FTC Expands Its Case Against Zurixx Real Estate Seminar Scheme

Amended complaint adds alleged violations of Telemarketing Sales Rule, additional defendants, and monetary liability for Zurixx officers

Do You Have a Question You'd Like Help With? Contact Debt Coach Damon Day. Click here to reach Damon.

The Federal Trade Commission and the state of Utah have amended their complaint against the operators of the Zurixx real estate seminar scheme, adding new charges that the defendants violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule on top of previous charges that they violated the FTC Act and Utah law.

Zurixx used celebrity endorsements and promises of big profits to lure consumers into real estate seminars costing thousands of dollars. The amended complaint alleges that, in addition to using false, deceptive, and unfounded claims at its live events, Zurixx also used such claims in telemarketing expensive coaching packages to consumers.

The amended complaint further alleges that Zurixx officers Christopher A. Cannon, James D. Carlson, and Jeffrey D. Spangler were responsible for key aspects of the scheme, and were aware of and involved in the company’s unlawful activity. These allegations could make the individual defendants personally liable for the monetary harm caused by the scheme.

The amended complaint also adds the following eight defendants to the case: Brand Management Holdings, LLC; CAC Investment Ventures, LLC; Carlson Development Group, LLC (Puerto Rico); Dorado Marketing and Management, LLC (formerly known as Zurixx); JSS Investment Ventures, LLC; JSS Trust; Zurixx Financial, LLC (Puerto Rico); and Gerald D. Spangler, in his capacity as trustee for the JSS Trust.

The case against Zurixx was originally filed in October 2019, and the Court has since issued a stipulated preliminary injunction against all defendants. The receiver in the case has created a website with information for consumers who may have been affected at www.zurixx.com. Consumers may also share their experience with Zurixx at ftc.gov/complaint.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the amended complaint was 5-0. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah.

See also  Expert Testimony Worth Reading on H.R. 2309 the Consumer Credit Protection Act (Debt Settlement Industry Regulation)

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the named defendants are violating or are about to violate the law and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.

Here is where you will find important stories located from around the web which can impact you and your financial life.