All Forum Posts by: Robert M Arthur

I thought this thread was a question about cashier's checks, and my advice is not to accept them. If you are accepting a large payment from someone you don't know, then a wire transfer is the best alternative. There's always risk in accepting payments from someone you don't know, though.

A regular, periodic rent payment, however, is another story. Presumably you know your tenant. If you really don't trust your tenant, then I suppose you could require cash payments. I question whether that person is your best choice for a tenant, though. There may be other payment solutions that use ACH that are intended for landlords and are better solutions. If the tenant does not pay, evict.

If you have to accept a large payment, require a wire transfer.

Don't accept cashier's checks from someone you do not know. They are easily faked, and clearance can take 4-6 weeks. You can't be sure if a cashier's check will not bounce for at least that time period.

Also, a lot of banks will refuse to confirm if a cashier's check is valid. Even if someone at a bank tells you that the account exists, you can't be sure if the funds are available. In the old days, banks would confirm this, but they are being careful to not take the risk now.

Don't accept cashier's checks. They are the overwhelming choice of criminals for fraudulent payments. If you have to accept a large payment, require a wire transfer.

The FTC and the State of Utah has an ongoing lawsuit against Zurixx. You can find out more about it here: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/182-3063/zurixx-llc

You should also monitor Zurixx's former website, which has been taken over by the appointed Receiver. They are posting updates there, and if a refund is ordered by the court, you'll find information posted there first: https://zurixx.com/

Other than that, there's really not much for anyone to do. The case is on hold until the US Supreme Court rules in a different case, Lui v SEC ( https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/liu-v-securities-and-exchange-commission/ ) because there are overlapping issues. That ruling will be by July, but the US Supreme Court's schedule has been affected by the Coronavirus, like everything else. They got the oral argument in on 3/3/20, thank goodness. But we are waiting on the US Supreme Court now.

The case is still in progress. You can follow the case here: 

https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/182-3063/zurixx-llc

Some parts of the case are on hold until the US Supreme Court issues a ruling in Liu v SEC, because there are some issues in Liu that could impact the case against Zurixx.

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/liu-v-securities-and-exchange-commission/

Yes, "Flippin' On the Side" was one of the names that Zurixx LLC used, through a shell company in Montana called High Point Education LLC or High Point Training LLC.

Some aspects of Utah's consumer protection laws make that state a favorable environment for companies like Zurixx and Nudge. This article touches on it:

https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=3395033&itype=CMSID

I think a larger factor is that Zurixx was started by individuals who owned an earlier scam that was shut down by the FTC, Daeus Financial Services. That's the subject of the article above. They all just continued to live in Utah. I don't think there is anything particularly nefarious about the state, except that a handful of bad people live there, and they have repeatedly started companies that scam people out of money with real estate and wealth building education scams. Hopefully, those people will be sufficiently discouraged this time from trying again.

The link above is for the Better Business Bureau, which is not associated with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). You can file a complaint with the FTC here: 

https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/

You can monitor the FTC's case against Zurixx here:

https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/182-3063/zurixx-llc

It is likely that the appointed receiver will have a web page where victims of Zurixx may learn more information about the assets that the receiver has collected, and about any potential refunds. That process may take days, weeks, or months. Check the FTC's case page periodically.

You can read more about the FTC's action against Zurixx here. You will probably recognize some of the facts in the complaint: 
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/182-3063/zurixx-llc

The Rich Dad/Legacy Education scam is done by a different company, but the action against Zurixx will serve as a warning to similar scam operations. 

@John M Mazur, you should file complaints with the FTC, and the Attorney General/Department of Consumer Protection in Florida and also the state in which you attended the seminar. Those complaints will be sent to the company, Legacy Education Alliance, Inc. Ask an attorney in your state to help you, if necessary.

 

The FTC has taken action in court against Zurixx, which is the Utah company that has been running most of the education schemes that are the subject of this thread. You can find many news stories if you search for FTC and Zurixx.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2019/10/ftc-acts-against-company-using-celebrity-endorsements-bogus