Jan-pro |
| United States |
|
|
Consumer reviews about Jan-pro |
|
Informed source
|
Dec 17, 2011
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Fortman, it must be killing you now that unhappy franchisee.com has pulled you off their header and moved onto another favorite Matco tools. Must really burn you that at every turn, negative things seem to be happening to you and your lawsuit. Guess even your freind 1st amendment has disappeared... Sorry for you, as stated before, just a loser!
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Dec 26, 2011
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To Lying source I see that you are still SCARED to give us your Name. Why are you so SCARED ? Lying source why do you hide ? Why don't you say who you are ??? Why do you hide like a Rat in a Cave ??? Will you be a man and tell us your name or will you keep hiding like a COWARD ? You know my name, you have my number and my adress. However you won't say who you are. All you do is hide like a Rat in a Cave with a fake name.
To anyone who has been ripped-off by jan-pro or any other cleaning franchise don't let these criminals get away with this crime. Don't let them intimidate you. 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
I think that they will be interested when you tell them that they are in violation of the Rico Raqueteering Laws
3. File a complaint with www.Fraud.org
3. Talk to everyone, talk to other cleaners, organise and look for an attormey.
Feel free to call me. I'm a lead plaintif in a National Class Action Lawsuit against jan-pro. I can give you a copy of the lawsuit and more information. We also plan to picket infront of jan-pros offices.
Jerry
909-684-1837
|
|
Informed source
|
Dec 26, 2011
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
1st amendment, aka I love America, aka Dude Love, aka Jerry Vasquez...Glad to see that you got back into the country again! No boarder control could ever stop you, regardless of what Obama or Sotomeyer says or does... Did Fortman ever buy you an iced tea and bring you to St. Louis for your deposition?
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Dec 28, 2011
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To Lying source, Your still avoiding the QUESTION? What is your real name? Why dont you tell us 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 complaint 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 up 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 I also plan to picket jan-pro offices. Call me so that we can picket there offices I will also send you more information about the Lawsuit and give you a copy.
Call me Jerry 909-684-1837
|
|
Informed source
|
Dec 30, 2011
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
1st amendment, saw that your friend at unhappyfranchisee.com got threatened by Jan-Pro and had to pull their logo information and cry like the little girl that he is! What a big man, maybe he should have contacted Fortman, I'm sure he would have protected him from big, bad Jan-Pro. Why don't you own up to all the "viewers" here and let them know how poorly your lawsuit is going, how many years and how much money it has cost SEIU and how much you have gotten from Jan-Pro!
Again, glad you are back in the country, don't worry ICE won't show up anytime soon for you...Liss-Riordin and her SEIU buddies will protect you..
|
|
Informed source
|
Jan 11, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
1st amendment/Jonathan Fortman, both of you sound so pathetic in your responses to posts now on that cowards website known as unhappyfranchisee.com Both of you that were one-time "darlings" for him are now cast aside as MATCO tools and others are more interesting. Even "guest" is now having more fun with MATCO than you.
Fortman, how's your case going? Know you were denied class action filing, know you were fined/admonished by judge for your play outside the St. Louis area with the letters. Know that you aren't getting the kind of response you'd hoped/thought from Liss-Riordin and SEIU.
1st amendment, you are a liar and a coward. Don't know how you sleep at night as you mislead disgruntled former franchise owners down a path of lies and dispair! You should be ashamed of yourself. Tell people the truth, that lawsuits by Liss-Riordin have been going on for 8 years, that to date ZERO monies have exchanged hands from any Franchise Company to any former franchise owner since this "witch hunt" has started.
|
|
Informed source
|
Jan 14, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Fortman, Poor Bastard and I mean that with as much disrespect as possible...You had to take down the lies in regards to your supposed "class action" against Stratus. Is 1st amendment smart enough to understand why? No...Let me draw you a picture that even 1st Amendment and SEIU loving Liss-Riordin can understand, You can't because there is not a valid reason too...In other words, other than the extreme Left/Socialist/Marxist/Communist State of MASS, no one else has a thought process that Franchising, especially commercial cleaning franchising has done anything wrong!
Fortman can't even get enough responses when he tries to do thing illegally and continues to make posts that are half-hearted attempts for him to think he is relavant somehow... So know he is going after Liberty Tax and others in the Tax Business. So what brainless moron steered you in that direction? Let me guess, the ever successful owner of unhappyfranchisee.com
Come on Fortman, post here again at least through your "partner" 1st amendment, let me and everyone else hear how wonderful you are, how your case is going/not going, how everyone should fear you as much as Liss-Riordin... The only reason to fear Liss-Rioridin is when the funnel of money coming from SEIU starts drying up even more than it is... Let's see then how many phone calls she returns to her old friend 1st amendment.
1st Amendment and Jonathan Fortman are both liars and cowards...
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 3, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To Lying source, the only little crying girl is you because you are to afraid to say who you are or your real name. The complaints on unhappyfranchisee.com are still up. Yes all 600 Post are still up and gues what more complaints keep getting posted. jan-crap I mean jan-pro Threatened people including veterans in the Millitary, families, immigrants and single Mom's. If you look at the video when jan-crap was exposed on Television for Ripping of so many people they had Ladies who had there faces covered because jan-pro had threatened them. For your information the lawsuits continue and there going very well. Oh and also please post your complaints on www.unhappyfranchisee.com you can add to the 600+ complaints on there.
If you have been ripped-off by jan-pro one thing that you should do immediatelly is file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission www.Ftc.gov They gave the authority to shut down jan-pro, raid there offices, and arrest them with police enforcement and the FBI. Please file a complaint.
If you have been ripped-off by jan-pro feel free to call me My name is Jerry and you can call me at 909-684-1837.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 3, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To lying source, The lawsuit against stratus has been filled. The only Coward is you because you wont say your real name or tell us who you are. You know my name will you tell us yours or will you keep being a COWARD!
February 1, 2012
Attorney Jonathan Fortman filed suit in Missouri yesterday seeking certification of a nationwide class of all Stratus Building Solutions unit franchisees.
According to Fortman, “We are simply asking the court to declare that under Missouri law, the Stratus Master Franchisees are captive agents of Stratus (based on Stratus’ level of control) and not independent contractors.”
Fortman says “We are also asking the court to declare that Stratus Building Solutions and its franchising company have conspired to defraud both the master and the unit franchisees into purchasing into a system they knew, based on their experience in St. Louis, could not be sustained.”
The Stratus Master Franchise Agreements require that the agreement be interpreted under Missouri law. If the Missouri judge rules in Fortman’s favor, he will be well-positioned to file group action lawsuits throughout the country on behalf of Stratus Building Solutions franchise owners.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 3, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
1st amendment, you and Fortman are both idiots...His lawsuit is being dismissed almost as soon as it was filed...Just as the previous attempt to have his suit labled as "class action" this too shall fail...You know, there are alot of similarities between you and Fortman...Both of you "leap" before you think. 8years later, NO MONEY has exhanged hands from the franchise companies to the supposed disinfranchised former owner-operators including yourself!!! Fortman is still driving a vechicle with 250K miles, buying dollar ice tea, behind on child support payments, getting advice on how to speak from his children and yelling at windmills!
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 7, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To lying source, Coward you still wont tell us your name ??? Why wont you tell us your real name? Why do you hide ?
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 7, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To Lying source, the lawsuits are going well and more are getting filled. Lawsuits against jan-pro have been won! Many have been settled out of court and others have gotten all of there money back.
If you have been ripped-off by jan-pro there is a few things that you can do.
1. File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission www.ftc.gob
2. File a report with your states attorney General and also the US attorney general.
3. Talk to everyone that works for jan-pro they have all been ripped-off then look for an attorney and take legal action.
3. Feel free to call me I can give you more information Jerry 909-684-1837
|
|
Jonathan E. Fortman
|
Feb 9, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Informed Source, you are a complete moron. You work for a company that defrauds and steals from people. Does that make you feel like a big man?? Check out the Contours case now. You can find the information on my LinkedIn page that you check every week. Justice prevailed in that case and justice will prevail against your employer. I would much rather take advice from my kids than you. At least they have some morals and know right from wrong. I may drive a Mercedez with 250, 000 miles on it, but at least it didn't come from money made by screwing people. Can you say the same? Your whole organization is based upon selling franchises to people even though you have no accounts to give them. You work for a Master that is losing money because the system was doomed to fail. You spout off all the rhetoric you want because, in the end, your company will have to explain how it is that so many of its franchisees have the exact same story of fraud. You should reveal to everyone your identity and the company that employs such an idiot. You won't because you're a coward and really have nothing to say. I look forward to deposing you at some point in the future. Take care.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 9, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
1st amendment, don't you ever get tired of whining, where's your personal responsibility? I know that you are an Obama supporter, that you believe that you are "owed" something by everyone elses blood/sweat/tears. I would think you would at least been smart enough to make something from the SEIU goons that you love so much that are paying liss-riordin and her croonies. But after reading all your blathering posts, I see that you are not...Stupid, but that is why you keep going back and forth to Mexico.
Fortman, you are a joke, you were a joke with contours, you are a joke now. Your amended case will fail just like your first case did, Why? Because it is only one-side of the story, I've learned from decades in business that there are always at least two sides. You on the other hand, can't support your children (your own words) yet, you call me a loser! Come on, be a man, you need to step up to the plate and get some real lawsuits coming in, those that will actually pay you and win! I know you are hoping to get some of the gravy that liss-riordin and her cronies are getting, but guess what? They think you are a second-tier attorney as well. I've told you more than once, if you think you know who I am, Cum Get Sum! But you are still hiding behind your children, cowering in the corner and waiting for them to tell you what I just said in a language you can understand... By the way, thought you were "banned" by the judge for visting and posting on these site?
|
|
Jonathan E. Fortman
|
Feb 10, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Informed Source, we'll be meeting soon enough. Only it will be on my playing field. Your company is either feeding you all a line of crap or you make up whatever pops into that empty head of yours. I haven't been banned, fined or anything else. The truth is always a defense. Everything I say is backed up with facts. You wouldn't know that because the truth is something that doesn't matter in your industry. Both the cases against your company are still pending. Nothing has been dismissed. The war is just beginning. Get your facts straight, moron.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 10, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Fortman, empty words, empty threats, empty promises. No crap, just facts. Your case is no where, that is why you had to amend it! Though I know it is uncommon for an attorney (especially one on as low of the food chain as you) to tell the truth, just simply tell everyone on this post where your case stands? Again, you make threats against me, that you are going to see me soon enough? Really? If you think you know who I am, then why don't you have me served with something? Wait a second, you can't, because you got "punished" for going outside your little circle of St. Louis...Just like the garbage that liss-riordin isn't flying outside of MASS, yours won't fly either! Spin your wheels, waste people's time, tug on their emotions and still end up with zero...Both you and them...Keep trying to get that money from SEIU, I would actually think more of you as a businessman if you do!
|
|
Jonathan E. Fortman
|
Feb 10, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Informed Source, you are such an idiot. I'm tired of toying with you. Go back to playing with your Star Wars collection or whatever else a mindless twit like you does in their spare time.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 11, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Fortman, oh so you are going to take your marbles and leave again! You supposidly did this one time before and now you are back again for more...Just like you idiotic statements in court, another idiotic statement from you today...Again, you and 1st amendment are the real thieves, the real liars in this thread! Promise things you can't/won't deliver, sucking more people into your little world of half-truth's and out and out lies, promise them that you are going to help, telling them that everyone else is to blame for bad things that have happened to them, the big/rich/profitable businessman is to blame for taking their money and not giving them 2x more, 3x more, 10x more than that back. Here's some basic food for thought you moron, business is business, there are no guarantee's in business other than an opportunity, what you make of that opportunity is entirely up to you...For every person you claim has been wronged, I can point to at least a hundred that have made it, that have changed their families lives, that has bought that new car, bought that first house, has made a success of the opportunity that they were given by purchasing a franchise...You better than all are an example that just because you finished law school doesn't automatically make you a millionaire, look at you, you can't even take care of your own kids financially, what am I to blame for that as well? YOU are in direct control of your own destiny, do things as advised, build and handle business the right way, you will be succesful, don't you will lose everything! Capitalism is GREAT! I'm sure you will use my words here to your friends at occupy St.Louis and San Bernadino respectfully. Send them to liss-riordin while your at it, only difference between you and her, she's a closet capitalist, at least she was smart enough to get into SEIU's pocketbook and fill her coffers with money...You pathetic ambulance chaser!
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 11, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Fortman, can't wait until we tangle in court as you call it "your turf". Your a moron here in the blogoshere, even the nearly bankrupt, totally worthless owner of unhappyfranchisee.com doesn't help you much. Did you ever stop to think why he has to adverstise as he is holding a Jerry Lewis Telethon a couple of times per year in order to stay afloat? No, I guess you didn't as you are still driving and supposidly proud to drive a beat up 250k miles Mercedes. Did more research on you, sorry to hear about your son (really am by the way, no child deserves to have cancer, regardless of who their dad is) Glad to hear you stopped getting drunk and arrested as well, that's not a good thing either, makes it difficult to focus, however it is the primary point that I'm making about you being a moron, it is obvious as to why your brain cells are completely firing and why/how your elevator doesn't go all the way to the top. So you cheated on your wife with one of your employee's, not too smart/cool either, but at least it sounds like you made an honest woman out of her! Now to the point of the legal argument...Oops, sorry run out of time, will have to do more posting later...
|
|
Jonathan E. Fortman
|
Feb 11, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Informed Source, you are a pathetic loser.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 12, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
Fortman, couldn't even hold your emotions in check for less than a day...That's your downfall, even if you were able to call me for a deposition, I would make a complete fool out of you...You'd lose your cool, you'd lose focus, you'd lose! Stick with the half-wits like 1st amendment who think the world OWES them something! Capitalism is a wonderful thing, pitty you're too lazy and stupid to realize it...But lets get something straight, I AM NOT TO BLAME for people that cannot listen, cannot grow, doesn't have the attention span of a fly (like you)! I go back to the stupidity of yours and liss-riordins argument against the franchise system, for every one "disgruntled, unhappy, lazy, worthless former franchisee you can bring to a court" I can show at least 50 to 100 happy, profitable, working, life-changing one's! IT'S ABOUT INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILTY! Things that you and the occupy wall street and 1st amendment idiots don't grasp!
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 16, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To Lying source,
I see that you still wont tell us your NAME? Why are you so SCARED to tell us your NAME? It looks like you are still a COWARD for not telling us your NAME.
This is a long list of the so many Lawsuits and settlements against cleaning franchisors ! It's only a partial list. I will post more later.
Jesus H, Castro and Herschand Co. v. The Kover Group. Inc. dba Coverall of South Florida. Mauro R. Guerra. individually, and Management Risk Group.iFinancial Corp.. (Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida, Case No. 97-8090-CA21), filed April 11, 1997. Plaintiffs allege breach of contract, rescission of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation. They claim they purchased a franchise and were not provided the appropriate amount of business. The plaintiffs claim damages in excess of $100, 000. We have denied all allegations of wrongdoing. The plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint in November 1997. The case was settled on August 24, 2007, and Coverall agreed to pay the Plaintiffs $20, 000.
Yared Bevene. et al v. Coverall of [sic] North America. Inc, , , Pacific Commercial Services. LLC. Coverall Cleaning Concepts and Coverall of Nashville. Inc. (Davidson County, Tennessee, Case No. 06-1202), filed May 12, 2006. There were five named plaintiffs who purported to be franchisees of Coverall or Coverall''s Service Franchisee, Pacific Commercial Services, LLC ("PCS")- The plaintiffs alleged violations of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, fraud in the inducement, and negligent misrepresentation. The case was removed to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on June 22, 2006 and assigned Case No. 3:06-0628. Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on October 17, 2006 adding two additional plaintiffs. Mediation was held on September 13, 2007, and the case was settled. Coverall paid the seven Plaintiffs, five putative plaintiffs, and their attorney $37, 500.
Jubilee General Contracting LTD. et al v. Coverall North America, Inc.. et al. (State of Michigan, County of Oakland), Case No. 07-080927-C2, filed February 20, 2007. Plaintiffs claim that they were fraudulently induced to accept two cleaning contracts; because they were shown documents by Defendant JLAG Janitorial Service, LLC that contained erroneous data about expenses related to the two accounts. On September 6, 2007, Coverall paid the plaintiffs the sum of $14, 200.00; and plaintiffs waived their right to appeal, and the case was dismissed with prejudice on July 25, 2007.
Isam Yonis v. Coverall North America. Inc., (Circuit Court of Williamson County, Tennessee, Case No. 04695), filed November 9, 2004. Plaintiff filed a one count Complaint alleging unspecified violations of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. We filed a Motion for More Definite Statement, which was never answered. The case was settled on January 8, 2007 for $12, 500. The case was dismissed with prejudice on January 26, 2007.
Bradley Carter v. Coverall North America. Inc. (Broward County, Florida, Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Case No. Case No. 06-011532(08), filed on August 2, 2006. Coverall moved to dismiss the Complaint in its entirety. In lieu of a response, Carter filed a First Amended Complaint (the "Amended Complaint") on October 9, 2006. The Amended Complaint alleged breach of contract and violation of �559 of the Florida Statutes pertaining to business opportunities. Coverall moved to dismiss the complaint based upon failure to engage in mediation, statute of limitations grounds and the inapplicability of �559 of the Florida Statutes to franchises. The parties mediated the dispute on December 19, 2006 and Coverall paid the Plaintiff $20, 000. The case was dismissed with prejudice on December 26, 2006.
Machado. et al v. Coverall North America. Inc. (U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts, Case No. 05 CA 11884 RGS), filed September 16, 2005. Plaintiffs, eleven current and former franchisees, filed this purported class action variously claiming that they were misclassified as independent contractors and that they were or are employees of Coverall; breach of their Janitorial Franchise Agreements; misrepresentations regarding the time necessary to clean customer accounts and the location of customer accounts; underbidding of customer contracts; and unfairly targeting franchise candidates with limited English language skills. Coverall filed arbitration demands against ten of the Plaintiffs. The case was settled and Coverall paid $300, 000. The case was dismissed with prejudice on December 19, 2006; as were all pending claims filed by Coverall against the Plaintiffs.
"Vazquez, et al v. Security Insurance Company of Hartford, (District Court, 166th Judicial District, Bexar County, Texas, Case No. 2004-C1-17880), filed on December 3, 2004. Coverall was one of seven defendants. Plaintiffs, former franchisees of ASK Services, Inc., a former Service Franchisee of ours, claimed that we violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act by instigating a scheme to "profit from premiums paid by Plaintiffs" to participate in a workers'' compensation program. None of the named Plaintiffs ever paid anything to us. The case was settled and the case was dismissed with prejudice on January 24, 2006. Coverall contributed $13, 000 to the settlement.
Jamil Abuajina v. Advantage Cleaning Corporations, Coverall North America. Inc.. (Jefferson County, Colorado, District Court, Case. No. 03CV1181), filed April 18, 2003. Jamil Abuajina, a Coverall franchisee, variously claimed that Coverall breached the Janitorial Franchise Agreement by failing to provide him with sufficient accounts to service and by providing him with troubled accounts. Abuajina also alleged violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act claiming that Coverall made false representations to him about the accounts it would provide to him. The case was settled and Coverall paid $30, 000. The case was dismissed with prejudice on November 22, 2005.
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.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 17, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To Lying source,
Why wont you tell us your name? What are you hiding ? Why do you HIDE like a Rat in a CAVE ? Will you tell us your name or will you keep hiding like a mouse?
Here is a list of more lawsuits against these rip-off Scams or like a Judge recently called them Modified Ponzi schemes!
Fartun Farah v. Coverall North America. Inc., (Court of Common Pleas, Franklin County, Ohio, Division of Domestic Relations Case No. 03CVH-08-8982), filed August 15, 2003. Plaintiff, a Coverall franchisee, variously claimed that Coverall breached the Janitorial Franchise Agreement by failing to provide adequate training or sufficient customer accounts to service and that Coverall used deceptive practices. Plaintiff also alleged that Coverall violated Chapter 1334 of the Ohio Revised Code claiming that Coverall failed to provide Plaintiff with notice of cancellation. Plaintiff sought compensatory damages in the amount of $25, 000.00 and punitive damages of $25, 000.00, plus attorney''s fees and costs. The case was settled and coverall paid on November 19, 2004.
Ralph Drinkwater v. Coverall North America. Inc.. (District Court Department Maiden Division Commonwealth of Massachusetts Case No. 04-1048), filed August 10, 2004. Plaintiff, a Coverall franchisee, alleged Coverall breached the Janitorial Franchise Agreement and that Coverall used deceptive practices. Plaintiff also alleged that Coverall violated Chapter 93A of the Massachusetts General Laws, Part I, Title XV, Regulation of Business Practices for Consumer Protection, by failing to provide sufficient customer accounts. Plaintiff sought damages in excess of $38, 000. Coverall paid and case was settled.
Smajil Chaiic v. Coverall North America. Inc.. (Associate Circuit Court of the County of St. Louis, Missouri, Case NO. 04AC-20843), filed August 16, 2004. Plaintiff alleged breach of contract and fraud claiming that he purchased a franchise and was not provided with the appropriate amount of business. Plaintiff claimed damages in the amount of $8, 500.00, plus attorney''s fees. Coverall denied all claims, and the case was settled for $6, 000.00. On September 22, 2004 the case was dismissed with prejudice.
Ismarv Diaz v. Coverall North America. Inc.. (Circuit Court for Hillsborough County Florida, General Civil Division, Case No. 97 06827), filed October 1, 1997. Plaintiff, a former Coverall franchisee, claimed that Coverall did not timely provide him with business accounts after relocating his franchise from Milwaukee, Wisconsin to the Tampa, Florida area; that we attempted to terminate his franchise without cause; and that we misled him by failing to reveal facts regarding the franchise. He asked that we pay him unspecified compensatory, punitive and treble damages. We denied any and all wrongdoing and stated that plaintiffs franchise had been terminated for cause. On May 3, 1999, this case was settled without any admission of wrongdoing by us. Accordingly, we paid plaintiff $7, 000, and he released all claims against Coverall, and dismissed this lawsuit with prejudice.
Maria Valencia, et al v. Coverall North America. Inc.. et al.fSuperior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles County, Central District, Case No.BC279578), filed August 13, 2002. Plaintiff, variously claimed that Coverall through its agent utilized high-pressure sales techniques, made earnings claims, provided plaintiff with customer accounts that were underbid and unprofitable, and took customer accounts away from plaintiff without cause for the purpose of selling these accounts to other franchisees. We denied all claims. On December 20, 2002, the case was settled and coverall paid $45, 000.00.
Vince Lynn. Milton Tyrone Watson, Sr. and Milton Tyrone Watson, Jr. vs. Coverall North America. Inc.. (District Court of Harris County, Texas, Case Number 200041147), filed August 2000. Plaintiffs Vince Lynn, Milton Tyrone Watson, Sr. and Milton Tyrone Watson, Jr., were Coverall franchisees in the Houston, Texas area. Plaintiffs alleged that we made false representations and warranties and asserted claims against us for breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, detrimental reliance, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Plaintiffs sought a refund of their initial franchise fees, forgiveness of their notes, unspecified economic damages, pre and post judgment interest, exemplary damages, court costs, attorney''s fees, and unspecified damages under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. On April 30, 2001, a settlement was entered into by which we paid the plaintiffs a total of Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30, 000.00), plaintiffs released all claims against us, and the case was dismissed "with prejudice."
Augustine Perez v. Coverall North America. Inc.. (Superior Court Civil Action No. 98-6549A, Commonwealth of Massachusetts), filed December 23, 1998, Plaintiff was a franchisee of MM&J Corporation, the Coverall Service Franchise for the Boston area until July 1995, when we reacquired certain assets of MM&J. In 1997, in a lawsuit which plaintiff filed against MM&J (in which we were not named as a party), plaintiff obtained a default judgment against MM&J in the amount of $58, 904.80. In January 1999, we were served with this new suit by Mr. Perez, claiming we are the successor and/or "alter ego" of MM&J and are thus liable on the above judgment. On October 2, 2000, a settlement agreement was entered into by which Coverall, without admitting any wrongdoing, paid plaintiff $55, 000. The matter was then dismissed with prejudice.
Mario Hercules, et al.. v. Coverall North America. Inc.. et al.. (Superior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles County, Central District, Case No. BC 272959), filed April 29, 2002.�� Plaintiffs, nine current and former franchisees, variously claimed that Coverall through its agents utilized high-pressure sales techniques, made earnings claims, provided plaintiffs with customer accounts that were underbid and unprofitable, and took customer accounts away from plaintiffs without cause for the purpose of selling the customer accounts to other franchisees. On January 27, 2003, Coverall filed its Answer and Cross Complaint denying all allegations of wrong doing. On July 21, 2003 coverall agreed to settle all claims for a payment of $450, 000.
|
|
1st Amendment
|
Feb 17, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
To Lying source,
Why wont you tell us your name? What are you hiding ? Why do you HIDE like a Rat in a CAVE ? Will you tell us your name or will you keep hiding like a mouse?
Here is a list of more lawsuits against these rip-off Scams or like a Judge recently called them Modified Ponzi schemes!
Ismarv Diaz v. Coverall North America. Inc.. (Circuit Court for Hillsborough County Florida, General Civil Division, Case No. 97 06827), filed October 1, 1997. Plaintiff, a former Coverall franchisee, claimed that Coverall did not timely provide him with business accounts after relocating his franchise from Milwaukee, Wisconsin to the Tampa, Florida area; that we attempted to terminate his franchise without cause; and that we misled him by failing to reveal facts regarding the franchise. He asked that we pay him unspecified compensatory, punitive and treble damages. We denied any and all wrongdoing and stated that plaintiffs franchise had been terminated for cause. On May 3, 1999, this case was settled without any admission of wrongdoing by us. Accordingly, we paid plaintiff $7, 000, and he released all claims against Coverall, and dismissed this lawsuit with prejudice.
Karen and Steven St. Clair, et al. v. Coverall North America. Inc.. d.b.a. Coverall of San Diego. Inc.. (Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, Case No. 720129), filed April 27, 1998. Plaintiffs, Coverall janitorial franchisees, claimed that Coverall unjustifiably terminated certain of their cleaning accounts and failed to replace them, and that Coverall failed to provide certain additional business accounts purchased by them. This conduct, they claimed, was a breach of the Franchise Agreement; breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; breach of fiduciary duty; intentional interference with economic relations; and unfair business practices. Coverall denied all allegations of wrong doing. On March 3, 1999, a settlement was reached by which Coverall paid plaintiffs $7, 500 in exchange for the dismissal of this lawsuit, "with prejudice, " and plaintiffs'' Coverall Janitorial Franchise Agreement was mutually terminated.
Richard and Jeanie Ko v. Coverall North America. Inc.. et al.. (Superior Court of California, County of Orange, Case No. 795516), filed June 12, 1998. Plaintiffs, Richard Ko, a former Coverall franchisee, and his wife, claimed that because an account, which they were servicing, was terminated by the customer, Coverall was in breach of the Franchise Agreement. The plaintiffs also claimed this action by Coverall constituted fraud and deceit and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Their complaint, also named as co-defendants Alex Roudi, former Chief Executive Officer of Coverall; Bill Burch, former Coverall Vice President and Divisional Director; and former Coverall Regional Director,
Jason Rasmussen. Plaintiffs asked for "an order of restitution in the amount of $157, 000, " plus an order of rescission of their Franchise Agreement, plus unspecified compensatory and punitive damages and attorney''s fees. We denied all liability and filed a crossclaim against plaintiff for the balance of the amounts still owing by them to us. On August 6, 1998, the parties entered into a settlement agreement by which we, without any admission of wrongdoing, paid plaintiffs $62, 000, and the parties dismissed their claims against each other, with prejudice.
Coverall North America. Inc. v. Warion. Inc. and Murray Arthur: and Coverall North America. Inc. v. Warion. Inc.. Murray Arthur andMichael Warden. (Before the American Arbitration Association, Chicago, Illinois, Case No. 51T1140001397) (consolidated); filed January 10, 1997. Coverall filed this arbitration proceeding against defendants, Warjon, Inc. ("Warjon"), our Coverall Service Franchisee, and Murray Arthur and Michael Warden, Warjon''s principal shareholders seeking a declaration that we did not, as respondents had accused, violate federal and state disclosure laws and guidelines by misstating and/or fraudulently failing to state facts regarding an alleged predecessor company of ours; an alleged affiliate company of ours; an alleged act or acts by us jeopardizing the Coverall service mark; and an alleged failure by us to disclose certain litigation regarding Coverall''s mark. Respondents denied that they were entitled to the relief sought, and filed counterclaims against us claiming we breached their Service Franchise Agreement, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and California, Florida, and North Carolina law, and that we committed fraud, misrepresentation and a breach of fiduciary duty. Respondents sought rescission of their Service Franchise Agreements, repayment of all money paid by them to Coverall, and unspecified damages. We denied the allegations in the counterclaim. On August 24, 1998, the parties entered into a settlement agreement by which Coverall, without any admission of wrongdoing, paid respondents $200, 000 as a partial reimbursement of their attorneys'' fees, and the claimant and the respondents dismissed their claims, with prejudice.
Ted Freeman v. Coverall North America d.b.a. Coverall of Los Angeles. Inc.. (Superior Court for Orange County, California, Case No. 787765), filed December 8, 1997. Plaintiff, a Coverall franchisee, claimed we breached his Franchise Agreement by failing to provide him with business accounts in a timely manner, and that we fraudulently misrepresented that we had an adequate number of accounts to timely provide him with the volume of business agreed to in his Franchise Agreement. Plaintiff asked for $40, 200 in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages in an unspecified amount, plus attorney fees. We denied breaching the Franchise Agreement or that we otherwise acted wrongfully, and filed a cross claim against the plaintiff for the principal balance of a promissory note from plaintiff to Coverall, then in default. On April 9, 1998, a settlement agreement was entered into between the parties by which Coverall paid plaintiff, and both parties dismissed their claims, with prejudice.
Coverall North America. Inc. v. Thelen Commercial Cleaning Corp. and William E. Thelen. (American Arbitration Association, Seattle, Washington, Case No. 75 Y 114 00037 97), filed January 10, 1997. We initiated this declaratory judgment action. Respondents filed counterclaims alleging breach of the Service Franchise Agreement, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violations of Washington law, and misrepresentation seeking either damages or rescission. On February 10, 1998, the arbitrators ruled. It was declared that while our disclosure regarding a predecessor company failed to satisfy technical disclosure requirements it was not a violation of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, and did not damage the Respondent. The arbitrators ruled in our favor on the Respondents'' Washington Consumer Protection Act and misrepresentation claims. They further found that loans made by then CEO, Alex Roudi, to his brother constituted breach of contract and should have been disclosed; but ruled that rescission or termination of the Service Franchise Agreement was not warranted. The arbitrators further ruled that our failure to disclose certain matters justified Respondents'' suspension of franchise sales, and assessed damages against us in the amount of $280, 000. We were also enjoined from providing information, assistance, guarantees, financial support, loans, or referrals of business, customers or accounts to the company owned by Alex Roudi''s brother, or its officers, directors, shareholders, or affiliated companies. We were also ordered to pay Respondents'' reasonable attorneys'' fees in the amount of $150, 000, plus a portion of costs.
Coverall North America. Inc. v. Kevin Foster, et al.. (District Court for Harris County, Texas, 295th Judicial District, Case No. 96-45847), filed September 10, 1996. We filed this action against defendant Kevin Foster, a Coverall janitorial franchisee, and others, based on breach of contract, fraud, and civil conspiracy, claiming that although defendant Foster agreed in his Coverall Janitorial Franchise Agreement not to engage in the janitorial business during the term of his franchise (other than as a Coverall franchisee), he, with the aid and assistance of defendant Gwendolyn Hodge, operated a non-Coverall janitorial business concurrently with his Coverall business. We asked that the defendants be enjoined from so competing and using our confidential and proprietary information in their non-Coverall business and that they account for profits earned as a result of so competing; and that we be awarded damages and attorneys'' fees. Defendant Foster filed a counterclaim against us, alleging we did not furnish him the amount of business called for in his Franchise Agreement, and also claimed that we failed to comply with unspecified "statutory required disclosures" when we sold him his Franchise, and that the sale was in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. On April 23, 1998, the parties entered into a settlement by which Coverall without any admission of wrongdoing, paid defendant $100, 000.
|
|
Informed source
|
Feb 17, 2012
|
Less than Minimum Wage!
1st amendment, blah, blah, blah...Everyone in your mind is a victim...Let's see you've shown us maybe what a dozen to two dozen "plantiffs" since 2003 here (9 years) to you and that idiot Fortman...Currently, with the primary owner-operator companies only, there are over 90, 000 owner-operators performing quality work on a nightly basis throughout this country alone! I go back to what I've said earlier, for every "disgruntled franchise owner" I can show you at least 50 to 100 HAPPY, self-performing, quality-oriented, money making, life changing owner-operators in the system. What is your answer to that?
|
|
|
|
|
