and wound up paying for it. What's going on in Layman's terms?

I would add I completely agree with you about the number of "cheap bastards" in this pursuit. There does seem to be many more in it penny pinching and looking for something for nothing than those willing to pay an honest dollar for services rendered. With so many looking to drain the suckers and sapps of their cash, can you really blame them? FWIW, there does seem to be more suckers and sapps looking East than those going in with their eyes wide open.

[Admin]

Can you elaborate? There's plenty of us that do not have any knowledge of the MOB website business and the subculture involved in it. Luckily for me I deduced early on about Jim's list but, I know many didn't, took his word as the holy grail and wound up paying for it. What's going on in Layman's terms?

I would add I completely agree with you about the number of "cheap bastards" in this pursuit. There does seem to be many more in it penny pinching and looking for something for nothing than those willing to pay an honest dollar for services rendered. With so many looking to drain the suckers and sapps of their cash, can you really blame them? FWIW, there does seem to be more suckers and sapps looking East than those going in with their eyes wide open.

The seedbed for IMBRA is only just now finally taking hold - witness the very recent release of the long-awaited Information Pamphlet (on October 27th - after what . . . 4 or 5 years). States are now taking up the charge in regulating IMB's, and their statutes are more onerous than the federal legislation. Businesses that have had it relatively 'easy' in the past are becoming more desperate and acting in ways that have surprised me - in particular, I have been sadly shocked and disappointed in John Adams and AFA in recent weeks - someone whom I thought I had a good relationship with previously. Many of the large IMB owners are aggressively seeking to diversify if not divest.

Jim is but a bit player in this whole thing - or . . . maybe even more sleight of hand in a "Jim" who may not really be a "Jim" at all - but rather, maybe a Mark or a Joe or even a "Ken" with direct connection to an organization/s who would benefit through sullying its competition.

Corruption eventually implodes. Wouldn't it be fascinating if the perennial punching bag A-web turns out to NOT be the most corrupt agency on the face of the planet (as Jim and others have claimed)?!? What if that moniker belongs to an agency on Jim's Gold List?!?

It just looks to me that there is a convergence of influences with none of them favorable to the large IMB's. It looks to be accelerating now - and I should know more in a week or so.

- Dan

[Manny]

Was it a libel claim? For some reason I was under the impression there might be other actionable torts that were 'in play.'

I know an outline that Jim has told me, described as "some legal sh!t".

I was amongst the recipients recently of a mass email from lawyers (apparently) of one big agency who were doing what can only be described as a fishing exercise by trying to apply pressure to those who are featured in some shape or form on Jim's sites. I think they were seeking his personal details. I got the mail, Ed got it, I know Kevin in FL and a few others got it, I assume many others did too.

I am aware of another action that was getting rather close to Jim and had been building up for some time. There was talk of that one being directed to some degree at his domain names. Jim did write a little himself about that on RUA I recall. Some of that is in the public domain already.

So as I said, I am not sure which of several possible actions hit him, nor the specifics of it. I have a pretty good idea, but if it is who I think it is, it is part of a larger action.

Finally - one last take-away. As I am learning about some of the things affecting Jim (and others BTW), I believe we are witnessing the beginning of a sea change. There are going to be massive changes in the near future now, and I do not expect this to be protracted in timing. It will be sooner - much sooner - rather than later.

Stay tuned. Things are about to get REAL interesting.

Of that, there is no doubt!

[facetrock]

So Dan.... Let me see if I understand this. The IMBRA laws are in effect but now are going to be enforced. There's also state laws that are more strict. So rather than risk their necks from ambulance chasing class action lawyers some of the big boys in the business are either going to say the hell with it and sell out, or the word "marriage" will not be found on any of their websites. They will become strictly address sellers.
  As for Jim... You have a suspicion he never really was working on his own but is a schill for some other big time agency used solely to slam most of the others, and make money at the same time. Now that would be sneaky and smart in a business that is far from honest.

[BC]

Just like my Mamma said..

'Life is like a washing machine.., the dirt always comes out in the end.'

[tim 360]

So Dan.... Let me see if I understand this. The IMBRA laws are in effect but now are going to be enforced. There's also state laws that are more strict. So rather than risk their necks from ambulance chasing class action lawyers some of the big boys in the business are either going to say the hell with it and sell out, or the word "marriage" will not be found on any of their websites. They will become strictly address sellers.
  As for Jim... You have a suspicion he never really was working on his own but is a schill for some other big time agency used solely to slam most of the others, and make money at the same time. Now that would be sneaky and smart in a business that is far from honest.

I'm sure if IMBRA is cramping the profits of some of these companies they will make some clever changes and loose the M word.  They won't throw the baby out with the bathwater.  Right now it does appear that the real money is made on collecting money from thousands of letterwriters who never visit.  Less $$ on those who marry.  So for now...why change anything?

[facetrock]

  I'm sure a herd of lawyers could figure out some way to sue a few of those companys into oblivion Tim. IMO they have been riding very close to the edge for a long time. Lots of claims could be made that they have deceived men. I'm sure there are plenty of fleeced men who would be happy to join a class action suit. Its been a few years since I heard it was tried but by now I would say there are more and more pissed off guys out there than ever before.
  I would hate to be part of the litigation or pay for it. Just think how long and how much money it would cost to defend yourself against a complicated suit like that. Nightmarish and a lawyers dream.
  Besides its not wether you win or lose its when you decide to settle to stop the bleeding. Most lawyers count on that.

[tim 360]

  I'm sure a herd of lawyers could figure out some way to sue a few of those companys into oblivion Tim. IMO they have been riding very close to the edge for a long time. Lots of claims could be made that they have deceived men. I'm sure there are plenty of fleeced men who would be happy to join a class action suit. Its been a few years since I heard it was tried but by now I would say there are more and more pissed off guys out there than ever before.
  I would hate to be part of the litigation or pay for it. Just think how long and how much money it would cost to defend yourself against a complicated suit like that. Nightmarish and a lawyers dream.
  Besides its not wether you win or lose its when you decide to settle to stop the bleeding. Most lawyers count on that.

Definitely many unsavory characters in this biz.  In a better world they'd all be put out of business.  I'm sure plenty of guys would say they were fleeced.  I'm not sure just how many fleeced themselves?   

[Admin]

So Dan.... Let me see if I understand this. The IMBRA laws are in effect but now are going to be enforced. There's also state laws that are more strict. So rather than risk their necks from ambulance chasing class action lawyers some of the big boys in the business are either going to say the hell with it and sell out, or the word "marriage" will not be found on any of their websites. They will become strictly address sellers.
  As for Jim... You have a suspicion he never really was working on his own but is a schill for some other big time agency used solely to slam most of the others, and make money at the same time. Now that would be sneaky and smart in a business that is far from honest.

  I'm sure a herd of lawyers could figure out some way to sue a few of those companys into oblivion Tim. IMO they have been riding very close to the edge for a long time. Lots of claims could be made that they have deceived men. I'm sure there are plenty of fleeced men who would be happy to join a class action suit. Its been a few years since I heard it was tried but by now I would say there are more and more pissed off guys out there than ever before.
  I would hate to be part of the litigation or pay for it. Just think how long and how much money it would cost to defend yourself against a complicated suit like that. Nightmarish and a lawyers dream.
  Besides its not wether you win or lose its when you decide to settle to stop the bleeding. Most lawyers count on that.

FTR,

I have come, in recent weeks, to realize there is FAR more . . . as in *VASTLY* more deception and sleight of hand than I ever imagined. I confess that I tend to take people at their word - and that is by design. I work hard to not follow my 'gut feeling' on a lot of things - instead, preferring to ask and ask until I feel I have a straight answer. That straight answer may NOT be an honest answer, however - and sadly, in a few instances, I am discovering that some folks who I held in high regard are some of the worst at evasions, deception and corruption.

Having had my own direct confrontation with Jim (AgencyScams and JimsLists), and finding him to be both illogical and intractible - my earlier conclusion was that he suffered from the 'Brasscasing' diagnosis of "bunker mentality." There is, however, another entirely plausible - even likely - explanation. Though I *do* believe Brass has it right about the "bunker mentality" bit - I just think there is even more to it - and profit motive is at the heart.

A few specific comments:

>>The IMBRA laws are in effect but now are going to be enforced.<<

Yes indeedy. It was the plan all along to 'put teeth' into IMBRA, but it has always been questionable how and when the authorities would be able to do so. The "When" part of the question seemed to hinge around the Information Pamphlet - now released. The "How" part of the question remains unknown - BUT - it would be folly to think that IMBRA's proponents have NOT been working to insure enforcement as soon as the path is clear. When I met with TJC 18 months ago they told me they have a file on those IMB's they want to see investigated - which was then, and should be now, no surprise to anyone. There are some dirty players in this business.

I would bet we will see some trial balloons at enforcement definitely within the next 12 months - and maybe much sooner. Not long after that, it would not surprise me to see a 'hallmark case' in which an IMB is intentionally made an example of.

>>So rather than risk their necks from ambulance chasing class action lawyers some of the big boys in the business are either going to say the hell with it and sell out, or the word "marriage" will not be found on any of their websites.<<

Already happening - more in the Latin markets we support over at Planet-Love, but also in the FSU markets - with a twist.

In the Latin markets, the IMBs are just closing up shop altogether. There are a VERY few that are of any consequence at all - and the ones that remain are .... well, IMBRA should have some easy pickings.

The FSU market is a bit different. In this market, it is all about consolidation. Many new websites are springing up - but the owners are all masked and very few offer any contact information. It is REALLY hard for me to understand how those sites manage to convince guys to give them credit card information - but apparently they do. Just look at one of the topics I posted in our Scammers forum recently about a bunch of different websites that submitted links to our directory - but they are ALL obviously owned by the same broader organization OR commissioned by that organization (ownership being somewhat transitory it seems if you believe what Jim is saying at his sites).

Asia is another market yet - and while not as active with the internet forum crowd, The Philippines remains the country receiving the largest number of K-1 visas year in and year out for decades now.

>>They will become strictly address sellers.<<

No - that era is long gone. For most of the bigger players, the movement is to diversify. If you dig just a bit, you can find some interesting information about the holdings and diversification of at least a couple of the big IMBs.

>>As for Jim... You have a suspicion he never really was working on his own but is a schill for some other big time agency used solely to slam most of the others, and make money at the same time.<<

Not quite. I would not use the term "never" - as I suspect there may have been a time when he was independent - sort of. I also expect that he is now deeply beholden to his masters (my opinion) - and that those masters are the ones paying him. I further believe there are events that quite likely tie Jim to at least one of the agencies on his Gold List in a way that would be tortious. And yes, I clearly believe that Jim's operation is one that supports and benefits those agencies who benefit Jim - and his operation works to the DISBENEFIT of all others - by design.

I am, of course, not presenting evidence in this matter - merely expressing my opinion and belief. At the moment, anyway.

>>I'm sure a herd of lawyers could figure out some way to sue a few of those companys into oblivion Tim. IMO they have been riding very close to the edge for a long time. Lots of claims could be made that they have deceived men.<<

It only takes a committed individual to rattle these particular cages enough that some REALLY slimy stuff will start oozing out. That may already be underway from what we are seeing of Jim's sites, and Manny's comments upthread.

>>I'm sure there are plenty of fleeced men who would be happy to join a class action suit. Its been a few years since I heard it was tried but by now I would say there are more and more pissed off guys out there than ever before.<<

I am not so sure. Jim has been touting some kind of "class action lawsuit" for maybe close to a year now - and to my knowledge, there is nothing filed and probably nothing going to be filed. Further, from what we have been able to put together here at RWD whenever we try to probe deeply on the topic of a concrete definition/evidence of IMB scamming behavior, it has invariably turned up that there is nothing that crosses any legal lines - ethics perhaps (almost certainly) but not legal. I just do not see this as a viable option - WITH THE INFORMATION THAT IS KNOWN AT THE MOMENT. As those cages get rattled and the slime begins to flow - who knows where that may lead.

Offered FWIW - and is merely my opinion (standard disclaimer applies).

- Dan

[facetrock]

  Dan from what I know of class action lawsuits here is how many start. If and when the government slaps some fines on someone like AFA,HRB or Aweb, law firms take notice. Lots of law firms feed on stuff like this. Not saying its bad all the time just the way things are. Once they see the government proved fraud(they dont really have to prove fraud just levy a fine) and they realize some of these agencys are multi-million dollar companys the hunt starts. Most use private investigators to track down clients and see if they have dirt. Their search will lead them here and other boards looking for people who think they were scammed.

  Its very possible Jim with all his claimed bad reports on agencys has alot of info the PIs would want to see such as the thousands of complaints from individuals complete with email addresses. Jim would have a big bullseye on him and if he gets named and has to release info it could be very embarrassing. Actually if what you think is true it could ruin what credibilty he has.
  If the investigators find what they are looking for(and in this case I think they would) they file a lawsuit which gives them access to all records and all customers with contact info from the big agencys. Class action lawyers can be relentless as well as ruthless.
 
 The fine line the big agencys ride in my opinion is this. All the scamming they claim is by affiliates in other countrys. Kind of an out for them in a technical sense. They claim and I believe they do get rid of bad agencys if there are some complaints. I wonder though how many of those agencys reincarnate themselves in a few months and are back in business with the same owners. You prove one of the biggies knows this is happening and they are in deep sh1t. No one here would be surprised if thats happened.

 Most here know the games the big agencys play. Dont think a smart lawyer wont figure it out and I'm sure several have already been taken for a ride. The US government works slow but eventually catches up to people and there's enough liberals in power now that would love nothing better to put every marriage agency out of business. Your right though, some of the rats will flee the ship when they smell smoke.

 One more thing Dan. I'm sure you see those ads on TV about class action lawsuits. What would you do if some law firm would ask to put a banner ad here looking for people who think they were scammed by some of the big agencys?

 I would say not one big agency would want to go to a trial by jury with the business practices they employ. Disaster waiting to happen.

[Admin]

  Dan from what I know of class action lawsuits here is how many start. If and when the government slaps some fines on someone like AFA,HRB or Aweb, law firms take notice. Lots of law firms feed on stuff like this. Not saying its bad all the time just the way things are. Once they see the government proved fraud(they dont really have to prove fraud just levy a fine) and they realize some of these agencys are multi-million dollar companys the hunt starts. Most use private investigators to track down clients and see if they have dirt. Their search will lead them here and other boards looking for people who think they were scammed.

  Its very possible Jim with all his claimed bad reports on agencys has alot of info the PIs would want to see such as the thousands of complaints from individuals complete with email addresses. Jim would have a big bullseye on him and if he gets named and has to release info it could be very embarrassing. Actually if what you think is true it could ruin what credibilty he has.
  If the investigators find what they are looking for(and in this case I think they would) they file a lawsuit which gives them access to all records and all customers with contact info from the big agencys. Class action lawyers can be relentless as well as ruthless.
 
 The fine line the big agencys ride in my opinion is this. All the scamming they claim is by affiliates in other countrys. Kind of an out for them in a technical sense. They claim and I believe they do get rid of bad agencys if there are some complaints. I wonder though how many of those agencys reincarnate themselves in a few months and are back in business with the same owners. You prove one of the biggies knows this is happening and they are in deep sh1t.

 Most here know the games the big agencys play. Dont think a smart lawyer wont figure it out and I'm sure several have already been taken for a ride. The US government works slow but eventually catches up to people and there's enough liberals in power now that would love nothing better to put every marriage agency out of business. Your right though, some of the rates will flee the ship when they smell smoke.

 One more thing Dan. I'm sure you see those ads on TV about class action lawsuits. What would you do if some law firm would ask to put a banner ad here looking for people who think they were scammed by some of the big agencys?

 I would say not one big agency would want to go to a trial by jury with the business practices they employ. Disaster waiting to happen.

FTR,

Really good comments and thoughts - thanks.

In reply to your one question:
>>What would you do if some law firm would ask to put a banner ad here looking for people who think they were scammed by some of the big agencys?<<

The answer is simple. We would run the ad if we have available space - just as we would run the ad for ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION. We took some real heat over the fact that RWD ran ads for A-web at one point in the past - and they are still an advertiser at GoodWife (one of our sister sites). We took more heat when Google published some HRB/RLM ads that appeared here. A long time ago in a galaxy not so very far away, there was an RWG site that was taken down by its owners failure to separate advertising from site content when he spuriously rejected paid advertising requests from an advertiser that eventually won a lawsuit for (among other things - and IIRC) restraint of trade.

RWD long ago ran polls and established strict policies to segregate our site content from advertising that is displayed here. So long as an organization - ANY organization - agrees to abide by the International Relations Advertising Terms of Service - they are free to advertise here.

I know that offends some - but the policy is fair and just and penalizes no-one - AND - is necessary to protect RWD.

- Dan

[Jack]

I would say not one big agency would want to go to a trial by jury 

Interesting that you mention that facetrock.

A few years ago we caught one of the big 3 doing something we felt was illegal, could prove it, and as such filed law suit over their actions. At first this company thought we would not be able to prove or back-up our allegation. After they were deposed their attitude changed considerably.

As we were preparing for trial I was thinking we were going to have a trial by jury. My attorney knew we would be able to prove up our case but he was against using a jury. As he explained to me their could be several American women on this jury and he thought we would be taking a real chance with American women on the jury and these women being able to see proof of thousands of men each year who were opting for younger, beautiful Russian women over American women.  As such the jury could award damages of $1 if they so elected. It was a chance we did not want to take but the other side could opt for jury trial if they so elected.

After attorney's from both sides talked I learned that the other side was just as concerned that American women on the jury could try to stick it to them and award an outrageous sum for damages. 

Both sides agreed to trial by judge. Both sides were fearful as to how American women would react when they were exposed to a lot of things that they had no knowledge of, but would learn, with regards to the great number of American men seeking Russian wife's. 

[Turboguy]

It would have been funny if they had been assigned a woman judge, especially a younger one.