coverall franchisees |
| United States |
|
|
Consumer reviews about coverall franchisees |
|
1st Amendment
|
Dec 26, 2011
|
owners are brain dead
To Lying source Hey you keep hidding like a Rat in a Cave. You still won't give me your name or where you live. I guees you have much to HIDE so you won't say your real name.
Don't let these criminals intimidate you. If you have been ripped-off by a cleaning franchise Ponzi Scheme Like a Judge recently compared them to you can do the following.
1. File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission www.Ftc.gov
2. File a complaint with the Attorney General www.Justice.gov
3. Organise with other cleaners and look for an attorney or lawfirm and get Justice.
Coverall has many Lawsuits and it looks like the Goverment will come down on them soon.
|
|
Informed source
|
Dec 27, 2011
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, aka Dude Love, aka I love America, aka SEIU Stooge... Glad to see that liss-riordin was able to secure your safe passage back from Mexico! Was getting worried about you...Hope your Jan-Pro lawsuit is still going on? Wait a second, that is still in hiatus isnt it? What happened, got a feeling you were about to lose, therefore, just asked for continuance again? Time is running short for you isn't it?
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Dec 28, 2011
|
owners are brain dead
To Lying source, Your still avoiding the QUESTION? What is your real name? What is your real name ? Why do you hide like a RAT in a Cave ? Be a Man and say who you are. What is your name and why are you so afraid to say who you are ?
The Lawsuits are going well. Don't let this Rat from corporate intimidate you. If you have been Ripped-off by a cleaning Ponzi Scheme like a Judge recently compared them to you can take action to get Justice.
The following are things that you can do.
1. File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. They are a Goverment agency with the Power to take action. They can and will go into a building with armed police officers and agents and take action. You should file a complaunt with the Federal Trade Commission. www.Ftc.gov They will take action once they get enough complaints . Your complaint with them is confidential. WWW.FTC.GOV
2. File a complaint with the Attorney General let them know that these companies are in violation of the Rico and Raqueterring Acts. WWW.Justice.Gov
3. Let your local News Stations and newspapers know what is going on with these cleaning companies and how they are a "Ponzi Scheme" Thats what a Judge recently said.
4. Organise with other cleaners who have been ripped-off. When you go to pick ip your paycheck talk to everyone.
5. Look for an attorney or Lawfirm. There is many pursuing lawsuits at this moment.
6. Picket and warn other people of this Scam!
6. If you call me I can give you a copy of the lawsuit and more information. Jerry 909-684-1837
|
|
Informed source
|
Dec 30, 2011
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, are you and the owner of unhappyfranchisee.com and Jonathan Fortman going to get together soon in St. Louis? If so, let me know and I will be more than happy to buy all three of you an ice tea! Heck, I'll even buy dinner... The owner of unhappyfranchisee.com is on food stamps and has to have a telethon at least twice per year to raise enough cash to keep things going. Fortman's got a car with 250K miles on it and he is your SAVIOR! Only reason Liss-Riordin isn't part of this issue is the fact she was smart enough to get SEIU and the union dues to pay her salary! Looking forward to 2012!
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Jan 10, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To lying source,
2012 is here and we are going to fight harder than ever. I will never give in until we get Justice. I think my congressman is going to be very interested in hearing of how these Ponzi Scheme cleaning rackets are ripping of many of his constituents. Oh and here is another article, hope you enjoy because I have more coming.
The following is an article from bluemaumau.org 12-31-2011
Shannon Liss-Riordan: Petite Sledgehammer
BOSTON — An attorney in a boutique Boston law firm, Lichten & Liss-Riordan PC, has gone after giants and won. Many with deep pockets, who employ some of the country's largest law firms, are licking their wounds and probably asking themselves if having been a little fairer in the first place may not have been the easiest route.
It's not just franchisors who are wary of her. Franchise owners too. She has won restaurant tip cases. Liss-Riordan focuses on class action litigation involving failure to pay wages, overtime, gratuities and minimum wage. She took on franchisors who pretended their employees were franchise owners.
Representing pole dancers, waitresses and newly immigrated franchisees, she is known as a champion of the little guy. Her legal wins have gained a reputation in the state, the country and the franchise world.
Her clients dub her "Sledgehammer Shannon."
In August of this year, attorney Liss-Riordan had the final win in a franchise case she was representing. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court smacked Coverall janitorial franchise system with a huge bill for labeling its employees franchisees. The high court ruled that the franchisor must pay back franchise-related fees, including promissory note payments, additional business fees, franchise fees and insurance payments.
Another Boston-based attorney, Seth Stadfeld, explains that janitorial services like Coverall find customers through the national office, call them, collect money and then give back to the franchisee what's left over. He explains that most franchisors aren't like Coverall. "The money flows uphill (franchisees collect money from customers and pay royalties up to their franchisor), while in Coverall and cleaning service franchises, the money flows downhill, " says Stadfeld. "In Coverall, the customer relationships flow downhill. It is the franchisors that determine whether you can service the customer or not. For purposes of independent contract status, that really is different."
Experts think the ruling that franchisees can be disguised employees will ripple down to other franchise systems and other states.
|
|
Informed source
|
Jan 10, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, now we are in 8 years since Liss-Riordin first took on the various cases that she has... How much money has actually been paid to the supposed "disenfranchised"? Absolutely ZERO! She has some legal victories, but at the end of the day, the only one with a judgement against them is poor old Aiwah! 1st amendment, you should be the one along with Liss-Riordin who should go to jail for deception. With a track record of calling everyone in, deceiving them into thinking the franchisor is the only reason for their failures in life, the only one responsible for them not making any money, the only one responsible for being on food stamps etc... What about Personal Responsibility? 2012 will be an interesting year for sure...
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 7, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To lying source its not 8 years its 3. You are such a liar and a COWARD because you are to chiken to say who you are. If you have been ripped-off by jan-pro there is several things that you can do.
1. File a complaints with the FTC Federal trade commisiion www.ftc.gov
2. File a report with your states attorney general and us attorney general
3. Talk to everyone that bought into the ponzi scheme and look for an attorney and take legal action
4. You can contact me Jerry at 909-684-1837 I can give you more information.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 9, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To Lying source,
Just so you know one of your favorate Lawyers was on the winning side of Justice in this LANDMARK and HISTORIC CASE!
Rhina Alvarenga v. Coverall of North America d/b/a Coverall Cleaning Concepts and Coverall of Boston. Sunrise Senior Living. Inc. d/b/a Sunrise of Arlington, et al (Superior Court, Middlesex County, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Case No. MICV2005-01782-A), filed on May 2, 2005 and Amended on August 8, 2005. Plaintiff, a former Coverall franchisee, filed this eleven count complaint against Coverall and one of its customers, Sunrise Senior Living, Inc. ("Sunrise"), variously alleging common law fraudulent inducement, and claimed damages in the amount of $19, 654.11; violation of the Massachusetts General Laws 93A; the right to rescission; breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; violation of the Massachusetts Minimum
Fair Wage Act; violation of timely payment of wages statute; overtime violations under the Massachusetts Minimum Fair Wages Act; and unjust enrichment. The case was settled and Coverall paid.
Not only that but they also had to pay Rhina Alvarenga unemployment benefits. Coverall didn't want to but Coverall lost in court again.
Coverall North America, Inc. v. Com’r of Div. of Unemployment, 447 Mass. 852 (2006) (amicus) (Supreme Judicial Court held that “franchisee” cleaning worker was employee entitled to unemployment compensation upon termination, not independent contractor)
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 9, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, per liss-riordin's own website, she states she met with and then decided to pursue a legal case against Coverall in 2004... Now I don't know how you count in your country of origin (Mexico), but here in the good ole USA we count from 2004 to 2012 as 8 Years... Hope you and Fortman have fun in the coming month's, I have a feeling this is coming to a head, sooner than later. Once Obama is voted out of office, your cases are history, because the money will be gone from SEIU!
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 16, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To Lying source,
The Rhina Alvarenga case was concluded back in 2006 it lasted 2 years. The case was won by Rhina Alvarenga. Thats 2 years! Then coverall tried to sue the Goverment LOL, LOL, LOL... The Judge scolded coverall and made them pay the Office of Unemployment and Rhina Alvarenga. The other case was filled in Massachusetts in 2007 so it hasn't been as long as you said. Either way it doesn't matter how long it takes what matters is that we eventually get Justice, Just like Rhina Alvarenga did.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 17, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, you absolute Moron, I'm talking about good ole Aiwah and liss-riordin. Not Alarenga. 2004 till 2012 is still 8 years. I know that in Mexico they don't speak or understand English, but at least you could get Fortman or someone in his office to translate for you...How's your case in California going? Not so well, think there is a common theme, NO WHERE ELSE BUT MASS! Now Fortman is trying to drag Masters into his lawsuit (pretty stupid) in order to gain some traction in Missouri...Pretty sure he is simply "yelling at windmills" and drinking Ice-Tea from the corner mart in his old, broken, beat down Mercedes and still avoiding his child support payments! But at least he has his current wife, former mistress, past employee to lean on in times of trouble.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 17, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To Lying source
Still afraid to give us your real name ? Can you tell us why you are so afraid to give us your real name? Why do you hide? I guees that is the way jan-crap and all the other fake cleaning franchisors do business, hide like rats in a cave.
The Pius Awuah case was filled in 2007. It doesn't matter how long it takes as long as we get JUSTICE just like Rhina Alvarenga did.
If you have been ripped-off by jan-pro there is several things that you can do.
1. File a complaints with the FTC Federal trade commisiion www.ftc.gov
2. File a report with your states attorney general and U.S attorney general.
3. Talk to everyone that bought into the ponzi scheme, look for an attorney and take legal action
4. You can contact me i'm Jerry and a plaintif you can call me at 909-684-1837 I can give you more information.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 19, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, you moron...Liss Riordin first met with the people in the awiah case in 2004. It does matter, and in fact as we still speak, the only one that has any type of judgement in the awiah case, is poor old, dumb, disgruntled, taken advantage of by liss-riordin and exploited by losers like you and Fortman is awiah... By the time the appeals are done, awaih will be back in his native country and still dirt poor thanks to you and liss-riordin.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 20, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
Lying source your a retard, the Pius Awuah case is diferent than the Rhina Alvarenga case and diferent from the other case settled in 2006. It's 3 diferent cases, two of them were settled a long time ago. You are either very stupid or a Big Dum Ass! Do you want me to post all 3 diferent ones?
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 20, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
The following article recently came out on the National Law Journal
Judge certifies class of cleaning workers misclassified as 'franchisees'
Sheri Qualters
The National Law Journal February 13, 2012
A Boston federal judge has certified as a class a broad swath of
purported franchisees of cleaning company Coverall North America
Inc. who are suing the company for misclassifying them as
independent contractors instead of employees.
In a Feb. 10 order in Awuah v. Coverall North America Inc., Judge
William Young of the District of Massachusetts defined the class as
individuals who owned a Coverall franchise and performed work for Coverall customers
in Massachusetts at any time since Feb. 15, 2004, who didn't sign an arbitration
agreement or have their claims previously adjudicated.
Young's recent ruling expanded the class he certified on Sept. 22, 2011, to include
some people who obtained a franchise through transfer. The class includes individuals
who became franchise owners through a consent-to-transfer agreement but did not
receive a copy of Coverall's franchise offering circular, which outlined terms of the
janitorial franchise agreements, including mandatory arbitration.
Eight named plaintiffs claimed in their February 2007 complaint that the company
misclassified franchisees as independent contractors. They also alleged Coverall did
not provide the promised volume of cleaning work to franchisees who paid $6, 000 to
$30, 000. And they claimed Coverall targeted immigrants who do not speak English as a
first language or fully understand the company's legal documents.
Since they are employees, the plaintiffs contend that the company is liable for minimum
wage, overtime and wage law violations. The legal claims include breach of contract,
misrepresentation, deceptive and unfair business practices and unjust enrichment. In March 2010, Young granted the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on the
misclassification claim. In that ruling, he found that Coverall did not meet the second
prong of the state's three-part test that defines independent contractors, which requires
workers to provide services that are "independent, separate and distinct" from the
employers' business.
The other two parts of the test require independent contractors to be "free from control
and direction in connection with the performance of the service" and customarily
engaged in the same trade, profession or occupation that they're doing contractually.
In his Feb. 10 ruling, Young expanded the class to include people who didn't sign an
arbitration agreement and get notice of the arbitration agreement, so "it's a pretty
straightforward commonsense ruling, " said one of the plaintiffs' lawyers on the case,
Shannon Liss-Riordan of Boston's Lichten & Liss-Riordan. "People can't be bound by an
arbitration agreement that they didn't get notice of or a copy of."
Liss-Riordan said the plaintiffs are looking forward to Young's pending ruling on the
"illusoriness" or validity of Coverall's arbitration agreement. "We have challenged the
arbitration agreement as a whole, " Liss-Riordan said.
She also said the case "raises very interesting questions about whether companies
really want to compel hundreds of individuals to go to arbitration or [whether they] are
they hoping they can deter people."
"This case is showing these issues are not going to go away, " Liss-Riordan said." It's
going to be even more expensive and complicated [for companies]."
The plaintiffs have filed a motion for summary judgment on damages, which is slated for
hearing on Feb. 14, based on Young's March 2010 ruling. They're seeking several types
of damages, including: $916, 844.65 for initial franchise fees and additional business
fees; $894, 433.78 for insurance deductions: $106, 535.77 for funds collected to offset
unpaid customer bills; and $122, 932.25 for interest on late payments.
The plaintiffs are also asking for triple damages based on a 2008 amendment to the
Massachusetts law concerning unpaid wages that allowed for the increase in damages.
Aside from that change, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled in 2005
in Wiedmann v. The Bradford Group that courts can treble damages for unpaid wages
when there is a showing of "outrageous[ness], because of a defendant's evil motive
or…reckless indifference" to workers' rights."
"He'll either assess the damages based on the papers or will have a trial in March to
determine those damages for the class members, " Liss-Riordan said.
Liss-Riordan said those amounts don't include fees paid by class members before
February 2004 and after June 2010, or fees paid by the class members added by Young's Feb. 10 ruling. Neither fee category has been calculated, she said.
Lawyers at DLA Piper who represent Coverall were not available to discuss the case.
Coverall did not respond to a request for comment.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 21, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, OK? As I've said all along, What happens in MASS, is the only place it is going to happen. If you think Coverall is going to do anything else but the following: You are a bigger fool than Fortman:
a) Appeal 1st ruling by Young
b) Appeal 2nd ruling by Young
c) Appeal MASS Supreme Judicial Ruling
d) If loses any/all of the above, offer peanuts for settlement
e) File for Bankruptcy in MASS and Plantiffs get nothing, because Liss-Riordin and her SEIU friends come 1st...
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 24, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, the above, plus the sum of $1.00 will buy you and Fortman an iced-tea!!! As we still "speak", Coverall has not paid one cent to any of the "plantiffs" in the case! I can post one year from now, two years from now, five years from now and this will still be a true statement...You know what will also be true? Obama won't be President, SEIU will be investigated for misuse of union dues, liss-riordin will move on to chasing down strippers in other states for collective bargaining rights!
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 29, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To lying source,
Law suits are getting filled all over the country in many different states. There also getting filled in other countries like the Uk, Australia and Canada. It's only a mater of time before all the people at corporate are arrested and put in Prison.
Richard Kissane the president of jan-pro knows what is going on. When jan-pro was exposed on Television for ripping of all of those cleaning ladies he said he would take care of the situation and rectify the mater and he never did. HE LIED !!! Richard Kissane is part of this Ponzi Scheme and needs to be put in Prison!
Webster Capitol bought jan-pro a few years ago. They took investors money to buy jan-pro. I don't think that Investors are going to be very happy with the purchase that Donald Steiner managing partner, Rob long senior general partner, david malm senior general partner, charles larkin general partner, andrew mcgee general partner, kyle hynden senior associate, jenny betzwieser senior associate, mark greene chief financial officer, or sarah mcbride associate. I dont know why Webster Capitol continues to let jan-pro and it's president Richard kissane and the other people in his cave run things when they constantly continue to run a Ponzi Scheme!
Thousands of us who got ripped off by jan-pro and webster capitol are coming together and we are growing in numbers everyday. We will continue our Fight until we get JUSTICE!
|
|
Informed source
|
Mar 7, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
As 1st amendment and Jonathan Fortman continue down the path of Moronic Sublime, let me be the first to tell them both what will happen with Monday's Ruling in MASS:
a) Judge will award approx. 6 million in damages to Plantiffs
b) DLA Piper will file appeal that is still open in previous judgement file
c) After Coverall loses that appeal, probably within 90 days, Coverall will file for bankruptcy protection in MASS, because the holding company that oversse's the state of Mass for Coverall, is seperate from actual Coverall Corp. Structure. At end of day, Plantiff's will get next to nothing, SEIU got nothing but alot of pain for no gain as their will be detailed questions about the mis-use of union dues, Liss-Riordin got SEIU's money and she got the "bump" as being a "bulldog" for pursuing this money loser of a case, 1st amendment will be able to thump his chest, but at end of day, he will get nothing, because he has no "standing" in the Coverall Case and Fortman after making himself out to be a complete MORON on numerous levels, will say his case against Stratus is different, forgetting that even his "non-sense" in regards to Masters being taken hostage by Stratus Corp. will have failed in Missouri court system on lack of merit.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Mar 12, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To Lying source,
We are hopeful that Judge Young will do the right thing. Just for your information Young was nominated by President Ronald Reagan on March 8, 1985. This shows that even a conservative appointed Judge knows a Ponzi Scheme when he sees one.
Even when a company files for bankrupcy it doesn't mean that they are off the hook. They don't just walk away.They will pay or be forced to. They will be arrested and put in prison if they don't comply. Assets will be seized. However the most important thing is that no more people will be ROBED of there life savings. They will pay eventually. We will also not stop there. We will also keep pursuing them until these people go to PRISON just like Madoff got 100 years in PRISON so should the people at corporate! They were running a PONZI SCHEME and people who run PONZI SCHEMES go to PRISON !
To Lying Source I don't know who you are and you wont tell us because you are afraid, you are Scared. However if I ever find out who you are and If I find out that you are someone at corporate trust me I will do everything that I can so that you are charged with FRAUD and put in PRISON !
|
|
Informed source
|
Mar 14, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, It doesn't matter who was nominated him for his postion, in MASS there are nothing but Liberals, Full of Liberal bias, Complete with Liberal leanings, look at Scott Brown, look at Mitt Romney, both CLAIM to be Republicans, both are nothing but Moderate Democrats! In regards to Bankruptcy, even Fortman knows better, Liss-riordin already knows what is going to happen and in all honesty, between the SEIU money already in her coffers, the publicity and additional STATUS she has gotten from fighting this "good fight" she has made millions for herself and her firm! In regards to me, who I am, what I do, who I work for is really none of your business...I've been right more times than wrong...I seem to know more about things than you do as an "insider" with liss-riordin and supposidly the "lead plantiff of a class action against Jan-Pro". As I've stated to Fortman (the loser that he is) anytime you decide to "man up" then "cum get sum"!
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Mar 19, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To lying source,
You still wont tell us who you are. I guees you are SCARED! By the way its really funny how you say "man up to get some " How ever you wont say who you are? You continue to hide like a Rat in a cave. You are the one who wont man up.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Mar 19, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
Great NEWS ! Finally getting JUSTICE !
The Judge has ruled. You can read part of the here and go to the link that I have put here.
http://www.bluemaumau.org/11385/coverall_pay_triple_damages
Coverall to Pay Triple Damages Posted Sat, 2012/03/17 - 21:53 by Janet Sparks
BOSTON – A federal judge ruled last Thursday that Coverall North America must pay triple damages to hundreds of workers classified as franchisees instead of employees, dating back from 2006. Previously, he had ruled that the court would triple damages from 2010. That changes the calculation of damages dramatically, adding the four year period.
In addition to the award on damages, the global janitorial cleaning franchisor will have to pay all the initial franchise fees and additional business fees, as well as recovering insurance deductions. The judge said those fees were unlawful and can be recovered as provided by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan of Lichten & Liss-Riordan, representing the class plaintiffs, said they were excited about the order. “We are very pleased that the workers who did not have arbitration agreements will be getting a judgment, and can finally see a conclusion to their case, ” she declared.
Liss-Riordan said the parties were given 30 days to submit what final calculations are based on from this order. She added, “We are now looking forward to the judge’s further rulings on the workers who had arbitration agreements. That will be the next step.”
The case, Awuah v Coverall North America Inc., has been closely watched by the franchise community since it began in 2007. The original complaint filed by eight purported franchisees alleges that they were misclassified as independent contractors instead of the reality of being employees. They accused Coverall of not providing the promised volume of cleaning contracts to them after they paid $6, 000 to $30, 000.
As employees, the plaintiffs assert that Coverall is also liable for minimum wage, overtime and wage law violations. In the lawsuit, the employees claim breach of contract, misrepresentation, deceptive and unfair business practices and unjust enrichment.
While there has been much activity with both sides filing various motions in the case for the past three weeks, U.S. District Judge William G. Young’s order took care of several other housekeeping issues. He did not rule on fifteen additional class members who converted their businesses to Coverall franchises without receiving a franchise offering circular containing arbitration clauses. Nor did he rule on other class members who signed releases after August 31, 2011.
DLA Piper, outside counsel to Coverall, did not respond to our request for comment on Thursday’s order.
IFA’s past warning
The International Franchise Association submitted an amicus (friend of the court) brief in the case last June through attorneys Eric Karp and Doris Fournier of Witmer, Karp, Warner & Ryan LLP in Boston. It was filed jointly on behalf of the IFA and two of its franchisor members, Friendly’s Restaurants Franchise and Fantastic Sam’s Franchise Corporation.
The organization warned the litigation could result in franchisors determining that the costs of doing business in Massachusetts are too high in comparison to other states. The brief surmised that it would leave many entrepreneurs without the chance to start their own business and many residents without employment opportunities or access to important products and services.
IFA President & CEO Steve Caldeira stated at that time, “On behalf of the franchise industry, we urge the court to fully take into account the unique attributes of franchising and the federal regulatory oversight of the franchise business model.”
The court disagreed.
Now, after five years of litigation, plaintiff attorney Liss-Riordan exclaimed, “It’s looking like we are finally seeing the end of the road here, at long last.”
Related Articles:
Coverall Doomed in Disguising Workers as Owners
Judge certifies class of cleaning workers misclassified as 'franchisees'
Franchisor Hit Hard for Pretending Employees Are Franchisees
IFA Amicus Warns of Franchisees Classified as Employees
IFA Warns States Not to Interfere with Contracts
Coverall Ruling Sends Shiver through Franchising
Coverall Not Over on Employee Status
Massachusetts Franchisee Sues Cleaning Firm
Federal Judge: Franchising Sounds Like Ponzi Scheme
|
|
Informed source
|
Mar 24, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
1st amendment, poor bastard...Your second best "hero" Richard Solomon, just informed you on Blue Mau Mau that your hero and her clients will get absolutely nothing by the time it is all said and done. You have been drinking the Kool-Aid thinking that you are going to be a millionaire and now all of a sudden, your world has begun to crumble. Really a sad moment for you isn't it.? I almost feel sorry for you, all your dreams, all your hopes, all your promises are fading away fast...
Maybe you can get Fortman to comfort you, take you for a ride in his old Mercedes that has over 250k miles on it, buy you an ice-tea and tell you how wonderful his life is as he is paying his back child support, finding himself another girlfriend in his office etc...
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Mar 25, 2012
|
owners are brain dead
To lying source you still wont tell us your name or who you are? Why are you so scared. Don't you get tired of hiding like a Rat in a Cave.
I noticed that you joined bluenaunau LOL. I see that you are trying to do some Damage control LOL. I noticed you call yourself churn LOL. Thats the word that coverall, jan-pro and janiking use to steal accounts from people.
|
|
|
|
|
