Postscript 2 ; current events

An amended class-action is now being launched against the Raygoza Gang. Not a moment too soon.

Keep looking out for it.

Pushtraffic Inc. would appear to have collapsed. Hardly makes any difference to its multitude of scammed customers. It only means Raygoza can't find new victims.
My bank tells me that Visa closed its merchant account with Pushtraffic . Well, that cuts off the snake's head, but it does not stop it squirming.
Raygoza will only try to open another scam-clone.

Just to let you know what perfidy and deception characterized the whole disgusting rat's nest while it operated, let's take another quick look at Pushtraffic's deceptive guarantees.

Their dishonest claims
"We provide 24/7 customer support at support@pushtraffic.com
7 day e-mail support at support@pushtraffic.com."

Reality
In fact, Pushtraffic's "support ticket" system was busted from day 1. Even after 30 days, I could never get a response from it, and I complained by email without effect. I also complained to their attorney, Michael Fitzpatrick when that legal mountebank phoned me in June, 2009.
I asked my first mentor, Ron Grajeda, for a 24-hour turnaround on my emails to him, but he would not commit to it, and made no mention of support. No other mentor agreed to 7-day email support, or even mentioned an option. I sent several emails to D. Sipes, Customer service Manager (so-called) but he did not bother to answer one.

Another dishonest claim:

In their refund statement, there is a Seminar Refund Policy.
Their claim:
"Every seminar put forth by Pushtraffic Inc is 100% satisfactory guaranteed."
(yes, you read it as they say it. But what does it mean?)

It then goes on to say:
"If you have attended and sat through the ENTIRE sessions(s) of any one seminar and have found yourself completely unsatisfied, please contact a Pushtraffic representative IMMEDIATELY. It is imperative that your contact is made PRIOR to the last scheduled day of the seminar you've attended. You will be asked to return everything you have received during the course of this relation, including but not subject to all books, binders, flowcharts, software, prizes, etc. Please note that a refund will not be considered if these items are not returned in full."

LOL

But nowhere in the section does it state your right to a refund!
It is not even implied.
The following heading: Cancellations, transfers and substitutions" precedes this paragraph:

"Your registration will be refunded, less a 50% placement and scheduling fee. Cancellations within 30 days of the seminar are non-refundable."

aside
Now if you can't make sense out of that gobbledygook, the warranty concludes with this kicker:
"Our refund policy can be changed at anytime without prior notice."
wow.

Interpretations
Tricky, eh? That's Raygoza for you.
In fact, the whole thing is nothing but Raygoza deception.
Let's go into the whole devious statement.


The policy statement seems to imply (possibly), at first glance, that a 50% refund is guaranteed. It is badly worded, but the 50% refund figure is put in there.
In other words, if you are given a load of complete crap (by all reliable reports, that's all you can ever expect) you can only hope get back half your money. You had better be quick because, it must be lodged with a representative PRIOR to the last scheduled day of the seminar you've attended.
But you must first sit through the entire session(s), as they put it.
Now how can I sit through all the sessions and also lodge an application prior to the last scheduled day? The last scheduled day of the seminars would include the final part of the seminars, logically. But if I lodge prior to the last seminar, it is not an entire set, so I am automatically disqualified. Even if it meant prior to the Close of Business on the last day of the seminars, it is still very unfair.
And if you try cancelling within 30 days of the seminar don't expect a cent!

It is a text-book case of consumer abuse. An ugly blot on American commerce.

But the whole thing is so badly worded, that it cannot be taken seriously.

It was never meant in good faith, that is certain!

By the way, who is to say whether anything is not returned in full, or not? The Merchant never acted in good faith, and if it helped them dupe the credit card banks, they would simply tell them something about not returning a book you may never even have received. That would be enough to stop charge back, but would be a lie.


Reality
I was personally advised by Raygoza's scumbag whore, Michael A Fitzpatrick, in a phone call to me on 3-4 June, 2009 that I was entitled to attend a Raygoza seminar in LA due in June 2009. All at their expense, under my Mastermind entitlement, which was never disputed until long after I claimed a refund.
The bums ignored my applications. Fitz-bum did not reply to my email sent to him in July 2009, asking what the hell happened to my promised seminar. By that time I was fed up anyway, and had already applied for a full refund from the crims.
But that does not let them off complying with their refund policy. In fact any of my letters could be used to invoke the policy. But they did not even reply to my demands for refund, the first one of which was posted on June 1, 2009.
The wicked refund policy does not cover the situation that the merchant fails to deliver at all. Oops! No refund possible then.
The only conclusion is that this phoney warranty was only ever included as part of the merchant's clear intent to defraud the client.

conclusion
Do not expect the slightest customer service or any courtesy from JP Raygoza's loathsome bunch of no-goodniks.
As long as the bastards can keep your money they wouldn't give a stuff!
US consumer protection is feeble and very poorly supported. Do not buy American goods, and do not trust credit card companies. If you have a dispute, you will need a lawyer.

the new contemptibles.

Remember these names.

Hated names for good reasons:
John Raygoza, CEO
attorney Michael A. Fitzpatrick,
attorney Andrew L. Weitz.

This last pair of scumbag legal henchmen specialize in writing deceitful and dishonest letters to the credit card banks in order to thwart clients' legitimate charge- back applications. These swindler-makers have found ruses to bamboozle the card issuers, Visa and Mastercard. They are both as despicable as their evil paymaster.

Damn their eyes.