LAST Updated on 9/15/2011 - Please Scroll Down Contact Us Click HERE
New to this site? Consider reading this page from the bottom, information is added to the top as it becomes available.
NEW Links added Congressional - Case Law Info - TCPA Doc's

9/15/2011
Trouble for "The Trouble Maker" a.k.a "The Trouble Shooter"
Files Chapter 7 BK - PRINT FILING HERE - PDF Case 11-31115-MER

The man who calls himself the "Troubleshooter" is in financial trouble himself. Tom Martino Bankruptcy.

Martino's September 2, 2011 filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Denver lists 47 creditors. Those include New Frontier Bank, which failed in 2008, and several other banks that made real estate loans to Martino.

The filing shows Martino has assets of about $1.37 million and owes $78.6 million. What happened to his watch? What about his elegant jewelry? Where is all the high dollar toys he had pictured on his web site for years?

Last year, Martino had an income of $2.15 million from three sources -- the Troubleshooter Network, Tom Martino Consulting LLC, and Denver TV station KDVR.

Martino had an hour-long show on Fox 31 called "Martino TV" and a three-hour talk-radio show on 630-KHOW. The TV show has since been canceled.

Tom Martino's lives in a house (PICTURE HERE) that is in his wife's name. (purchased 7/24/09). View Info HERE. If he married prior to the purchase, would a portion of the equity be an asset? Did he use his money to purchase the home? If he used his money, it would be likely that it was placed in her name as a way to protect this asset from any possible litigation. It's been said that Tom met his wife as an employee of his Trouble Shooter business. If that's true, she likely did not have access to large sums of money that Tom has enjoyed prior to meeting Tom.

His business known as the "Trouble Shooter Network" owns a helicopter and an airplane that his attorneys are trying to protect from his creditors. Interesting!   On his TroubleShooter.com website within the about us page under "personal" he states he is an "avid airplane and helicopter pilot". One would assume that his intent on owning an airplane and helicopter are for personal use. Clearly not a "tool of his trade" that may have been an exempt item in his BK. View Screen Shot HERE    The link at the time of this writing to his about us page HERE.

Local TV Station News Article CLICK HERE

Well written article in the Denver Business Journal CLICK HERE

Interesting observation... Tom's attorney is number five on his referral list, however the Better Business Bureau lists his firm as "Not BBB Accredited" View HERE

It will be interesting to see how his bankruptcy plays out. I'm confident there will detailed scrutiny by all concerned.   Perhaps they will force Tom to take a Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Being the high profile consumer that Tom is, they will likely dig deep in an effort to prevent him from protecting and hiding assets from his BK filing. It has been openly stated in the media that they are trying to protect his aircraft from being considered assets of the BK

Something to think about... When is the deadline for the yellow pages ad copy? How many advertisers will be removing their "proud sponsor of the Trouble Shooter" from their ad copy?   If you're a sponsoring advertiser, this just gave you something to think about.

On another topic... I'm aware of businesses that Tom has cut deals with, rather then charging them $3,000 yearly to be on his referral list. Is this deal cutting fair to those that a paying?

Stay tuned... This site gets a ton of traffic from searches on "Tom Martino" and other related keyword phrases. Thus the main reason I have made this recent news worthy update. As you can see below, it's been three and a half years sense I made updates to this site.

9-22-2011... As anticipated, things are heating up for Tommy. Great article in the Denver Business Journal. VIEW HERE.   Excerpts from the Denver Business Journal article below.

"Martino “has not provided income tax returns, audited financial statements, appraisals, or even a complete list of assets and liabilities for these entities..."

"The International Bank objection alleges that Martino and his wife made “certain fraudulent transfers” in violation of Colorado state statutes..."

"International Bank also claims to possess financial statements from Martino and his wife “that may indicate the debtor transferred other assets prior to the petition date.”   END of Excerpts.

On Tom's TroubleShooter.com website he clearly states under "Personal" that he is an avid aviation enthusiast. Clearly these expensive toys (airplanes and a helicopter) are not for his business and should not be sheltered as he claims his business is worth nothing without him. If his business is worth nothing as he contends, there should be no assets of value that would give the business value. Looks like an oxymoron to me. Sure looks like Tom is trying to commit bankruptcy fraud by sheltering his high dollar belongings within his business that he contends has no value.

Definition of Oxymoron: Noun: A figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g., faith unfaithful kept him falsely true).

If his business truly has no value, all assets should be liquidated from the business. Clearly the high dollar items within his business are not "tools of the trade" which may be protected from liquidation by the bankruptcy.   Example: A plumber filing BK would be allowed to exempt his plumbing tools from the BK so he could continue working to produce an income during and after the BK.

3/3/2008 Another Victory for the Defense Andrew Quiat's TCPA Treasure Ship gets sucked into the Bermuda Triangle. The Colorado Supreme Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment that the court had subject matter jurisdiction over over Respondent Douglas M. McKenna's claim for violation of the facsimile solicitation provisions of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. 227 (2003), and holds that Mckenna lacks standing to assert the TCPA claims that were assigned to him. The court holds that a claim for liquidated damages under the TCPA is a claim for a penalty, which cannot be assigned under Colorado law. "CONCLUSION... We conclude that McKenna lacks standing to assert his claims under the TCPA, because he obtained them through void assignments. We therefore reverse the court of appeals, and remand for reinstatement of the trial court's dismissal of the action with prejudice." To View Click HERE

Tom Martino... What do you think now? On your web site you say "I simply state my opinion and then back it up with facts. If I believe someone is a liar, cheat, rip-off or unethical in some way... I say it. Then I reveal facts." All the things you were as it relates to the faxing controversy. Why did you disassociated yourself with the fax controversy and litigation, including taking down your faxwars.com web site after boosting about it for numerous months on your radio show? ( Go HERE to see what faxwars.com looked like prior to removal.) You must have decided to stop playing attorney, giving people legal advise? You were not above board about the facts behind faxwars.com along with your association with Consumer Crusade and disbarred attorney Salazar. Remember Tommy... you said "I'm going to sue your ass for faxing" several times on your show? You would have lost. Remember how you would tell people on your radio show to call someone all at the same time to harass them? Do you think that is an ethical thing to do? Regarding your questionable statements about faxwars.com, the Westword has an article HERE from May of 2005 that covers that. Here's registration info for faxwars.com Clearly shows who the site belongs to, even has ties to your Liberty Bill Telcom company. Did you ever get that jet you were looking for? (Noted on your website.) For numerous years (long before June of 2005) you repeatedly indicated on your radio show that you had a pilot license. (Airmen Certification) Appears to have been false statements prior to June of '05. According to the FAA records you obtained your Airmen Certification for (private pilot single engine land) on 6/3/2005 in the name of Thomas Gerard Martino. In September of 2007 a corrective lenses restriction was added to your Airmen Certificate. How are things going with the controversy of you charging businesses to have you sponsor them? (Firms on Troubleshooter.com pay yearly fees as high as $4,000 to receive Martino's de facto endorsement. (Quoted from Westword article.) Time for the Westword to run another story on Tommy. By the way Tom, your help may be needed to find your buddy Attorney Jim Demirali, head counsel for Consumer Crusade. Please see the next segment dated 1-15-2008 below. (FTA & Contempt) Several articles in the Business Journal HERE covering Consumer Crusade and Martino. This Google Search provides more reading on Consumer Crusade and Martino.

Tom Martino

1/15/2008 At the hearing on Jan 18,2008, both Consumer Crusade and its counsel failed to appear and failed to present any argument, objection or evidence that would explain why it failed to answer the interrogatories to Judgment Debtor directed toward it. Mr. Demirali failed to appear at the scheduled deposition and to produce records. Thereafter, he failed to appear in Court on Clarion's motion for contempt citation. Accordingly, the court hereby enters this Order Regarding Contempt Citation. Clarion is to call the Court's staff to schedule the matter for a hearing at which time Mr. Demirali must appear to explain why he should not be held in contempt of Court. Clarion shall give notice of the hearing to Mr. Demirali through LexisNexis. To View Click HERE

1/16/2008 Another HUGE Victory for the Defense Supreme Court of the United States, Washington DC. Petition for writ of certiorari is DENIED. To View Click HERE

Tom Martino

1/15/2008 Attorney Demirali's legal battles continue to mount. He gets a taste of his own medicine. A judgment has been obtained for sanctions against Consumer Crusade Inc. and Demerali in the district court for Arapahoe County for bringing a groundless and frivolous case. Consumer Crusade was Tom Martion's "original baby". He bragged about it at length on his daily radio show. Consumer advocate Tom Martino and disbarred attorney Salazar were the kingpins of the original Consumer Crusade and web site FaxWars.com.
See how Martino's Faxwars.com looked when he promoted it by Clicking HERE

12/13/2007 Another Victory for the Defense COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 06CA0432 Judgment and Order Affirmed. Opinion by: Judge Vogt. Announced: December 13, 2007. "Plaintiff contends on appeal that the trial court erred in dismissing its TCPA and CCPA claims. We disagree." "We agree with the conclusion of the Tenth Circuit in iHire IV that the emphasized statutory language encompasses the matter of assignability..." "We conclude that, under Colorado law, the TCPA claims plaintiff asserted against these defendants are not assignable." "Rather, it concluded that the TCPA claims in this case were penal in nature under Colorado law and therefore not assignable for that reason. Because we agree with that conclusion..." "I conclude that the TCPA is penal in nature. This is a distinct reason why the TCPA claims cannot be assigned. 362 F. Supp. 2d at 1253." "...we agree with the trial court that the sums sought by plaintiff in this action were penalties and, as such, were not assignable." To View 06CA0432 Click HERE See similar order below...

Dousing a couple more...
They just will not give up...

12/20/2007 Another Victory for the Defense COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 06CA0433 Judgment and Order Affirmed. Opinion by: Judge Furman. Announced: December 20, 2007. "... we conclude the district court correctly dismissed the TCPA claims asserted by the Center because they could not be assigned, and therefore the Center did not have standing to bring those claims as an assignee." "The judgment and the order are affirmed. Judge Rothenberg and Judge J. Jones concur." To View 06CA0433 Click HERE

Martino's Troubleshooter Network www.faxwarS.com Site Down or Up? More info HERE
Not Just DOWN - It's GONE... 11/2/2006 View Screen Shot Domain is still registered to Thomas Martino, email tmartino@troubleshooter.com Pointed to his servers. Yet Tom claims to not have anything to do with Consumer Crusade ! What kind of Consumer Advocate is Tom anyway? Everyone knows he was instrumental in creating Consumer Crusade and Faxwars.com, he announced it on his radio show. Martino's Latest FawWars.com Registry Info searched on 3/4/2007.

Brain Wasting Away

3/1 Two More Victories for the Defense. Tom Martino's Consumer Crusade operated by the Demirali Law Firm looses two more. "Short and Sweet". (3 pages) "TCPA claims are not assignable under Colorado law. Order affirmed." JUDGE ROTHENBERG and JUDGE LOEB concur. Colorado Court of Appeals. Demirali, why don't you stop wasting our court's resources, here in Colorado and in other States?
Colorado Court of Appeals Case 05CA2240 and 05CA2241
To View 2240 Click HERE To View 2241 Click HERE

2/10/2007 A Reliable Source informs us that... "The Demirali Firm has stated that it intends and is currently finding counsel in other states to take the TCPA claims." A Query for Attorney Demirali: If a tree falls in the woods, and nobody is there, does it make a sound? And if a Colorado entity assigns an assignment that is unassignable in Colorado, is the assignment valid?

2/7/2007Another Victory for the Defense... This one is HUGE United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. "Here, the Plaintiffs suffered no injury at all. They received no faxes from Defendants. Thus, there is no representational standing. We therefore hold that diversity jurisdiction is available for TCPA claims, but AFFIRM the judgments of dismissal based upon lack of standing." ... US Fax Law Center presented an additional question of whether plaintiffs have standing to bring assigned clams for unsolicited faxed under the Colorado Consumer Protection ACT (CCPA)? "We affirm the district court's determination that CCPA claims are unassignable under Colorado law based on the reasoning in Myron. See 2006 WL 3094074, at *3."
VIEW Document Click HERE - Format 1 Format 2

1/30/2007 AND Another Victory for the Defense... Colorado court of of Appeals affirms dismissal on 9/28/06 (see below by date) Colorado Court of Appeals Case No. 04CA2366 - District Court, Denver County Case No. 04CV4841. Consumer Crusade, Inc., v. MBA Financial Group Inc. and Dale Finney. Demirali files a petition for Writ of Certiorari... See yellow box below...

1/30/2007 DEMIRALI like a bulldog and just will not give it up... He files a Petition For Writ of Certiorari on the last allowable day, January 30, 2007. Not withstanding that MBA is out of business and Finney has been Discharged from Bankruptcy. VIEW Document Click HERE

1/18/2007 Another Victory for the Defense... Colorado Court of Appeals affirms lower courts decision. "Thus, we conclude that the claim relating to receipt of unsolicited telephone facsimiles under 47 U.S.C. 227 is, at its core, a breach of the right of privacy tort and, as such, cannot be assigned." . . . "We conclude, along with the other divisions of this court that the federal district court's reasoning in iHire I, supra, is persuasive as applied to the facts of this case. Accordingly, we hold that an action based upon the receipt of unsolicited telephone facsimile advertisements by individuals in violation of the TCPA is not assignable because such an action is in the nature of a violation of the right to privacy.

Because the Center is an assignee, the Center lacks standing to bring these federal claims. Thus, the trial court correctly dismissed the Center's claims based on lack of standing. Given our conclusion, we need not address weather TCPA claims are not assignable because they are penal in nature. The JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. JUDGE LOEB and JUDGE ROMAN concur." (Court of Appeals No. 05CA1671 - Arapahoe County District Court No. 04CV91) USA Tax Law Center, Inc d/b/a US Fax Law Center, Inc. v. MBA Financial Group Inc. VIEW OPINION Click HERE

1/18/2007 Not huge news, however very note worthy. Attorney Jim Demirali is suspended for 6 months from practice of law, however stayed, thus not really suspended and is placed on probation with the Attorney Disciplinary Counsel for a one-year period. Action did not stem from a TCPA case. To VIEW PDF for printing Click HERE

PEOPLE v. DEMIRALI, 06PDJ099 (Colo. 12-8-2006) 06PDJ099. December 8, 2006.
The Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved a Conditional Admission of Misconduct submitted by the parties and suspended Agim Demirali (Attorney Registration No. 10889) from the practice of law for a period of six months, all stayed upon the successful completion of a one-year period of probation, effective December 8, 2006. Respondent's paralegal developed an idea for the law firm to provide a service to prison inmates whereby they would prepare portfolios, which inmates could present to parole and community corrections boards. Respondent agreed to allow his paralegal to take on this project, accepted funds without depositing them into his trust account, and thereafter terminated the project without notice to his clients who believed they had hired an attorney. Respondent's misconduct constituted grounds for the imposition of discipline pursuant to C.R.C.P. 251.5 and violated Colo. RPC 1.15(a), 1.15(g), 1.16 (d), 5.3(b), and 5.5(b).

Interesting timing as I was considering filing a complaint with the attorney disciplinary counsel as Jim Demirali just will not give it up. Just recently, he filed an appeal on case 04CV4841 many months after my Bankruptcy Discharge causing my attorneys to address the issue with him. They advised Jim in writing to dismiss me (Mr. Finney) from the appeal (04CA2366) clearly pointing out to Jim Demirali what he already knew. "Upon entry of discharge, the automatic stay is lifted and an injunction enters prohibiting you or your client from taking any further action to collect on these claims. Violations of the injunction may result in an award of attorneys' fees." All this in light of Jim knowing that the corporation is dissolved.

11/2/2006 Another Victory for the Defense... US Fax Law Center is defeated again. Published Opinion is released today. Colorado Court of Appeals has laid down the law. TCPA & CCPA Fax Claims CANNOT be assigned in Colorado. It does not matter if fax is sent to an individual or business.
To VIEW Published Opinion Click HERE Colorado Court of Appeals Case #05CA1426

The End is nearing for the Fax Litigation Bottom Feeders. (Gosh... Could not have happened to a nicer bunch of guys... LOL)

We have heard from reliable sources that the Ball Law Firm is leaving the sinking TCPA Treasure Ship.
(Withdrawing from numerous cases involving US Fax Law Center / Attorney Andrew Quiat)

Added here on 10/17/2006 September 13, 2006 Audio Recording from Colorado Court of Appeals Oral Arguments in the case of US Fax Law vs. Myron. This case has been litigated all along by Attorney Andrew Quiat. Now for reasons unknown Attorney Jim Demirali argued this case.

Listen to Audio Click HERE Colorado Court of Appeals Case #05CA1426
To VIEW Supplemental Brief of Plantiff-Appellant Click HERE US FAX Law Center, Inc v. Myron Corporation 04CV0684

9/28/2006 And Another WIN for the "Good Guys". On the heals of the last one. Announced on September 28th... "MBA Contends, for the first time on appeal, that Consumer lacked standing to bring this action because TCPA claims are not assignable under Colorado law. We agree." The new owner of MBA may want to go back and sue the assigners. Finney sold MBA in early April of 2005. Six months later Finney filed Bankruptcy on October 5th 2005.
View News Article from Denver Business Journal Click HERE

Attorney Demirali fighting a legal battle out side of his TCPA collection scheme Perhaps these ex-employees should consider reporting Demirali to the Trouble Shooter, Tom Martino. Martino can call him a 'rip off" and "scum bag" on his radio show coercing him to pay up?
See story from Denver Business Journal by Clicking HERE Scroll down when document opens.

We were told a few days ago that the case below dated 9/9/2006 originally litigated by attorney Andrew Quiet is now under the hand of attorney Jim Demirali (Attorney for Tom Martino's Consumer Crusade) asking the Colorado Court of Appeals to re-consider. Looks like that's a long shot with two decisions stacked against them. Time will tell.

VIEW OPINION Click HERE COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS, Court of Appeals No. 04CV4841, Honorable Lawrence a Manzanares, Judge.

9/9/2006 Another win for the "Good Guys". This may put the TCPA Litigation Mills out of the "Legal Extortion Business". The Colorado Court of Appeals finds that violations of the TCPA is NOT ASSIGNABLE. Announced on September 7th 2006 the Colorado Court of Appeals concludes that the trial court reached the correct result... in Division II, Judge Rothenberg Roy and Hawthorne, JJ., concur with the lower count stating that "causes of action for invasion of privacy are NOT Assignable." "Accordingly, we hold that an action based upon the receipt of unsolicited faxes by individuals in violation of the TCPA is not assignable because such an action is in the nature of a violation of the right of privacy."

VIEW OPINION Click HERE COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS, Court of Appeals No. 05CA0298, Boulder County District Court No. 03CV2099, Honorable D.D. Mallard, Judge.

Should defendants sue to recover from the assigners and attorneys that have litigated these cases in Colorado?

04/1/2006 JUDGMENT AFFIRMED on March 30th 2006 - Another WIN against Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali (original King Pin of Tom Martino's www.faxwarS.com) "NOT Published pursuant to C.A.R 35f."

VIEW ORDER Click HERE Consumer Crusade v. Construction News (04CV2709) Court of Appeals Number 04CA2313

Policy of the Court concerning citation of unpublished opinions:
Citation of unpublished opinions is forbidden, with the following exceptions:
(1) Unpublished opinions may be cited to explain the case history or to establish the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel;
(2) This policy shall not apply to opinions that were designated as "Not Selected for Official Publication" and were announced between January 1, 1970 and November 1, 1975, but nevertheless were published in the Pacific Second Reporter. (Policy adopted April 28, 1994)

2/26/2006 Received an eMail with attachment from an attorney apparently defending cases against Consumer Crusade. They wrote:
This may or may not be interesting/useful to you but this letter from General Counsel of the American Bankers Association to the FCC brings up some interesting points. They were apparently sued by CC.
VIEW Letter Click HERE

2/24/2006 Article in the Denver Business Journal by Paula Moore 2/20/06 "Crusaders against junk faxes suffer legal setback"
VIEW FULL ARTICLE Click HERE

	"Another hitch has developed in the effort to collect money from alleged "junk faxers" by the local Tom Martino affiliated company Consumer Crusade Inc. ..."
	"Bayless said in his rulings those documents aren't enough -- it has to produce the actual recipient at trial..."
	"Based in Englewood and affiliated with local consumer radio talk show host Martino, Consumer Crusade seeks out recipients..."
	"Bayless said Consumer Crusade had more than enough time to prepare its case and was given the opportunity to present evidence, but "failed to do so"..."
	"Profits from collected damages go to Martino's nonprofit Troubleshooter Foundation, which helps the needy, according to Martino. Consumer Crusade's owner, Francis R. Salazar -- an acquaintance of Martino's -- has said in a recent deposition related to a Consumer Crusade case that the company hasn't "made any money," according to the deposition..."
	"Salazar started Consumer Crusade in 2003 with Martino's help. The consumer advocate promoted the company on his radio show and Web site..."
	"Salazar was disbarred because of his 1971 conviction in Colorado federal court for illegally profiting from loans made by Rocky Mountain Bank of Lakewood while he was a director and attorney for the bank..."
	"When recently asked by phone to comment about his dealings with the bank and his disbarment, Salazar hung up on the Business Journal..."VIEW FULL ARTICLE Click HERE

2/24/2006 Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali (original King Pin of Tom Martino's www.faxwarS.com)
Filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus in Denver District Court trying to get court to order County court judges to rule on a bunch of pending cases that the county judges said they won't process until 10th Circuit appeal from Judge Babcock's order on assignability is decided.
VIEW Writ of Mandamus Click HERE

2/19/2006 Consumer Crusade v. JD&T Enterprises Inc. - US District Judge Edward Nottingham rules that records cannot constitute business records. Monition to dismiss id GRANTED VIEW ORDER Click HERE

2/19/2006 Consumer Crusade v. New York Deli - VIEW ORDER Click HERE

12/10/2005 Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali (original King Pin of Tom Martino's Consumer Crusade & www.faxwarS.com) TCPA piggybank may be at risk. Jim suffers an interception and fumbles the ball several times on this one. Way to go Jim!

(2004CV5151) Denver District, Honorable Judge H. Jeffrey Bayless in his ORDER, has concluded that "the action is groundless". "The court then turns to the request for attorneys fees. Attorney fees certainly may be allowed... " (All this on the heals of a reaffirmed dismissal.) "Accordingly the court orders that a hearing be set by the defendants on notice to plaintiff for consideration of attorney fees..." "The hearing shall not included any further discussion or argument on plaintiff's motion to reconsider..."
VIEW ORDER Click HERE

10/31/2005 (A note from the author, Dale Finney) Happy Halloween... Been busy working on my Bankruptcy. (Thanks in part to Andrew Quiat, Tom Martino, Consumer Crusade and the other TCPA Litigation "Bottom Feeders".) Just in case any one is wondering, this site has not produced income for me or my company. My motive is simply to help fight the war against the bottom feeding collection attorneys. Nothing more than ambulance chasers on the fax highway using highly calculated tactics to obtain settlement from the defendants that they litigate against. I want to thank all the attorneys and defendant's that have provided information and documents for this site, even though the documents are public record. I have been tagged as the "Anti TCPA Bar" . (see posting 6-15-2005 below, scroll down) Andrew Quiat has been making the same reference to me, thanks Andrew.

10/31/2005 Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali stubs his toe at the front door of the Federal Courthouse. Threshold of Federal Courthouse proves too high for Mr. Demirali to step over; Demirali expected to recover, and be back in action after the holidays.

Federal District Court Judge Edward Nottingham, on October 14th 2005, granted MOTION TO DISMISS in favor of defendants (Civil Action 05-CV-00211), JD&T Enterprises, Inc. a California travel discounter. "JD&T" had enlisted fax.com, resulting in the assignment of 735 fax's to Consumer Crusade, and incurring the vigorous pursuit of Tom Martino's favorite TCPA "bulldog," attorney Jim Demirali. Mr Demirali expected to litigate this "million dollar baby", and challenge Chief District Judge Babcock's ruling against assignability (See iHire ruling). In the alternative, Mr. Demirali is always happy to use the forces at his disposal to extort a settlement from his adversary. Unfortunately for his client (Consumer Crusade Inc.) Mr. Demirali will not be arguing such esoteric matters quite yet, nor leveraging a hefty settlement, since the affidavit of Francis Salazar did not pass muster to establish a prima facie case.

Judge Nottingham concludes: "I decline to accept Salazar's affidavit." Now, one might think that Judge Nottingham is looking back at Mr. Salazar's Federal felony conviction, and doubting his veracity. Then again, one might think that the federal judges occasionally have lunch with the Colorado Supreme Court judges, who doubt Mr. Salazar's fitness to practice law within the confines of Colorado. No ... That's not why Mr. Salazar's affidavit was denied.

One would expect that the affidavit of the "litigation director" of Consumer Crusade would be a carefully crafted document, prepared, signed and sworn in support of a million dollar case, However Judge Nottingham finds that it is based not on the personal knowledge of Mr. Salazar, but upon hearsay statements and documents. Judge Nottingham, like many lawyers defending these TCPA cases, finds that the actual recipients have the personal knowledge to establish these jurisdictional issues. Until Mr. Demirali can satisfy the Federal judiciary concerning the threshold issue of "long-arm" jurisdiction, and get the real parties in interest before the Judges, he just doesn't have a ticket to the game.   Incidentally, Mr. Demirali's client has been ordered to pay the costs of Defendants.

VIEW ORDER Click HERE (Order Provided is from an online resource that provided all the text from the order. An actual copy of the order may be obtained from the Federal Court House)

Last but not Least... Judge Edward Nottingham noted that assignments cannot constitute "Business Records" of the Plaintiff... Bottom of page 8 of the order provided herein. "Contrary to Plaintiff's position, these facsimiles cannot constitute business records of Plaintiff, and thus, cannot constitute an exception to the hearsay rule... "

The underlined items above that are not brown in color are Hot Links to documents. Click on the links to view.

10/31/2005 Andrew Quiat at it again... Joining numerous defendants within one action.   (Case 2005CV7967 assigned to Judge Ronald M. Mollins) This did not work in the past, why would it work now? Upon Information and Belief many of the defendants may band together, forming another TCPA Defense Bar, Time will tell... This may be perfect setting for "abuse of process". All but one of the parties named have 1 fax assigned by Lion Capital, believed to be a shell corporation set up to assign faxes. In this case assignments are 2 and 3 times removed from the true party.

The shell Corporation: Documentation shows that a phone number connecting to Andrew is owned by Katie Irvine, the registered agent and sole stock holder of new Lion Capitol Corporation.   Lion Capital corporation was dissolved on October 1st 2000. Viewing the prior corporation filings shows Edward J. Ott as part of the corporation. Ott is currently a close associate of Andrew Quiat along with Katie Irvine.
VIEW COMPLAINT   Part 1     Part 2

NOTE: Not sure what Quiat is up to here?   He filed a complaint against 43 defendants with the Denver District Court on 9/29/2005, then dismissed it the next day. (Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Pursuant to CRCP 41a1) (Case 2005CV7707 assigned to Judge Catherine A. Lemmon) Then on 10/3/2005 he filed the same complaint with the same defendants in the same court.???   For those interested you may view the dismissed case using these links: Print and compare, I did not see any difference between them.

Could it be he did not like the Judge assigned to the case due to a prior decision? Perhaps he was having second thoughts about filing the case in this posture, and then decided to "go for it any way." I know of numerous defendants that settled with him and are now having regrets, hoping to someday recover their losses.   (Anyone having information to support these or other ideas, please contact me at This Link.

VIEW Duplicate Complaint Filed 9/29/2005 with Voluntary Dismissal   Part 1   Part 2   Part 3 (Part 3 is the Dismissal)

10/31/2005 Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali, original King Pin of Tom Martino's Consumer Crusade & www.faxwarS.com is placed on hold by Denver County Court until the Tenth Circuit determines standing and assignability. Demirali has nearly 50 cases in Denver Count Court. This should keep him and others out of county court until a decision is handed down. Way to go Denver County Court judges! VIEW ORDER Click HERE

VIEW ORDER Click HERE

8/25/2005 Colorado Court of Appeals reverses Judge Egelehoff's decision. Judgment reversed and case remanded with directions. Posted 10/31/05 VIEW ORDER Click HERE

8/15/05 - Roasted Goose may be new Menu Item At Boston Market!
MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED! Boston Market Corporation, a purveyor of "comfort food," may have the opportunity to expand their menu. It seems that their "goose" is getting slow-cooked in Jefferson County District Court. add a few side dishes, and you have a feast for the whole family!

Boston Market was apparently aggravated to receive "junk" fax traffic, and entered into an alliance with collection attorney Andrew Quiat, whose U.S. Fax Law Center, Inc. has sued a large number of businesses alleging violations of the "TCPA."

iHire was the defendant at the center of Federal Judge Babcock's ruling that faxes are not assignable in Colorado. iHire has sued Boston Market, as the assignor of faxes in that case, for negligence. Boston Market's motion to dismiss the suit was denied in a well-reasoned decision by District Court Judge Leland P. Anderson. IHire is now free to litigate with Boston Market Corporation for iHire's legal fees and costs, which amount to almost a half million dollars. (Frank Ball is representing Boston Market, this may prove to be very interesting.) Those who know the history are well aware!

This case could cost Boston Market hundreds of thousands of dollars even though they stood to gain only a couple of thousand dollars by assigning the iHire faxes. This could be the wake-up call needed to warn those that assign faxes to the junk fax litigation mills. (Defending Attorneys "Take Note") TCPA Defense attorneys should carefully follow the developments in this case, which could establish precedent for recovery of the massive legal defense fees that have been incurred.

View History of Documents HERE

8/18/05 Colorado Court of Appeals AFFIRMS DENIAL of Class Action Court of Appeals NO. : 03CA2041
Arapahoe County district Court No. 02CV3159, Honorable Timothy L. Fasing, Judge. ORDER AFFIRMED
Division V, Opinion by JUDGE NIETO, Roy and Criswell, JJ., concur. Announced: May 26, 2005

View History of Documents HERE

8/15/05 The following info was received by email from a concerned attorney defending one of the many TCPA cases... We are attempting to get further information from the provider. Please check back for updates on this posting... We are currently playing "Phone Tag" with the provider, (A VERY High Profile Attorney in the Denver area) in an attempt to obtain further details. "I have something new that should be posted to your website. These plaintiffs complain about my discovery that you have previously posted, saying that it is unnecessary and oppressive to require that they produce names, phone line proof, fax machine ownership, etc., because they have a "verified" assignment! In a recent new case, I discovered that out of approximately 36 faxes at issue, 30 were assigned to CC by a sub-tenant in the suite that only had permission to use the fax machine, but did not own the fax machine or the telephone line. In addition, the owner of the line and machine actually wanted to get those 30 faxes..... as he was a member of the organization that sent the faxes. Thus, a bogus assignee, who had no rights or ownership, and was not a "victim", "assigned" most of the faxes at issue in the case to CC. This should surely justify any Defendant being entitled to force CC to answer all the "unfair" questions asked regarding ownership proof for the phone line and fax machine."

7/23/2005 - Admiral Quiat's, Esq, COLLECTION ATTORNEY Calls in deep sea divers to save his sinking "TCPA Treasure Ship" Arapahoe District Judge Timothy L. Fasing, GRANTS Motion to Dismiss. "THE COURT having examined the pleadings and documents of record, and being sufficiently advised in the premises, FINDS AND ORDERS:"

	"Further, as a general rule, statutory penalties may not be assigned.
	"In determining whether a statute is penal in nature, the Court must examine whether the statute creates a new cause of action and whether the statute requires proof of actual damages."
	"The Court must also examine whether the penalty imposed is greater than the actual damages."
	"Although the holding in US Fax Law Center, Inc., is not binding authority, the Court finds the reasoning to be persuasive and agrees that the TCPA creates a new cause of action which does not require proof of actual damages and, in fact, imposes a penalty in excess of the actual damages. US Fax Law Center, Inc. v. iHire, Inc..."
	"Accordingly, the Motion to dismiss is GRANTED."

VIEW ORDER Click HERE

Admiral Quiat's, Esq, COLLECTION ATTORNEY "TCPA TREASURE SHIP" begins to collapse under the pressure. Denver District Judge John N. McMullen, GRANTS Motion to Dismiss.

In summary, the court concludes that plaintiff's TCPA claims are penal in nature and thus not assignable. Since plaintiff asserts these claims only in the capacity of assignee, plaintiff lacks standing to assert its TCPA claims. Therefore, the court GRANTS the motion to dismiss...

The court has thoroughly considered the arguments in plaintiff's self described "ponderous" (53 page) Response and has read and considered the voluminous attachments to the Response. Plaintiff is advised that the court does not intend to reconsider this order absent the presentation of previously not cited, reported authority directly on point.

VIEW ORDER Click HERE

PRESS RELEASE - FAX BILL SIGNED BY PRESIDENT - Junk Fax Prevention Act becomes law

NEW YORK, July 11, 2005 - On Saturday, July 9, 2005, the President signed the following bill into law: S. 714, theJunk Fax Prevention Act of 2005," relating to unsolicited advertisements via telephone facsimile machines.

The practical significance is that, as of two days ago, people can send unsolicited advertising faxes where there's an EBR, as long as they comply with the new law's opt-out and other requirements, without the fear of getting sued. Companies must be vigilant to watch out for future state laws permitting suits, however, since--unlike the CAN-SPAM Act--this one does not preempt state laws.

Opt-out rules - You need not provide an opt-out opportunity for any faxes other than "unsolicited advertising" faxes, so, unless you have a business reason for offering to stop sending more faxes, you should word your opt-out notice accordingly. We are still waiting for an FCC response to our( now rather old) request that it clarify that renewal notices for no-charge subscriptions are not ads, and other content--such as order confirmations, surveys, etc.--are certainly not ads. If you decide that you want to be able to send such faxes, it's not a good idea to word your opt-out notice too broadly.

6/24/2005 - Admiral Quiat's, Esq, COLLECTION ATTORNEY "TCPA TREASURE SHIP" slipping deeper again...
Chief Judge Lewis T. Babcock of the Federal District Court of Colorado finds:

Colorado CCPA claims for statutory penalty are NOT assignable.

1999 Colorado Legislature Amendments PRECLUDE when no injury suffered in fact.

To establish a cause of action in trespass to a chattel in Colorado, there must be an intentional interference with the possessions or physical condition of a chattel in possession of another.

In order to establish a claim for conversion, a plaintiff must show it suffered some actual injury or damages stemming from converted property.

Generally, the right to recover a penalty is not assignable in the absence of express statutory language to the contrary because the assignability of such claims encourages litigation. (This is been acknowledged by the Colorado Supreme Court.) The CCPA-like the TCPA-does not contain express language to the contrary.

Therefore, Plaintiff neither has standing to bring the claim nor is the real party in interest.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

DEFENDANTS' joint motion for summary judgement and motion to dismiss pursuant to FED R. Civ. P12(b)(6) is GRANTED
PLAINTIFF's common-law claims for negligence, trespass, and conversion are DISMISSED
PLAINITIFF's Colorado Consumer Protection Act claim is DISMISSED
All remaining motions are DENIED AS MOOT
The case is DISMISSED;
DEFENDANTS are awarded costs; and
The Clerk of the Court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly.

VIEW ORDER Click HERE VIEW JUDGMENT Click HERE

6/24/2005 PRESS RELEASE FAX BILL PASSED BY SENATE Junk Fax Prevention Act moves from Senate to House of Representatives.
NEW YORK, June 24, 2005 - The United States Senate passed the Junk Fax Prevention Act, S. 714, by unanimous consent at noon today, sending the legislation to the House of Representatives for consideration... the bill is expected to pass the House quickly and without difficulty...

	a statutory "established business relationship" (EBR) exception to the ban on unsolicited commercial faxes;
	there is no time-limit definition to that EBR;
	unsolicited commercial faxes will now have to include an opt-out provision on the first page of the fax, providing a cost-free, 24/7 means for the recipient to request removal from the fax distribution list;
	after the date of enactment, fax numbers to which unsolicited advertising will be sent must be obtained either directly from the recipient or from a public source to which the recipient gave the number for publication (i.e., a website, advertisement or directory);
	fax numbers in the possession of the sender at the time of enactment are "grandfathered" as to the means by which the number was obtained;
	in the case of an EBR that exists at the time of enactment of this legislation for which the sender does not possess the fax number, that fax number would have to be obtained in the same manner as if it were a new relationship being established, in other words from the recipient or a public source;
	after not less than three months from enactment, the FCC is authorized to review this matter, and if it determines that there are significant abuses of faxes sent under the EBR exception, it may reconsider imposing limitations on the EBR.

TO VIEW FULL STORY Click HERE

6/15/2005 Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali, original King Pin of Tom Martino's www.faxwarS.com placed into public record today (Denver District Court Case No. 04CV5151), stating: "Finney, his attorney, and the other members of the Anti-TCPA Bar, any and all tactics admittedly are fair game in attempting to sidetrack or obstruct plaintiff's TCPA actions." also claiming that this web sites sole purpose is for "attacking plaintiff, other TCPA plaintiffs and their counsel." Demirali further tries to sway the court into thinking that the following verbiage from this site is a "new strategy" employed by TCPA defendants.

"The issue of assigning CCPA claims now comes into play. Reviewing the statute may impact the current attorney enrichment scheme used by TCPA Litigation firms. The whole scheme currently utilized by these collection firms was clearly NOT the intent of the CCPA. This whole scheme may raise the question of "Champerty"."
(Originally posted 1/3/2005 see below - scroll down) (Champerty was raised at the onset by many TCPA defendants.)
I call the above freedom of speech! Post your thoughts on the public forum HERE

This site was originally erected to defend MBA Financial and Finney from Martino's ON AIR and WEB SITE comments: "Scum Bag", "Sue Your Ass", "Consumer Rip Off", etc. See MBA's Response HERE. The site has evolved into a general TCPA knowledge base for use by anyone involved in TCPA litigation. MBA and Finney were originally scammed by eLoanSite.com and Fax.com into believing that sponsoring their service was supporting the Missing and Exploited children's network. Similar to the Amber Alert System used on the nations highways today.

Yes I admit, that it is my feeling that these litigation collection attorneys are nothing more than ambulance chasers on the Fax Highway. Many publications have referred to them as "bottom feeders".

Jim Demirali... you have no idea... Stay tuned to your Bannock inbox and the local media. By The Way, why is your FawWars.com site DOWN? Original copies of the site are available by Clicking HERE.

It has been noted by several, that Attorney Jim Demirali has a temper that has been displayed in the professional surroundings of our court houses. Keep your cool Jim... people are watching and talking...

To ALL, Please post your reaction to this on the Public OPEN Forum by Clicking HERE

6/14/2005 - Andrew Quiat's COLLECTION ATTORNEY "TCPA TREASURE SHIP" Slips deeper with recent 7.0 quake. Chief Judge Lewis T. Babcock of the Federal District Court of Colorado, responded to US Fax Law Centers MOTION to REVISE or WITHDRAW his order of March 28th. (See Below) "In the final analysis, what is at work here is an effort to utilize this Court to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse." "Plaintiff US Fax Law Center's motion for "revision" or for "withdrawal" is DENIED" VIEW ORDER Click HERE
See related Decision and Order (below) dated March 29, 2005 (Click to View)

5/29/2005 - Court of Appeals decision to allow class certification has been overturned by the Supreme Court of Georgia. Decided 3/15/2005 - Class certification has been denied! This decision has far-reaching consequences. (Consumer Crusade's Attorney Jim Demirali recently boasts about "focusing on class-actions in the near future". Click HERE and HERE. How will this Supreme Court decision effect his class-action goals? Martino has boasted on many occasions about doing class-action against fax blasters on his radio show.) VIEW ORDER Click HERE

This Supreme Court of Georgia decision should be the death knell for the majority of class-action TCPA cases.

Judges Frank M. Eldridge and Charles B. Mikell Jr., whom Barnes appointed to the court in 2002, also sat on the panel. Barnes didn't originally file this suit, however... he was brought in for the appeal by his former law clerk, Marc B. Hershovitz, who coincidentally had researched the consumer act for Barnes in the summer of 1993." See Article here: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1068651187767

3/29/2005 - COLLECTION ATTORNEYS' "TCPA TREASURE SHIP" FOUNDERS UPON THE ROCKS OF ASSIGNABILITY: Admiral Quiat, Esq., Captain Ball, Esq. and First Officer Demirali, Esq. washed over board; may join actual "bottom feeders" near wreck site. Those who assigned TCPA claims may face rough seas without life jackets.

Chief Judge Lewis T. Babcock of the Federal District Court of Colorado, on March 28th 2005, issued an "outcome-determinative" ruling in the diversity jurisdiction case of US FAX LAW CENTER, INC v. IHIRE, INC. (Civil Case No. 04-B-344). Judge Babcock finds that "Junk Faxes" are NOT ASSIGNABLE... Click the link below for details.

See related Memorandum Opinion and Order (above) dated June 14, 2005 (Click to View)

MORE Details Click HERE VIEW ORDER Click HERE

1-14-2005 Visit Defendants TCPA Forum Public OPEN Forum related to TCPA cases
Visit Defendants TCPA Private Forum PRIVATE Forum related to TCPA cases
Should you desire Access to this Private Forum, please complete our Member Area Request

Attention Defending Attorneys: We strongly suggest that you deposition the assignors and the person that notarized the assignments on ALL faxes. Remember to MORE... Click HERE

2-15-2005

Jacques Machol, III and Andrew Quait are KING Pins of TCPA Litigatrion Bottom Feeders. Machol and Quait and their firms specialize in prosecuting bulk TCPA claims. More... Click HERE

Fix puts exemptions in unwanted-faxes law - By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News March 1, 2005 View HERE

3-7-2005 Consumer Crusade loses another one. This one in Denver County Court. Case 04C29922. Jim Demirali's first error was to seek damages in excess of the courts jurisdiction. Regardless, County Court Judge Melvin Okamoto GRANTS Motion to Dismiss, also citing Judge Egelhoff's decision. View Order HERE

2-18-2005 Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali, original King Pin of Tom Martino's www.faxwarS.com loses case in Arapahoe County. Defendants Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. View Order HERE District Court Judge William Sylvester finds "Colorado Courts did not have Subject Matter Jurisdiction to hear private right of action for violation of TCPA prior to 2004". Case 04CV228

2-18-2005 Denver Business Journal's Paula More writes article "Consumer Crusade files 25 suites". Feb 11-17, 2005 Edition. We could not find article on www.BizJournals.com at time of this update. Click HERE to view excerpts from article.

Click to View Colorado Bar Association & Find Law information on attorney Andrew L. Quiat

View Current District Court cases by Andrew L. Quiat Posted 1/14/2005
View Current District Court cases by Frank J. Ball (A close associate of Quiat)

1-4-2005 Another one of attorney Andrew Quiat's prime targets case is dismissed by District Judge D.D. Mallard. McKenna v. MBA Financial Group Inc. Case 04CV992. COURT FINDS: "No Subject Matter Jurisdiction to hear TCPA claims brought prior to August 2004". View ORDER Click HERE (File Size 627KB)

1-3-2005 TCPA Litigation King Pin attorney Andrew Quiat's Boulder Colorado case 04CV997 (Plaintiff: Douglas M. McKenna) is ruled on by District Judge D.D. Mallard.

COURT FINDS: "No Subject Matter Jurisdiction to hear TCPA claims brought prior to August 2004". CCPA Claims remain if a CCPA violation exists. View ORDER Click HERE (File Size 1 Meg)

The issue of assigning CCPA claims now comes into play. Reviewing the statue may impact the current attorney enrichment scheme used by TCPA Litigation firms. The whole scheme currently utilized by these collection firms was clearly NOT the intent of the CCPA. This whole scheme may raise the question of "Champerty" (see below)

In law, champerty is the practice of participating in a lawsuit in order to share in the proceeds by a person not naturally a party to the lawsuit, that is, buying in to someone else's lawsuit. This practice is prohibited in some jurisdictions; in others, judges are considered to have the responsibility for policing such behavior.

Consumer Crusade Attorney Jim Demirali, original King Pin of www.faxwarS.com web site FINALLY responds to Fax Wars in an update on Martino's TroubleShooter.com web site. In his article he shows little to no respect towards Denver District Court Judge Martin Egelhoff. He writes about an updated website, what happened to www.faxwarS.com why is it gone? He does not address that! Click HERE for more info.

Finally, sometime in December 2004 www.faxwarS.com was updated with the same information that was posted on www.TroubleShooter.com site previously. More... Click HERE

Heads Up to Defending Attorneys requesting discovery with little success
View MOTION TO COMPEL against US Fax Law Center GRANTED
Arapahoe County District Judge Marilyn Leonard awards $2,260 in attorneys fees.
As an example: View Plaintiff's Responses to Defendants First Set Of Interrogatories on a case we are fighting in Boulder - A clear opportunity to file Motion To Compel with Attorneys Fees

TROUBLE FOR "THE TROUBLE SHOOTER" October 15, 2004
Denver District Court Judge Lawrence A. Manzanares adopts
Judge Martin Egelhoff's reasoning, DISMISSING Martino's Consumer Crusade, Inc.
v. MBA Financial Group Inc. and Dale Finney
CLICK HERE to view order View Document History

Boulder District Court Judge D.D. Mallard adopts Denver District Judge Martin Egelhoff's
reasoning dismissing plaintiff's TCPA claims View Ruling & Order
Douglas M. McKenna v. Stephen C. Oliver September 10, 2004

View "FEDERAL LAW PRE-EMPTED BY STATE LAW", in Fax Blasting law suits,
according to Denver District Court Judge Martin Egelhoff July 26, 2004

Documents that may be useful in fighting TCPA "Bottom Feeders"
View Click HERE Case Law Info

View The True Income Calculation for the Demirali Law Firm

House votes to relax junk fax rules... A greener light for "junk" faxes. The House has voted to relax regulations on unsolicited commercial faxes. The bill would overturn FCC rules requiring senders of commercial faxes to get prior written approval from recipients. The rules, which were set to take effect last August, have been delayed until January. The House bill would rewrite the rules so that senders of commercial faxes would be required to prominently include "opt-out" instructions for recipients who no longer wish to receive them.

(This would put ambulance chasing, "Bottom Feeding" law firms back on the streets of America) Click HERE For source.

We have REMOVED an article entitled "Martino Leading Crusade Against Junk Faxes"
On or about November 15th we received a registered letter from the publisher American City Business Journals asking that we remove the article and links as it is viewed by them as copyright infringement. The letter stated in part, "As you may or may not be aware, American City Business Journals, Inc. owns exclusive copyright rights in this material. This unauthorized use of this material is copyright infringement and is unacceptable to us. Please remove the material from your site immediately."

If you would like to view the article, please visit www.Google.com and do a search on "martino leading crusade against junk faxes". You will find links to the article that was published in the Denver Business Journal on July 30th, 2004, along with 38 other related links produced by this search.

Qwest critic Martino becomes firm's rival... Becoming Qwest's competitor led Martino to ease up on the Baby Bell, however. Listeners with bad things to say about Qwest now have their calls taken off the air. FULL Story

View Article written by Mike Taylor, Managing Editor of Colorado Biz Magazine,
Referring to Tom Martino... "Trouble Shooter or Trouble Maker?" September 2004 Issue

"That's why it's hard to see how Tom Martino, consumer advocate that he is, can believe he is helping the consumer"

"It's disturbing to think we might need a new Tom Martino just to troubleshoot the current Tom Martino"
"Curiously, much of the late-night infomercial bluster from two months earlier had disappeared, kind of like Martino's trademark mustache." "I personally love being a lawyer. I've been doing it for 35 years. And it bothers me when people make jokes about lawyers, but this gives lawyers a bad name. I mean, it really does. This is the bottom-feeder."

"FEDERAL LAW PRE-EMPTED BY STATE LAW", in Fax Blasting law suits,
according to Denver District Court Judge Martin Egelhoff July 26, 2004

DEFENDANTS MBA and FINNEY'S First Set of Interrogatories,
First Request for Production of Documents, and First Request for Admissions
Lion Capitol v MBA - Not related to Demirali's Case September 4, 2004

PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES
November 24, 2004

View current District Court cases filed as of 7/30/2004, by Fax Wars - Consumer Crusade
c/o Demirali Law Firm, 875 South Colorado Blvd, Box #662, Denver, CO 80246, PH: 303-832-5900
View Cases Filed after 7/30/2004 Click HERE Posted 1/14/2005

View County Cases filed by Consumer Crusade as of 8/15/2004 File Size about 1 Meg

County court Judge Kim Goldberger dismisses TCPA claim finding that
"Private Right of action created under TCPA is NOT Assignable" View ORDER Click HERE March 31, 2004
NOTE: This case was overturned, don't use as case law...

Motion to Dismiss Filed by counsel on behalf of MBA Financial Group Inc. July 1, 2004
Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss July 1, 2004
Consumer Crusade's Response to MBA's Motion To Dismiss August 9, 2004
MBA's Reply to Consumer Crusade's Response to Motion To Dismiss August 18, 2004
View Document History

Documents that may be useful in fighting TCPA "Bottom Feeders" View Click HERE

MBA's response to Martino's attack of June 26, 2003

On September 26, 2004 we tried to access FaxWars.com (Tom Martino's Site)
We got an "Under Construction" NOTICE. To see what we saw, Click HERE
For those who would like to see what the site looked like prior to 9-26-2004 Click HERE

View ORDER

The Parties and lawyers to the "Fax-blast" litigation in Colorado were stunned by a ruling on Monday, July 26, which may change the complexion of this widespread controversy. The ruling was issued by Denver District Court Judge Martin Egelhoff. Order states "Federal Law Pre-Empted by State Law".

The ruling may be the subject of an appeal, because it dismisses with prejudice the claims of one of the high-profile TCPA Plaintiffs, Consumer Crusade, organized by "Troubleshooter" Tom Martino. (Currently ten plus suits) There has been no comment by Martino, nor any apology for his mistaken allegations against local businessman, Dale Finney. To View Full Story Click HERE

Tom Martino's "Legal Advice"

The www.FaxWarS.com website contains the following language: As of 8/10/2004
Martino's FaxWarS.com complete site PRIOR to 9-26-2004 Click HERE

"Now you can simply assign your faxes and the collection rights to Consumer Crusade and they will pay you $25.00 for each junk fax on which collection is made. "There is absolutely no expense to you." All claims, demands, suits and legal action will be brought in their name and not yours. "You will never be involved in any way in these matters." "http://www.faxwars.com/turning.htm See Screen Shot HERE

Mr. Martino does not cite any legal authority for this viewpoint, though Collection Attorney Demirali's name, address and phone number are prominently featured on that website. Martino asserts that "There is absolutely no expense to you." If you have given up a statutory entitlement to $500 to $1,500 in return for a possible recovery of $25.00, is it true for Martino to say that there is "...absolutely no expense to you." "You will never be involved in any way in these matters." Did you know that defendants are entitled to confront the true plaintiff? If the Defendants serve a SUBPOENA for your phone bills, or for you to appear and testify, you will incur expenses! Is Mr. Martino going to pay for your time to appear? Have you ever had to appear for a deposition without being "involved in any way" Next time you need legal advise, be sure to check with Mr. Martino.

What is the site about?
This site is a resource for faxing and spamming issues. It is not intended to be one-sided or slanted in any way. It does not just provide a small snippet about fax blasting laws; it covers a massive wealth of information. Use the navigation buttons at the top and bottom of this site to access the wealth of information provided. Also please see MBA's response to Martino's "on air" attack of June 26, 2003.

Why is this site here?
We suspect that a ton of visitors will come to this site because of Tom Martino's efforts to get people to visit www.faxwarS.com   Thus we are providing this resource for those whom want to have access to the growing body of information and judicial rulings addressing the subjects of "fax blasting" and "spamming". As noted at the top of this page, if you are looking for Tom Martino's site on faxing issues, visit www.faxwarS.com

Who placed this site here?
Dale Finney, former owner of MBA Financial Group Inc. Located in Denver Colorado, MBA Financial Group Inc. is one of the many companies that Tom Martino has pilloried on his radio show for Fax Advertising. In fact he continues to mention MBA Financial Group Inc. on the air, saying he has 4 faxes from us (which, if true, is arguably the result of his failure to "opt out" or utilize the Colorado No Call List).

Yes I sent faxes many months ago, believing it was lawful. I was led to believe this by www.eloansites.com and www.fax.com (two of the vendors I had used). I was told that the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children was a principal beneficiary of The Internet Emergency Response Network. The commercial sponsors, including MBA Financial Group Inc., were funding the efforts of The Internet Emergency Response Network, and receiving the ancillary benefit of having their commercial message transmitted as part of the campaign. I was led to believe that all recipients of the subject fax's would have consented to such fax traffic, in support of the goals of that emergency response network. It is the electronic parallel to the "Amber Alert" system which now publishes emergency information about recent child abductions to travelers on the interstate highways. I was further led to believe that such transmissions were lawful in Colorado under the State Statute C.R.S. 6-1-702 (b)(I) that precludes unsolicited fax advertisements "unless the fax contains a statement informing the recipients of a toll-free number they can use to stop future faxes". All my faxes had a toll-free number for removal. All of this fax traffic was conducted in good faith with due regard to the Colorado No Call List and in arguable compliance with the State laws as explained by the vendors of such services. The most recent interpretations of the TCPA by the federal courts have imposed a more restrictive scheme, which governs this area of speech pending rulings by higher courts.

While fax advertising generated lots of business and I felt that the faxing was within the scope of the law, I terminated fax advertising services.

Having accumulated about 2 hours of audio telephone recordings and traced calls (provided by www.WhosCalling.com) from Tom Martino and his staff harassing me and my employees, I revisited whether or not I wanted to continue fax advertising. As noted above I stopped.

What you will find on this site?
A wealth of links leading you to almost every facet of faxing and spamming. Also links to companies that are currently providing faxing services, just to show that there are still people using fax advertising. I am not the arbiter of whether it is legal or not. It will be very helpful when our legislature enacts a law that is judicially interpreted to provide clarity on the faxing and spamming issues. You will find numerous articles detailing the progress toward a clear cut solution.

Are you tired of spam email?
I currently get about 300 to 500 spam emails per day. This is another instance where a clearly defined law would help minimize spam mailing. In the mean time I have found a program that help manage spam email before it gets into your inbox. Visit www.MailWasher.net

A thought on self protection, we all do it every day!
I placed all of my office phone numbers (including fax) on the Colorado No Call list, virtually stopping ALL telemarketing and FAX calls. (Visit www.ColoradoNoCall.com)   I also added my home phone and fax numbers to the Colorado No Call list, successfully stopping telemarketing and fax calls. It is clear that using the Colorado No Call services is a simple and effective way to stop unwanted telemarketing and fax calls. Just one simple step, similar to taking your car keys with you when you park your car to go shopping. Many people refuse to use the tools available to them thinking they should not have to take that extra step.

Yes it works! Just like taking your keys with you (and setting the alarm) when you go shopping. Why not take 3 minutes to add your number(s) to the Colorado No Call list to stop unwanted calls for ever?

Tom Martino and others say "I should not have to do that". People shouldn't have to call Tom Martino, either. Enough said... Do what works for you!

Please enjoy the site. Check back often for updates on this fast-developing legal controversy.

To obtain a recording of Martino's radios shows, call: Video Monitoring Services, 303-733-8000

See MBA's response to Martino's "on air" attack of June 26, 2003
Enjoy the site...

This web site should by no means be taken as legal advise. If you wish to utilize the information contained on this site, it is always best to consult an attorney.