Hello Folks: I am interested in this from a different standpoint. I am trained as a mechanical engineer, but the rest of my family, mother, father, brothers, sisters are in the legal profession. 3 judges, 2 lawyers. Talking with them I hear an almost unanimous opinion that it is the owner's constitutional right to serve as a forum for just about any kind of "expression" of opinion as long as it does not directly incite illegal activity. Although that line is not easily drawn, an example would be someone who decides to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre. In addition, this website is privately owned, and as such, the owner is entitled to express his own view (also with the caveat that he may not directly incite illegal activity). The bottom line is that one may sue for just about any reason, but the chance of a litigant obtaining any monetary relief because a trader lost money responding to a scam offer is about zero. This "opinion" was obtained informally, and relates to US law only. While I am sympathetic to Mr. England's plight, I do wonder why he did not put more effort into a due diligence process before sending funds to such an obvious scam artist. If he chooses to pursue legal action, given the emotional nature of his comments, a good defense attorney would pretty much "bitch slap" him around the block (I apologize for the language). As the wicked witch said in Wizard of Oz, "what a world"... Regards, Steve46
Yes caveat emptor. Regardless of what others think of traderbrad's ethics, he has no contractual responsibility to give back any of the money. The ironic thing is that traderbrad probably used Samson's money to buy advertisements on ET, though I see that traderbrad is now no longer an advertiser on ET. How's that for an "interesting" marketing strategy?
Yep, I tried to point this out to "Brad" in an earlier post. Whether he intended to do so or not, he developed a lot of buzz about his service at a relatively low cost. Unfortunately he plays the game at a low level, and doesn't know how to take advantage of it. Based on his reluctance to post his "picks", I am guessing that his system is little better than random chance. In contrast look at the way "Ms. Cleo" did it on national TV!! That gal and her fake Jamaican accent pulled in millions of dollars every month for several years! She made so much money that she hired an attorney who got a stay of action so that she could continue to do business while her case was proceeding through the courts. If I understand correctly, she paid a relatively small fine and took home millions in profits from who knows how many people who fell for her act. I know it is a step removed from the financial industry but from my point of view a scam is a scam. Regards, Steve46
Steve46 The chances of it here in Canada are even less than zero our laws are far more protection oriented to the consumer, trust me one of my close friends is an attorney Some lawyers may advise their clients differently to attempt a case because after all they have nothing to lose but like you said steve46 ... anyone can TRY and do anything but it will be a waste of money and time...
Tri, I would normally agree with you here, but Samson said he did not receive all of the course material (per Brad's admission that he did not get everything) and was booted from the chat room prematurely. That means he did not deliver product for the money. That is what I have a problem with. Had he gotten everything he paid for it would just be a lesson in buyer beware, but if not, its borderline theft.
I agree WarEagle. If traderbrad argues in court the way he has here, he will likely not win. It does appear he is preventing sampson from getting the rest of - the main part of - the supposed product. If he represented the 43 page manual as the product, even worse...in the sense that it is admittedly not the entire product. I have a theory that whenever we are about to be bamboozled, we get a sign/signal/warning/red flag. It is always veiled, but always there. In this case, the first red flag is an unusually long and drawnout "agreement" just to enter the traderbrad site. With this headline: "The last course you will ever need to purchase!". And inside: "Let me be your mentor!" [Two more flags]. These are always easy to see in hindsight. Since Sampson77 won't be buying anymore courses, and since traderbrad taught him how to do that, it might be argued that traderbrad delivered. Thanks Sampson for sharing your experience. You should prevail in court. JohnnyK