Advantage Conferences II

[soapboxmom]

Please find below the form to report tax cheats to the IRS. I am sure they would be delighted to hear that Jack took a few WorldVentures magazines on his trip to visit family for 3 weeks this summer and said he will be deducting the entire trip.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3949a.pdf

The next form is used to report bankruptcy fraud. You never know when that might come in handy.
http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/fraud/index.htm

Soapboxmom

[soapboxmom]

The following is an interesting exchange I had with Jack on Scam.

http://www.scam.com/showpost.php?p=558656&postcount=950

http://www.scam.com/showpost.php?p=558668&postcount=951

Originally Posted by jweinzierl
Heather Dobrott, just another example of your lies and deceit. As you know all too well, I am an independent representative of AC and I never sued the BBB. Once again, you share a thread of truth and attempt to mislead folks.

Oh, so, you didn't support Timmy's brilliant business decision to sue the Better Business Bureau???? Tim Darnell did say you were his advisor, so it appears you were at least partly responsible for that debacle. I did enjoy reading your lengthy deposition from that case. Tell us how you prevailed as God promised on that one???? Is there trouble in paradise? Is Tim not your holy brother in Christ any longer?

http://mysite.verizon.net/resurlf0/adva ... /id15.html

From the Better Business Bureau's Motion for Summary Judgment:

The BBB membership standards require....truth and honsty in advertising and selling practices....The (BBB) website raised concerns about AC's business model and the truthfulness of its advertising Specificallly, the BBB questioned AC's use of certain trademarks and copyrights found on its website, its earning representations and whether AC was primarily engaged in promoting a pyramid scheme.

Judge said:

CAUSE NO. 05-11461
ADVANTAGE CONFERENCES, LLC, PLAINTIFF,
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
vs.
§ § § § § § § § § § §
14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS, INC. AND JON TAYLOR,
DEFENDANTS.
DALLAS COUN1Y, TEXAS
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On this 25th day of September, 2006, came on for hearing Defendant Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Dallas, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion") filed on August 21, 2006. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, Plaintiffs Response to the Motion, Defendant's Reply, and all timely filed pleadings, and all competent, timely filed summary judgment evidence, and having heard the arguments of counsel, is of the opinion that the Motion should be GRANTED in all respects.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Defendant Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Dallas, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment filed on August 21, 2006 is hereby GRANTED in all respects.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff Advantage Conferences, LLC take nothing from Defendant Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Dallas, Inc. by reason of its action and that Defendant Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Dallas, Inc. recover from Plaintiff its costs of court, for which let execution issue.


All relief as between Advantage Conferences, LLC and Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Dallas, Inc. not expressly granted herein is denied.
Signed this 2; day of October, 2006.
Judge~ Mary Murphy


ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT - PAGE 1

Obviously, Tim Darnell has been a great mentor in Jack's life! Timmy postulates, "when you work and breathe for God, the outcome is assured. Our victory is a foregone conclusion, and we enter the rest of the battle with enthusiasm and sustained, unwavering belief. " Time will tell on that one boys.

Soapboxmom

[soapboxmom]

More fun with scammer Jack!

Jack Weinzierl has his fingers in a number of other pies. Here are just a few of the gems Weinzierl is currently peddling.

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=44838

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=44912

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=44970

Soapboxmom

[soapboxmom]

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=45170

I started a nice little thread over yonder with more from Jack's bankruptcy filing. Please enjoy!

Soapboxmom

[wserra]

Two things stand out, SBM:

(1) Weinzierl wants to keep his $1.2M McMansion and Mercedes 350SL. At the same time, he wishes the Court to discharge $220,000 (yes, you read that right) in credit card debt - plus such ancillaries as SBM's friend's fraud lawsuit against him. Perhaps a Texas practitioner (Prof? JRB? Famspear?) could estimate the odds of that happening. In any event, Weinzierl, that doesn't seem exactly like the Christian thing to do. Live high on the hog, then keep the good stuff and leave everyone else holding the bag.

(2) If the income numbers he reports under oath to the Court are accurate, then he's been lying to everyone else. This "Christian millionnaire mentor" reports $250K in 2006, $15K in 2007 and ($6K) in 2008 - at the same time as he is telling people that they should listen to him due to his amazing success. And I do wonder how he is going to pay the monthly nut on the McMansion and the car with negative income.

He's surely not the only one in this "industry" to play the shell game, but it's not often that you can catch people at it so cleanly. He should remember that special corner of Hell reserved for people who scam in God's name.

[soapboxmom]

Jack Weinzierl for President Election 2008! LOL!!!!

http://socialmediatrainingnetwork.ni...59:Video:25466

http://www.themarketleaders.com/prof...ogPost%3A21664

Meet the campaign manager:

http://www.maximonline.com/DianaFalzone/video/493.aspx

Check out his qualifications:

http://mysite.verizon.net/resurlf0/a...ruth/id35.html

http://mysite.verizon.net/resurlf0/a...ruth/id15.html

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=45170

view...3109d&start=45

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=14273

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=13128

Soapboxmom

[soapboxmom]

http://www.themarketleaders.com/vide...AVideo%3A21728

Look at the genius campagin supporters he has. Here is another look at the campaign manager. Was she handpicked by his wife?

http://www.mahalo.com/Diana_falzone

Then we have Tim Darnell who will no doubt offer his services as the campaign treasurer. Brilliant businessman, Darnell, still hasn't paid his 2007 property tax or taken care of the 8 grand tax lien on his home due to his wife not paying her federal income tax in 2003, but his golf skills make him the natural choice to handle minute amounts of money. He didn't pay his taxes from 1998 - 2005 preferring to use the the "oasis of integrity" method of sending Affidavits in asking questions of the IRS instead of actually filing and paying his taxes. Lest we forget his stellar, brilliant business model for Advantage Conferences resulted in a mere 98% loss rates for the recruits. Maybe the Better Business Bureau will offer their endorsement. LOL! Who better to lead the campaign as God is on their side and all.

Soapboxmom

[wserra]

A few days ago, the bankruptcy trustee requested that the Court set a cut-off date for the filing of proofs of claim in Weinzierl's Chapter 7 proceeding. In my limited bankruptcy experience, the Court is not likely to set that date for less than a month. Any potential claimant who has not done so already, though, should take a look at the official proof of claim form and its instructions.

[Prof]

Two things stand out, SBM:

(

1) Weinzierl wants to keep his $1.2M McMansion and Mercedes 350SL. At the same time, he wishes the Court to discharge $220,000 (yes, you read that right) in credit card debt - plus such ancillaries as SBM's friend's fraud lawsuit against him. Perhaps a Texas practitioner (Prof? JRB? Famspear?) could estimate the odds of that happening. In any event, Weinzierl, that doesn't seem exactly like the Christian thing to do. Live high on the hog, then keep the good stuff and leave everyone else holding the bag.

(2) If the income numbers he reports under oath to the Court are accurate, then he's been lying to everyone else. This "Christian millionnaire mentor" reports $250K in 2006, $15K in 2007 and ($6K) in 2008 - at the same time as he is telling people that they should listen to him due to his amazing success. And I do wonder how he is going to pay the monthly nut on the McMansion and the car with negative income.

I just caught this request for comment. Please note on the schedules that it appears that the Mercedes is leased. Also, the house is listed as worth less than the debt securing it (there are both first and second deeds of trust secured by the house).

His statement of intent says he is going to surrender the GMC Yukon, which is subject to a purchase money debt, but he wants to keep the leased Mercedes and the house, so he intends to reaffirm those debts (note: if the Mercees is leased, he cannot really reaffirm; he has to go through an assumption process under a separate section of the Bankruptcy Code; that said, neither the lenders secured by the home mortgages or the leasing company has to accept the proposed raffirmation/assumption).

If he had any equity in the house, which he says is worth less than the debt, he could keep an unlimited amount of equity in bankruptcy. Texas, along with Florida and several other states, allows a virtually unlimited homestead exemption -- the urban homestead in Texas is limited to 10 acres, irrespective of what the value of the home might be. A rural homestead is limted to 200 acres/head of household or 100 acres/single person, irrespective of value of land or improvements.

If the Mercedes were owned, the personal property exemption in Texas is capped at $60,000 (head of household; $30,000 single person) for all qualified assets (furniture, art, tools, 2 guns, livestock, cars, jewelry). If he actually owned the Mercedes, the equity could exhaust this exemption. Texas also allows unlimted exemptions for retirement accounts (qualified) and insurance products/proceeds. All in all, Texas is very generous. However, this guy has no equity in anything.

By the way, if you move to Texas -- or buy a new home in Texas -- and then file bankrtupcty, the exemptions for the homestead and retirement accounts are limited by the most recent set of bankruptcy amendments if you file within about 700 days of moving to Texas. I don't have time to check the statute this morning.

Hope this helps.

[wserra]

neither the lenders secured by the home mortgages or the leasing company has to accept the proposed raffirmation/assumption

Thanks, Prof. Do you have an informed opinon about whether Weinzierl's mortgagees are likely to accept a reaffirmation? Can other creditors exert any influence over that decision? Can someone contemplating filing a bankruptcy petition get a decision in advance of filing about whether a mortgagee will do so?

On a completely different note, how are you doing?

[Prof]

neither the lenders secured by the home mortgages or the leasing company has to accept the proposed raffirmation/assumption

Thanks, Prof. Do you have an informed opinon about whether Weinzierl's mortgagees are likely to accept a reaffirmation? Can other creditors exert any influence over that decision? Can someone contemplating filing a bankruptcy petition get a decision in advance of filing about whether a mortgagee will do so?

On a completely different note, how are you doing?

Reaffirmation of a debt in a chapter 7 is at the election of the debtor, subject of course to the creditor's agreement; the matter does have to be approved by the Court and the Court may refuse if the reaffirmation would pose an undue hardship. Where homes are involved, the Court's would rarely refuse reaffirmation. In this case, I doubt that the creditors involved would refuse -- given the market for $1 million homes, even in Dallas-Ft Worth. But, that is just a guess.

Other creditors have no say in the matter and neither does the chapter 7 trustee where the property -- as here -- is exempt. But, the chapter 7 trustee might object if there was equity in non-exempt property that he could realize. (Say the Debtor owns non-exempt realty with equity and moves the reaffirm; the trustee might jump in if he thought the equity could be realized; same for a non-exempt property like a business premises leased at below market rates; if the trustee thought he could realize a profit by assuming and assigning the lease, he might do just that. However, assumption and assignment of leases, real or personal, is more complicated than just reaffirmation; there is no provision for the debtor to assume or assign a lease, and the Code refers only to the trustee's right to do so. And, one defense, is that the person assuming, whether the debtor or someone else, is not as financially responsible as the Debtor was at the time of the execution of the lease.)

The Mercedes lease -- notwithstanding the legal niceties -- should be easy, since the auto leasing companies are in deep doo-doo, according to the WSJ.

As to your question about my health, I am back at work part-time; the cardiologist doesn't want to see me again until January, and I have one more appointment with the surgeons.

JOKE: One of the surgeons who treated me in had been an investment banker at Salmon Bro's before going to Medical School. As you know, the doctors decided not to oerate but rather to treat me as a medical patient, because the "disection" clotted. I told the surgeon that this had to be the first time that an investment banker passed up the opportunity to knife a lawyer.

[soapboxmom]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF COLLIN §
On the below-referenced date Scott S****, the undersigned affiant, appeared before me, the undersigned Notary, and stated the following under oath:

1. My name is Scott S*****. I am over the age of 18. I have never been convicted of a felony, and am fully competent to make this affidavit. I have direct personal knowledge of the matters contained herein as described below; they are true and correct.

2. I am the Executive Pastor of Cottonw**d Creek Baptist Church (the Church hereinafter) and have been so employed at all times relevant to the matters attested to herein.

3. At no time has the Church had any affiliation or connection with Advantage Conferences or Treasures of the Kingdom.

4. At no time did any officer or authorized agent of the Church give express or implied consent for the aforementioned businesses to act on behalf of the Church or in the name of the Church in any capacity.

5. To the best of my knowledge and belief, no member of the executive staff of the Church has ever served on a board of directors for either of the aforementioned businesses.

Further, Affiant sayeth not.
SIGNED under oath before me on this the 3rd day of July, 2008.

CAROL A. KEMP
Texas
Notary Public in and for the State of Texas

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRS says:

"Integrated Auxiliary of a Church" Defined

The term integrated auxiliary of a church refers to a class of organizations that are related to a church or convention or association of churches, but are not such organizations themselves. In general, the IRS will treat an organization that meets the following three requirements as an integrated auxiliary of a church. The organization must:

Be described both as an Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3) organization and be a public charity under Code section 509(a)(1), (2), or (3),
Be affiliated with a church or convention or association of churches, and
Receive financial support primarily from internal church sources as opposed to public or governmental sources.

Title 26 is also helpful:

(h) Integrated auxiliary—(1) In general. For purposes of this title, the term integrated auxiliary of a church means an organization that is—

(i) Described both in sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a) (1), (2), or (3);

(ii) Affiliated with a church or a convention or association of churches; and

(iii) Internally supported. (receive financial support primarily from internal church sources)

(2) Affiliation. An organization is affiliated with a church or a convention or association of churches, for purposes of paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of this section, if—

(i) The organization is covered by a group exemption letter issued under applicable administrative procedures, (such as Rev. Proc. 80–27 (1980–1 C.B. 677); See §601.601(a)(2)(ii)(b)), to a church or a convention or association of churches;

(ii) The organization is operated, supervised, or controlled by or in connection with (as defined in §1.509(a)–4) a church or a convention or association of churches; or

(iii) Relevant facts and circumstances show that it is so affiliated.

(3) Facts and circumstances. For purposes of paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this section, relevant facts and circumstances that indicate an organization is affiliated with a church or a convention or association of churches include the following factors. However, the absence of one or more of the following factors does not necessarily preclude classification of an organization as being affiliated with a church or a convention or association of churches—

(i) The organization's enabling instrument (corporate charter, trust instrument, articles of association, constitution or similar document) or by-laws affirm that the organization shares common religious doctrines, principles, disciplines, or practices with a church or a convention or association of churches;

(ii) A church or a convention or association of churches has the authority to appoint or remove, or to control the appointment or removal of, at least one of the organization's officers or directors;

(iii) The corporate name of the organization indicates an institutional relationship with a church or a convention or association of churches;

(iv) The organization reports at least annually on its financial and general operations to a church or a convention or association of churches;

(v) An institutional relationship between the organization and a church or a convention or association of churches is affirmed by the church, or convention or association of churches, or a designee thereof; and

(vi) In the event of dissolution, the organization's assets are required to be distributed to a church or a convention or association of churches, or to an affiliate thereof within the meaning of this paragraph (h).

(4) Internal support. An organization is internally supported, for purposes of paragraph (h)(1)(iii) of this section, unless it both—

Soapboxmom

[wserra]

Interesting, SBM. And something worth looking into: the incorporator, who signed and swore to the contents of the Articles, was one Robert L. Ward, CPA, of Dallas. His own web site is "under construction", but a listing is here. Ward swore that ToK was an "integrated auxiliary" of Cottonwood Creek, so either he is lying or Darnell lied to him. Either way, a CPA isn't going to like to see his name over such material falsehoods in an official filing.

If Darnell is really pressing his defamation suit against you, I would approach Ward for an affidavit. If he refuses, I would serve him a subpoena for a non-party deposition (a lawyer can do that in NY; I assume, but am not sure, that Texas permits the same). He really has no choice, given that there is a professional disciplinary board to which to complain.

wserra's Rule One of scammer self-preservation: don't sue for defamation.

BTW - any news from the Weinzierl bankruptcy creditors' meeting yesterday?

[soapboxmom]

I took copious notes at Jack's hearing and will share all the highlights here.

Jack confirmed that all his tax statements are correct. When asked about employment, he said he worked a couple of online businesses, but declined to name them. He then emotionally revealed he is interviewing for jobs. I, of course, was shocked to hear that Mr. Christian Millionaire Mentor would be job hunting after all those hours of videos touting his fantastic success and claiming he was there to truly mentor folks. He talked like he basically had no income at this point (more on that later.)

The poor lad had to pull virtually all the money out of his SEP retirement account to live and will be facing tax consequences for that brilliant move.

He started to well up when being asked about his 1.2 million dollar mansion. He is praying to reaffrim that debt and keep his ill-gotten gain. He then whined about how he had perfect credit for 20 years.

When asked why he had to declare bankruptcy he got all emotional again and proclaimed that he took full responsibility and had made bad business decisions and investments and the like. He admitted he had built his home and that was a mistake. Then he began a tirade on how he has been attacked on Scam.com.

I bet folks didn't know that Advantage Conferences lost 95% of its business due to Scam.com or so Scammer Jack sniveled. He failed to mention the Better Business Bureau suit or many investigations currently being conducted by various agencies. He also failed to acknowledge that these "attacks" consisted of court documents, e-mails, AC call notes, advertisements, press releases, reps experiences and opinion. There is nothing that is in any way the cause of their demise. The truth in their case is certainly much stranger than fiction. The BBB suit, Houston Press article and hundreds of posters across the net on various sites discussing this venture have peformed a valuable service.

Jack obviously isn't aware that all these many "major governmental" agencies his friend Timmy blathers about are looking into Advantage Conferences and sharing files and information. So, if he thinks the trustee and bankruptcy court will buy into this delusion of persecution he is selling, he is not too bright. That Better Business Bureau suit and the one page judgment that resolved the case in the BBB's favor confirmed the BBB's statements that AC is primarily conducting a pyramid scheme and advertising deceptively. All this information is in the hands of those investigating his filing.

Jack continued his silly tirade by claiming Advantage Mentoring was under attack. He also says contrary to all logic that the debt is all his and not his wife Stephanie's. He talks about his travel business and says he has 3 or 4 main websites.

He blathered on about Advantage Conferences and its weekly mentoring calls and how they provide business education ( mentor folks straight into financial disaster and bankruptcy?????? ) He talks about his little friends in his social network marketing. He talks about the 6 millionaire mentors coming to AC's conferences and his coveted MBA.

When asked if he had any other assets related to possible suits, he said he had no one to sue to collect funds. He proudly proclaimed AC was MLM but had changed to a direct sales model.

Jack's next statement was unbelievable. He claimed his wife, Stephanie, was not working with him in Advantage Conferences and if memory serves I believe he also claimed she has had no income. The facts are Jack Weinzierl joined AC on 2/26/05 and his wife Stephanie on 3/23/05 at the highest level MMC-IV for $9,995.000 each. There was only one page from the Advantage Conferences General Ledger showing commissions in the court files and the page was dated June 26, 2006. The court records had 2 pages total that were from the Advantage Conferences General Ledger, but AC"s entire set of records was turned over in discovery for that frivolous case Tim Darnell filed and lost. Jack Weinzierl is listed as receiving $750.00 in matrix commissions and right below him Stephanie Weinzierl, his wife, is listed as being paid $400.00 in matrix commission on that one page of the general ledger alone. So, clearly Stephanie has received thousands and thousands in matrix commissions in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Jack admits the most he has made is $450,000.00 a year. Now whether that is before or after his fascinating deductions and taxes I am not sure. He is such a brilliant businessman that he once again put 5% down on his house and concedes he shouldn't have bought it. The reason he cites for the purchase is he had to downsize his $1,000.00 a month water bill from his previous mansion. He reminds us that he had every reason to believe Advantage Conferences would turn around. He didn't believe the "attacks" would effect his business like they have.

He says AED@home is not technically closed and though he claimed 4% ownership in his deposition in February 2006, now he only owns 2% and is getting no income from it. He says he has drained his SEP retirement fund to the tune of around $60,000.00 as its value had dropped when the bank stocks dropped.

He is asked about the suit on investment as he calls it that was filed against hims and claims the he never talked to the rep and that rep never attended the conference. He claims he was named only for his "deeper pockets."

He admits he has drained his children's college funds.

When questioned by a special guest attorney about what he has been paid since he filed on August 11, 2008, he says he made $500.00 tops in Traffic Geyser, $1,100.00 in WorldVentures, $7,500.00 for MyInternetBusiness and $400.00 is due from Max Steingart in October . He claims MyInternetBusiness has garnered him 3 to 4 grand a month since April.

When challenged on his claim of earning less than $6,000.00 this year we were subjected to a lecture on his many business expenses and online marketing expenses he had to deduct such as auto responders, Marketing Burst and the like. He doesn't do Google Adwords anymore, he chimes in.

We learn he has closed Vemma as of a month ago as it was not profitable (and I believed him when he said it was less than a thousand a month and paid his utility bills. Funny, that his site is still up too.)

An attorney then asks Jack for clarification of his earnings over the past few years. He says $450,000.00 for 2005. He claimed about the same and then settled on $420,000.00 for 2006. We can contrast that with the $242,629.00 on the bankruptcy filing and see he is taking some massive deductions.

Jack becomes very emotional again when pressed on how he blew $126,000.00 on his American Express card alone. He goes on about how he needed it to live and then concedes he also took cash advances out with it. How many other families get to blow $220,000.00 on their credit cards in a year or 2 and keep all those ill gotten gains at the expense of their fellow Americans???????

Jack said he gave several hundred dollars or one thousand dollars here and there to his brother's church for a total donation amount of 5 -7 thousand to Grace Christian Church.

When discussing Oasis he rambled on about how that church might go bankrupt so he and his group of friends had bought part of Oasis and then sold it back to them in July when LifeChangers purchased it. Jack told us on scam.com he left in December 2007. Apparently he left in early 2008 according to his testimony. So, why he is listed as having purchased part of the church in April this year is a mystery. Jack believed it was a late filing or something. He has been giving $400.00-$500.00 a month in donations all along.

He also shares that his retirement SEP account is down to $450.00. The $8833.33 is the $53,300 withdrawn from his SEP account and divided into the six months to show it as his income for the chapter 7 means test. Jack desperately wants to qualfiy for chapter 7. That would get him out of the conspiracy, fraud and Violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices suit he he called a suit on investment that he is sure to lose. Chapter 7 would completely wipe away all the debt from his shenanigans and let him try and hang on to his 1.2 million dollar mansion.

That concluded a very bizarre hearing.

Soapboxmom

[Prof]

Altough I generally agree with your post, please note that the Debtor apparently has NO EQUITY in the mansion and his Mercedes is leased (i.e., he has no equity in that car). By the way, one of the nice things about Texas is the virtually unlimited homestead exemption (10 acres for urban homesteads, irrespective of the value of the land or improvements, if the homestead was not recently acquired). If this idiot had put any equity into his tract chateau, that equity would have been sheltered from almost all types of creditors except a creditor claiming that the money used to purchase the house was stolen from him/her/it, creating a constructive/resulting trust.

Also, claims of fraud are not discharged in chapter 7 or 13 (prior to the Bush amendments, chapter 13 had a broader discharge provision) if the creditor sues to avoid discharge; AmEx may certainly request the Court not to discharge the massive AmEx debt run up in order to "live."

On the other hand, you can't get blood from a turnip; if the creditors do not think he'll ever come back, they will not bother with objections to discharge.

[Judge Roy Bean]

....Jack desperately wants to qualfiy for chapter 7. That would get him out of the conspiracy, fraud and Violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices suit he he called a suit on investment that he is sure to lose.

I'm not sure I understand what you wrote, but BK can't get you out of a suit. Is he suing or is he being sued?

Chapter 7 would completely wipe away all the debt from his shenanigans and let him try and hang on to his 1.2 million dollar mansion.

That concluded a very bizarre hearing.

Soapboxmom

Depending on when the mansion became a homestead, it may or may not be protected.

[soapboxmom]

Dear Prof and Judge Bean,

Here is the lawsuit Jack Weinzierl listed in the bankruptcy filing and is desperately hoping to weasel out of.

http://mysite.verizon.net/resurlf0/adva ... /id35.html

Thank you all for taking the time to comment on this latest twist in the Advantage Conferences soap opera.

Soapboxmom

[Prof]

This lawsuit may be moved to or refiled in the Bankr. Ct. as an affirmative claim and as an objection to discharge of this debt if the Plaintiff wants to pursue a man who is now a turnip.

Earlier, I should have pointed out that an objection to discharge of a debt ("objection to dischargeability") and an objection to discharge of the debtor are two different things. Debts of various types are either automatically non-dischargeable (child support is an example) or subject to a complaint objecting to dischargeability (fraud); or a creditor may object to discharge of a generally bad debtor, meaning that no debt is discharged.






example) or

[soapboxmom]

Jack said:

Success Strategy #6 Level: 10 Hrs Divert Traffic From Other People's Blogs.

Naturally, I took Jack at his word and commented on his hundreds of videos across the net. I didn't know Weinzierl had rescinded the right to free speech. I noted that he was not a "Christian Millionaire Mentor" as he calls himself. He had in fact filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy. I noted that Advantage Conferences sued the Dallas Better Business Bureau and lost. I noted that pyramid scheme had a loss rate of 98% for the participants and many had lost thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. I made dozens of short comments along those lines all across the net. Weinzierl apparently has no appreciation for the truth. His reponse was as follows:

Subject Re: Comment on your video : Jack Weinzierl and My Internet Business
Received 03-10-2008 at 16:12 (GMT+1)
From earnvacations
Message Yes, every one of your comments will continue to be deleted and archived. You are now posting on my pages and have crossed the line on many occasions. Contacting members on TheMarketLeaders is not wise on several levels. I feel so sorry for you Heather. I am trying to do the right thing and have even asked to dismiss my bankruptcy so I can honor my commitments. You are so full of hatred that you have lost any sense of right and wrong. God will have mercy on you if you repent. I know who I serve.-----------------

I think Jack should tell us the real reason he is asking to dismiss his bankruptcy if this e-mail is genuine.

Soapboxmom

[wserra]

You'll like this, SBM.

The U.S. Trustee has objected to a dismissal without prejudice. The objection is here. In essence, the Trustee says that Jack's account of his finances, well, strains credibility. He notes as follows:

How could Debtor pay for a Million Dollar home without any income? How did Debtor pay his living expenses during the first 7 months of 2008 (i.e., $14,000 per month) by using only his SEP account totaling $53,300? More information was needed to determine Debtor’s financial picture.

So he sends Jack demands for proof - and shazam! Jack moves to dismiss without prejudice rather than answer, saying that he has "new business ventures" with which he "feels" that he can pay his creditors. The trustee expresses considerable skepticiam about all of this, ending with:

Debtor has enjoyed the benefits of bankruptcy, without providing parties in interest with a reasonable explanation of his financial situation. To allow Debtor to simply dismiss his case is prejudicial to creditors and parties in interest. Instead, dismissal under these circumstances should be to the prejudice of Debtor.

I'm sure you agree.