These Complaintsboard.com Asses Need to Die

Complaintsboard.com has an editorial posted up that they believe does not tell the whole story. Sure, explaining in detail the rise & fall of charge offs is at best daunting. What strikes us as odd, is complaints board editorial seems to be four sided. The author, who by the way forgot to post their name,  did in the last sentence ask that consumers not be surprised at the long term effect of consumer card defaults. But for the most part seemed to favor big business, take for example this excerpt “Considering you’re the ones in charge of the company, you know the company’s success depends on your decisions. So you realize that if your customers aren’t paying back their loans, it’s because they can’t afford to. You also come to understand that because they don’t have money to spend, they are coming to depend on their credit cards to pay for their everyday costs even when they know they won’t be able to pay the bill one times it comes.” Over the last year, credit card companies have been raising the interest rates on consumers across the board. they've received e-mails from consumers who claim to have credit scores in the low 700’s as well as a moderate debt to income ratio, yet their interest rates went from %12 to %22.
Rates were beginning to rise before the official start of the recession

Major credit issuers employ analyst that are able to forecast fiscal trends, & warn of possible declines in economic stability. Rates were beginning to rise before the official start of the recession. This creates a  money cushion for the advancing lean times. The problem was the analysts could not see exactly how bad the recession was going to be. No four forced these credit card companies to over extend themselves. People were getting lines of credit on cards that were way to high. If you applied for a credit card, did you have a choice on how much the limit was?


they periodically read other consumer complaint sites to see what active trends in business/consumer relations lie. & every so often there is an articles that will not fit the demographics of a site. On Monday June 15th 2009 major credit card companies announced a rise in consumer card defaults, & some consumer sites have picked up on this information. The rise across the board is roughly 1 percent. Although that seems small in contrast, to big business that means serious a serious decline in dividends paid out to share holders.


No, the issuer decided this. If you lost your job, & saw no other way to feed your relatives but use this card would you then use it? Yes you would. A few years back someone & everyone was able to get multiple credit cards, with ext


Basically this website is the most one sided and slanderous vehicle on the internet.  A person who is spine less and has (vaginosis) can't even list there real name or at least company name or website.  This site causes problems for all legitimate companies.  Thats the reason for this site to defend hard working business owners.  Keep this in mind,  when a business owner falls not only does it hurt him or her and the people around them personally, it affects jobs for other people service workers who service the business.   Business closing down only hurts our economy.  I love the free speech we have in this country but I hate people who want to exercise it behind the curtain of complainst board.




COMPLAINTS BOARD YOU SUCK MY SALTY BALL SACK.  


FUCK OFF!!!! NAZI FAGOTS

This is the woman responsible for Complaints Board.  What a Bitch!!!

Look what I found on google about our friends!!!! These people are a mess!

Subject: NAAS Listing of Criminal Websites

Related Report#1: Numerous NASFAA/NACAC members implicated in Student-loan fraud
Related Report#2: Father of Carnegie Mellon University Employee Linked to Criminal websites

cc:
CollegeConfidential.com, Inc.
ComplaintsBoard.com
Ripoff Reports.com*
Eastmont HS
Bad Business Bureau
*Any website associated with N.Y. UnderBoss Josh Centor, or members of the Centor family, or that has accepted uncensored input from the Centor family, or that provides material support for Centor family.
(This report is Continued from Page 2.)

Page Page 1; Page 2 of 3

---

NEWS, Commentary & Analysis This brief Media Report contains a subject matter of general and public interest, and should be read only by persons interested in the subject and contents therein. NAAS Editors Implemnent New Rule
Child Molestation Background checks Commencing in January 1st, 2009, it is now routine for NAAS-NEWS reporters, and editors to seek various back-ground checks on persons who become focal points of and/or listed in NAAS-NEWS Media Reports. These various background checks may include, but are not limited to, investigations of past Child Molestation convictions, past child molestation arrests, past child molestation inquiries, past arrests and/or convictions, rapes, past or pending lawsuits, bankruptcy, opinions of neighbors, ex-wives, ex-husbands, co-workers, etc. As a general rule, if a person, teacher, website operator, news-reporter, employer, or politician has received monies, cash, gifts, payments, inducements, promises, offers of employment, free attorneys, or drugs from any member of the New York-based Centor family, or from Josh Centor, in exchange for requests made by the Centor family, or in exchange for news articles that attack critics of New York Mafia bosses, it is virtually guaranteed and/or very certain that such persons are corrupt.All persons connected to New York Crimes bosses or the Centor family will automatically be subject to background checks. Unlike main-stream media, NAAS does not accept advertising dollars. Phoenix News Reporter Sarah Fenske pens The Real Rip-Off Report Internet searches will reveal that the Centor family is associated with, and have used a number of criminal websites because such websites are consistent with the low-level of their personal integrity, as documented in a federal criminal complaint filed against Josh Centor in 2001; he did not formally refute, or deny the allegations. Numerous legitimate media organizations have caught onto the scam as to how phony consumer websites generate operating revenue. Shall we recite some facts? Let's go for it.

Complaintsboard.com, Rip-off report.com, Eastmont High School, etc. Many of these phony consumer reporting websites are nothing more than extortion rackets. They are designed by criminals for the benefit of criminals. The Centor family should know. Birds of a feather typically flock together. Consider an article written by Sarah Fenske of the Phoenix News entitled The Real Rip-Off Report. No! No! Not the corrupt New York Times, or Samuel G. Freedman, an alleged newsreporter that served as a personal parrot and receptive journalistic prostitute for disgruntled Josh Centor. This is story that details actual facts, not theories invented by washed up consumer terrorists who torment others for no legitimate reason.

At first blush, the article by Sarah Fenske demonstrates her dependence, integrity, and unwillingness to play the role of prostitute for the subject of the story. This is an article that every reporter, especially Samuel G. Freedman, associated with the New York Times and the Centor family should read. Sarah Fenske writes that The Rip-Off Report has become a boon to the disgruntled, who've posted complaints taking on everything from poor business practices to deadbeat dads, ofen without a shred of proof. The reporter continues that despite his efforts to live off the public-records grid, there's plenty you can know about Ed Magedson without even talking to him: the legal battles, the allegations of extortion, even his parents' death certificates and the paperwork from that old 1970s pot bust. The story details numerous embarrassing facts with regard to the alleged extortion attempts of companies associated with Ed Magedson. This issue was first reported by NAAS reportes in dealings with Better Business Bureau chapters. For a fee, self-styled consumer advocates like Ed Magedson are willing to mitigate or remove negatve information, writes Sarah Fenske. In a nutshell, the article supports the belief that various website used and relied upon by disgruntled and morally weak consumers like the Centors are simply criminal, and post unproven negative information in an attempt to extort monies from businesses.

Despite being assisted by New York Times reporter Samuel G. Freedman, who wrote an article for the Josh Centor family that portrayed NAAS in a negative light, let the record be clear that National Academy of American Scholars HAS NOT, WILL NOT, AND WILL NEVER pay a single dime to the family of Josh Centor. Even if the Centors recruited the entire staff of The New York Times, the entire staff of the Los Angeles Times, or any other newspaper. NAAS has been and will always remain morally superior to the entire Centor family, and their associates. NAAS will not be a party to extortion or blackmail.

Grab some pop-corn, and enjoy the table below. Smile.

Publication and Explanation of Criminal Websites Table

A * in the table below to the left of the named person or agency indicates that Larry Centor and/or Joshua Centor fully and successfully penetrated, influenced, and/or prostituted the company, agency, or person in terms of that person or agency agreeing to perform an act, command, or desire, or agreed to parrot a statement or phrase on behalf of and for the benefit of the Centors. A ** indicates cross-ties to representives or officers of NASFAA or NACAC. It should be no surprise that the most vocal critics of NAAS are also connected to NASFAA/NACAC. The members of these organizations are largely responsible for the majority of all student financial-aid fraud in the entire United States.

Tabular listing of Persons, Companies, and/or Agencies the Centor family has sought to influence or prostitute
*CollegeConfidential.com, Inc	Federal Trade Commission
Attorney General of New York	Attorney General of Nevada
U.S. Dept. of Justice	U.S. Dept. of Education
Congressman Gary Ackerman [D-NY]	Federal Bureau of Investigation
**NACAC	**David Hawkins
*United States Postal Service	*Samuel G. Freedman
California Department of Education	Washington State Attorney General
**Josh Centor	**The Ethics Scoreboard
Attorney General of California	*Elana Centor
The Los Angeles Times	Internal Revenue Service
*Complaintsboard.com	Etc.
**Larry Centor concedes he acts on behalf of Josh Centor

Last Known Addresses of Suspects

Last Known Addresses of Suspects Associated with Criminal Websites
Suspect's name & last known address	Website
Larry Centor 18-05 215th Street Bayside NY 11360 (*NASFAA/Centor Affiliate: Yes)	*Multiple
Josh Centor 18-05 215th Street Bayside NY 11360 (*Background-check: negative) (*NASFAA/Centor Affiliate: Yes)	*Multiple
Elizabeth Arden, d/b/a/ ComplaintsBoard.com P.O. Box 99800 Emeryville CA 94662 Email: complaintsboard@gmail.com (*Background-check: negative)	ComplaintsBoard.com
Melanie Lowry d/b/a/ ComplaintsBoard.com 942 Stanley Avenue Escondido CA 92026 (*Background-check: negative)	ComplaintsBoard.com
Melanie Lowry d/b/a/ ComplaintsBoard.com 5699 Kanan Rd. Apt. #645 Agoura Hills CA 91301 (*Background-check: negative)	ComplaintsBoard.com
Kathleen Heineman, d/b/a/ ComplaintsBoard.com 6033 S. Zanta Way Aurora CO 80015	ComplaintsBoard.com
Kathleen Heineman, d/b/a/ ComplaintsBoard.com 16397 E. Berry Ave. Centinnial CO 80015 (*Background-check: negative)	ComplaintsBoard.com
Ivonne Wainwright, d/b/a/ ComplaintsBoard.com P.O. Box 99800 Emeryville CA 94662 Email: complaintsboard@gmail.com (*Background-check: negative)	ComplaintsBoard.com
Roger Dooley (*Background-check: awaiting F.B.I. Child-Molestor report) (*Separate report: PENDING	CollegeConfidential.com, Inc. (*Legitimate business address unavailable) (*Altoona Business license unverified) (*Background-check: negative) (*Registration with Pennsylvania unverified) (*Incorporation papers unverified) (*Response to NAAS Inqueries: none (*NASFAA/Centor Affiliate: Yes
Jack Marshall (*Background-check: awaiting F.B.I. Child-Molestor report) (*Separate report: PENDING	The Ethics Scoreboard (*NASFAA/Centor Affiliate: Yes)
Doug Clay, Webmaster (*Background-check: awaiting F.B.I. Child-Molestor report) (*Separate report: PENDING	Eastmont High School 955 N.E. Third St. E. Wenatchee, WA 98802 (*NAFSAA/Centor Affiliate: Yes)
Ed Magedson, Owner (*Background-check: awaiting F.B.I. Child-Molestor report) (*Separate report: PENDING (*Further facts: PENDING).	Rip-off Report.com a.k.a. Bad Business Bureau P.O. Box 310 Tempe, AZ 85280 (*Centor Affiliate: Yes)
Elana Centor (*Background-check: negative) (*Separate report: PENDING (*PENDING).	funnybusiness.typepad.com (*NASFAA/Centor Affiliate: Yes)

These Guys Suck Too

So what is slander really all about? The following report includes some fascinating information about slander--info you can use, not just the old stuff they used to tell you.

Truthfully, the only difference between you and slander experts is time. If you'll invest a little more time in reading, you'll be that much nearer to expert status when it comes to slander.
Racketeering Charges Filed! Conspiracy and Racketeering (RICO) proceedings as well as claims for defamation and invasion of privacy are being issued against Ed Magedson owner or RIP OFF REPORT and Bad Business Bureau - under a Federal Court in Phoenix Arizona. The warrant has been issued against Rip Off Report, Bad Business Bureau - owner Ed Magedson for the operation including the sites: ripoffreport.com, badbusinessbureau.com, and a number of countless other “consumer advocate” sites being orchestrated by the extortion consortium. Ed Magedson operates his illegal extortion scam under the guise of “consumer advocacy” sites - to force innocent companies into paying him to take down his dirty posts. Currently 28 Attorney Generals and 17 Federal Prosecutors throughout the U.S. are pursuing Ed Magedson and the rip off report. Known to draft court service notices since 1992 (long before he started this extortion operation), rewards of up to $50,000 have been offered for his whereabouts. If you do a key word search under “Ed Magedson” you will see his shady past.

But the legitimate companies are not paying. Currently there are almost 100 court cases pending against Ed Magedson – including a judgement against ED for Ten Million Dollars - under the courts of Nevis where he has hosted his websites in the past.

Ed Magedson and the Rip Off Report EXPOSED in a WSVN Fox News Television Report! Click here to view!

USA Today issues warning that bloggers are inaccurate forms of information. For more information click here.

Here are just a few of the sites you will find when you do a keyword search in google using the phrase “Ed Magedson”.

Learn more about Rip Off report extortion: Click here: http://www.bad-business-rip-off.com/

http://www.goodbusinessbureau.com/

http://www.fight-back.us/11-16-04--Federat...est-records.htm

http://www.ezripofflawsuit.com/

Join the Class Action Lawsuit – Against the Rip Off Report

The tide is turning. A group of more than 130 companies have joined together in a class action law suit and are leading the charge against RIP OFF REPORT Ed Magedson and his group of strong armed criminals. Instead of each company having to fight the battle alone, the class action law suit has organized many companies and individuals including Walmart, Verizon Wireless, Pizza Hut and more who have been targeted by this extortion operation.


* If you have posted on the site and have been solicited for money we would like to hear from you.
* If you have seen a Ripoff Report posting and decided not to work with a company or do business with a company because of what you have read on one of these sites please let us know about your story.
* If your company has been victimized or attacked on the Ripoff Report we would like to hear from you.

If you are a consumer and you are researching a company you should be skeptical of anything on these sites. Instead visit official government sites such as the BBB, or the FTC: website to check out a company, and you will not be drawn into the web of deceit created by these criminals.

File your complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) - https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.sta...Z_ORG_CODE=PU01

News 1-23-06

BREAKING NEWS:

DEFENDANTS: Ed Magedson, Xcentric Ventures, LLC, Ripoffreport.com, Bad Business Bureau.com

“IT IS SO ORDERED. Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction are denied.”

January 18, 2006, Charles R. Norgle, District Judge

This decision by a Federal Judge clears the way for business, that have been the target of Rip Off Report - Ed Magedson’s extortion racket, to sue, shut down and jail Ed Magedson and his collaborators.

Facts in Evidence:

“Visitors must register with Sites, by providing identifying information such as name, email and street address in order to post comments. Defendants sell this information to law firms seeking to file class action lawsuits against companies. In addition, discovery has revealed that Defendants sought to enter into a business relationship with the law firm of…, which holds itself out as a firm, which ‘prosecutes class actions throughout the United States...’ Defendants proposed to refer clients to this firm, and attempted to negotiate a fee of $800,000 per year for this service. Defendants referred clients (information) to one of these (law) firms and actively solicited the business of another.”

In one case, the website (Rip off Report) posted more than 110 “complaints” from consumers. Investigation proved that only 11 of these postings were actually from customers. The balance of 99 reports was made-up by members of Rip Off Report staff.

So now you know a little bit about slander. Even if you don't know everything, you've done something worthwhile: you've expanded your knowledge.

Complaints Board Really Sucks!!!

Imagine the next time you join a discussion about Slander. When you start sharing the fascinating Slander facts below, your friends will be absolutely amazed.

 You may not consider everything you just read to be crucial information about Slander. But don't be surprised if you find yourself recalling and using this very information in the next few days.

Complaintsboard.com violates trademarks and utilizes slander as a means of doing business -- while trying to hide behind First Amendment rights for free speech.

Fortunately recent court rulings in California have taken a very dim view of trademark violations when there is commercial intent. As is clearly the case here.

Complaintsboard.com hides behind private registration and does not make itself known so that companies and individuals can take legal action against it.

Complaintsboard.com racketeering and is in violation of the RICO act. Just like ripoff reports.com it uses 'mobster tactics' to extort money from the companies that are wrongly accused just wish to clear their names.

Complaint Boards Is A Scam

These Guys are Pissing a Lot of People Off

Complaints Board does not publish truthful info - Armed Forces MCSS
PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE:

I agree that this website (complaintboards.com) is in violation of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). Batzel v. Smith, 2003 US App.LEXIS 12736 (9th Cir. 2003).
They are NOT immune from liability for defamatory statements posted on their websites.
Blogs or social networks in which defamatory statements are written or recorded present several potential sources of liability and recovery for the person whose character was defamed. In cases where the defamation is proved, damages are presumed and often enforced with liberality.
As social networking sites and internet blogs continue to increase in both popularity and use, the opportunities for defamatory and libelous actions increase proportionally. Defamation, sometimes called "defamation of character", is spoken or written words that falsely and negatively reflect on a living person's reputation. Slander is generally spoken defamation, while ‘libel’ is written. Blogs or social networks in which defamatory statements are written or recorded present several potential sources of liability and recovery for the person whose character was defamed. In cases where the defamation is proved, damages are presumed and often enforced with liberality.
Operators of blogs are generally immune from liability for defamatory statements posted on their websites, as long as they did not contribute to the posting. In 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a listserv moderator and operator of a website which allegedly published defamatory statements provided by a third party was eligible for immunity under the Communications Decency Act (CDA). Batzel v. Smith, 2003 US App.LEXIS 12736 (9th Cir. 2003). However, if the online service provider plays an active role in soliciting information from users that leads to the defamatory act, the operator may not be protected by the safe harbor provisions of the CDA. In Carafano v. Metrosplash.com, Inc., a federal court ruled on the application of the safe harbor of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). The defendant in that case operated a matchmaking website known matchmaker.com. As part of its service, the defendant collected profiles of singles based on an extensive questionnaire. The plaintiff sued Metrosplash because of a false profile of her which an unknown user had posted to the website. The court ruled that by creating the extensive questionnaire, Metrosplash played an active role in developing the information that had been posted. Furthermore, the court ruled that Metrosplash was an information content provider and thus not eligible for the CDA's safe harbor provided to "interactive computer services." Carafano v. Metrosplash.com, Inc., Case No. CV 01-0018 DT (CWx) C.D. Cal. 2002) (subsequently reversed by appeals court). While operators of blogs and services are generally immune from such liability, the more active the service is with its member’s, the greater the likelihood of potential liability as a publisher of defamatory materials.
Another potential source of liability is the person who actually posted the defamatory materials. As with more general defamatory statements or materials, a poster can be held personally liable for anything posted which reflects falsely and negatively on a living person’s reputation. Posting false and explicit claims regarding a person will generally be held as defamatory for purposes of liability. However, other issues arise concerning the anonymity of the person posting the information, and if known, the jurisdiction in which they are subject.
Jurisdictional issues may arise in situations where the poster had no reason to expect that the effect of the posting would be felt in a certain jurisdiction. However, in defamation cases jurisdictional disputes are liberally ruled upon in favor of the victim. In Griffis v. Luban, the Minnesota court of appeals ruled that Alabama had jurisdiction over a Minnesota defendant who posted defamatory messages on the Internet. The defendant repeatedly posted messages on an Internet newsgroup attacking the plaintiff’s professional credentials. The plaintiff initially obtained a $25, 000.00 default judgment in Alabama, which she was seeking to enforce in Minnesota. The Minnesota court ruled that the Alabama court had properly exercised jurisdiction because the effects of the messages were felt in Alabama and that the defendant should have expected that she would be sued there. An important factor in the ruling was that she had actual knowledge of the effect of the defamatory statements on the Defendant. Therefore, the Minnesota court enforced the $25, 000.00 default judgment. Griffis v. Luban, 633 N.W. 2d 548 (Minn Ct. App. 2001).
However, there are cases where courts have refused to allow the exercise of personal jurisdiction based on defamatory statements. In a Pennsylvania case, the court refused to exercise jurisdiction over a New York defendant who had posted defamatory comments about a defendant on an offshore betting website. The court held that since the comments were not specifically directed at Pennsylvania, the court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant. English Sports Betting, Inc. v. Tostigan, C.A. No. 01-2202 (E.D. Pa. 2002).
The problems with bringing defamatory actions based on internet postings largely lie in proving that the defendant actually made the posting. If that connection can be made, a much stronger case can be presented and jurisdictional issues can be tackled.
And of course, you do understand that one person can post multiple complaints cloaking themselves as different individuals and then use this as a reference to show extreme prejudice.
It is unfortunate that people will mistake opinions for the truth.
Here are some complaints :
Complaints Board
Posted: 2007-11-15 by Cindy Hunter [send email]
Complaint Rating:
Company information:
New York
United States
I'm complaining about the Complaints Board.
The messages are cut short and some make no sense.
Comments United States Other
Share with others:
Was the above complaint useful to you?
More Complaints Board complaints

Complaints Board - fake
Complaints Board - Complaints Board is One-Sided!
Complaints Board - Complaints Board is IRRESPONSIBLE!
Complaints Board - Complaintsboard.com is hurting businesses
Complaints Board - Complaints board is looking to get sued! a
Complaints Board - complaints board is looking to get sued!
Complaints Board - RIDICULOUS
Complaints Board - Liars! Scammers!
Complaints Board - Unfair! Does not list complaints against itself
Complaints Board - wrongful posts

Why Don't People Get a Life!!!!

This complaints board site is nothing but a lazy persons way to make a buck. The site entices every moron consumer to voice there unwanted opinions about services or company's that screwed them. The only problem is that anyone with a valid email can post on this site and be completely unrestricted as to what they can say. Many business owners have been affected by these post tremendously. Here is a quote fr0m a website I found on google.com.

"The complaint board is trying to ruin my company's reputation by posting lies from people who I have never heard of. They certainly are not my clients. I will offer a total refund to anyone of them if they can prove they are a client. Some sites are asking me for money and this is extortion!
I have built a wonderful company that has taken 23 years of sacrifice and hard work ethics based on honesty and plain old good American values. You treat one another as you would treat yourself or your family. In 23 years I have had very few complaints and those few were happily resolved out of thousands of clients. Check the BBB, as we have a A+ rating. The complaint board never checks anything.
They may even be the ones posting the lies to direct more advertising to their site. Or a competitor is paying them to put me out of business.
If they don't take the lies down, call me for any kind of law suit to get rid of such an dishonest & unethical organization. 415- 332-4111."

Comment by Jill Kelleher on 07:09 PM May 21, 2009 found on here.


Here are a few more just for fun. I can't believe how much a stupid website can affect someones business and lively hood..... these people who post on there are whack jobs.

I agree and would pay if a real lawyer would take this up. Could also contact melbourneit.com who they registered the site with. By telling the domain register that they allow Slander to be posted about your company and if they do not stop it, they can be sued as well.

Posted by Donna Lewis on 06:53 PM September 24, 2008

I have defamatory comments written about my company that are not true. I want this company hut down. Someone needs to be monitoring the usage from individuals. Their sole intent is to ruin company names or extort money from businesses, which is illegal.

Comment by Tina Norris on 06:27 AM December 16, 2008

Please review NAAS Media Reports for an investigation of this company.
http://www.naas.org/facts.php

Comment by naas on 02:33 AM January 29, 2009

Thank you so much for all your legal information. I am actually also thinking about a way to take complaintsboard to court for enabling defamatory statements about businesses and private persons without checking the justification of such comments. My husband has been called a THIEF, a loser, a bad parent and many more things on this website by different people who got their feelings hurt by him. I know that those women who accused him of all of that could not win on court against him and this is the reason why they now turn around and continue their fight on the complaints board website. These things have to stop.

Posted by Karin Bennett on 04:02 PM March 14, 2009