Trafficmonsoon Review: what happened and why are you unable to login?
The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) filed a complaint against Trafficmonsoon on July 26, 2016.
As a result, Trafficmonsoon is currently closed. The company and Charles Scoville are under an order freezing their assets (bank accounts, online processors,…).
Case # 2:16-cv-00832
Trafficmonsoon Lawsuit: (when) can I expect the website to come back?
As quoted on the TrafficMonsoon Receivership:
It is too soon to predict whether (…) [it] will begin operating again. For now, based on the Court’s orders, Traffic Monsoon is not operating.
While you could speculate about whether it may or may not get resolved through a settle or a trial, I recommend you to stick to the official documentation to avoid biased analysis.
You will find below the official website which has been setup to communicate with the public:
In order to have a better understanding of this situation, I suggest you read the full complaint under the “Key Court Documents” tab as well as the “FAQs” provided by Peggy Hunt.
Trafficmonsoon Case: what is being discussed by the parties involved?
The SEC alleges that TrafficMonsoon LLC and Charles Scoville are responsible for running an Internet-Based Ponzi Scheme. The details are available on a litigation Release (No. 23604) which was broadcasted on July 28, 2016.
November, 2016: The case is currently undergoing a preliminary injunction process.
Accordingly to the SEC:
Because of their profit-sharing component and the manner in which they operate, AdPacks constitute securities and, consequently, individuals who purchase AdPacks are investors.
Because all investor returns are funded through new investor contributions, the company operates as a classic Ponzi scheme.
Accordingly to Charles Scoville:
By using profit margins from sales and giving to customers who surf ads in the traffic exchange they call this a Ponzi. I disagree. It’s not a Ponzi at all because service buyers are customers.. truly not investors and there is always more than enough money to pay people what they have earned.
Trafficmonsoon Updates: stay tuned with the official events:
A Trafficmonsoon preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled on the 23rd September 2016. The hearing has now been continued by the Court until November 1, 2016 at 10:00 am.
Initial Status Report should be filed and made available by the Court shortly.
Update on September 23, 2016: motions were filed by Charle’s attorney — Washburn, D
Accordingly to Charles…
What the motions are basically attempting to do is:
1. Clearly, identify that Traffic Monsoon is not offering a security
2. Even if it was, the SEC doesn’t have jurisdiction over 90% of the business.
3. Get the business back up and running for people outside the USA.
4. Have funds released so people outside the USA can be paid what they have earned.
5. If needed to freeze funds while the court determines whether TM is a security, hold onto the amount of funds purchased by USA account holders minus the amount they have been paid.
6. No need for an aggressive receiver who is interfering with constitutional rights, but place funds in question into escrow instead.
7. Identify using precedent case law and statutes that Traffic Monsoon is a business offering advertising services and commissions, not a security offering any investment products. Whether profits exist in commissions paid to members, these profits are not the type associated with a security since they do not result from managerial efforts of others. (managing in terms of investing funds in some way intended to obtain profits and return money and profits back – this type of thing was not offered on Traffic Monsoon)
Update on November, 2016:
A preliminary injunction hearing has been processed on 1st and 3rd November 2016.
Several Trafficmonsoon Leaders attended to testify and support Charles Scoville.
There were arguments on both sides, and the Honorable Judge Jill Parrish really paid attention to the things that were said. I’m very pleased how many things were presented about how Traffic Monsoon works, and it made me smile to see how closely Jill paid attention as for how things actually work were presented. Based upon my understanding, both sides have a deadline of 28 Nov. 2016 to provide findings and conclusions to the court, then the next hearing is the 30 Nov 2016. The judge mentioned she is most interested having both sides submit relevant law determining where a transaction took place, and whether what’s written on the website, the offer as it is described, terms of service, etc matters legally. — Charles Scoville
Update on December, 2016:
A few extra documents have been added, including the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.
On the 30 November 2016, the temporary restraining hearing took place as scheduled.
No decision has been taken at this point.
The judge is expected to update both parties with more details and a schedule in the near future. The matter is under advisement for a later ruling.
Now what happens next is the judge will make a decision which could take a few days or weeks on what happens next which can be one of three options. 1. DISMISSAL, 2. TRIAL, or 3. NEGOTIATIONS
Additionally, you can find more details about the current questions and challenges raised in “The Salt Lake Tribune“, a daily newspaper published in the city of Salt Lake City, Utah.
Trafficmonsoon News: alternative resources to follow the case:
If you the official TrafficMonsoon Receivership website is not enough for you (or too slow to get updated), you may check dockets from Pacermonitor. It’s usually updated in a matter of a few hours.
But it either requires a paid subscription or paid-to-download fees for each document you need.
Alternatively, the best method available, with delays, but for free is to follow news at trafficmonsoon.org
The blog shares all documents, without edits or personal interpretation, which is the best for an unbiased information.