Removal recording: "You have reached the fax number removal line. Starting with the area code, please dial your 10 digit fax number."
Header format: 05/04/04 13:31 16505551212 HealthCare PAGE 1"
I've been hit by Concord! So now what are my options?
Please see I've been faxed. What are my options?
|Broadcaster has transmitted faxes on behalf of:|
|B & M Construction|
|Capital Financial Resources, Inc.|
|Magical Memory Vacations, LLC|
|Med Health Plus|
|Unknown dba "Diznel, Inc."|
|Vacation Getaway Travel, Inc.|
|West Direct Marketing, Inc.|
Dear Secretary of State Reed:
I am sending you this email to initiate an inquiry into the activities of some corporations, all owned by a single individual in your state who may be misusing Washington’s corporate laws in an unlawful way. I have sent a similar inquiry to the Office of the Attorney General in your state, and I am additionally copying them in on this email. My name is Peter Jay Gould and I live in and own a television production company in the State of Connecticut.
The individual about whom I am writing is one Christopher L. Moore, age 39, currently (on information and belief) of 1212 3rd Avenue West, Seattle, Washington. Mr. Moore owns a Seattle-based company of which he is also president, which may be found on the web at www.concordfax.com. If you inspect your business registry, you will find it listed as Concord III, LLC.
Concord markets itself as a service company that sends out “fax broadcasts” for hire by third-party companies. That is, they are hired by businesses to send out unsolicited advertising materials to the fax machines of other people and businesses.
The first problem is that this entire business endeavor is unlawful: pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq: no person or businesses may send an unsolicited commercial fax advertisement to another. The remedy prescribed in the law is a private lawsuit pursued by the recipient in the small claims session of the state court in which the unwelcome fax was received, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3). The law provides for statutory damages of $500 per violation, and treble damages if the court finds that the violation was “knowing” or “willful.” Additional violations occur when the transmitting company fails to include its name and fax number in the ‘header line’ at the top of the fax, which are additional violations that Concord commits in order to try to escape detection by the recipient of the unwelcome fax (it also suppresses its Caller ID information for the same reason). Thus, each fax sent by Concord results in statutory damage liability of, at a minimum, $1,500 per fax, which may be trebled by the court to $4,500 per fax.
The second problem is that Mr. Moore seems to have found a way around his company’s statutory liability by misusing your corporate law system: he simply dissolves his corporation and re-forms under different names. A search of your database reveals that Mr. Moore has dissolved and re-formed his company many times. It has been called Concord Technology, Inc.; Concord Fax, LLC; Concord III, LLC; and (most currently) Concord Technologies, LLC. Sometimes he lists himself as the statutory contact; sometimes he lists his attorney, Walter L. Schefter, Esq.
On each occasion, the physical embodiment of the company does not change: it apparently maintains the same address, the same website, the same offering of services, the same people and the same appearance to the public. In fact, I suspect that Concord’s customers probably never know just what the company is called at any given time, and probably just keep calling it Concord Technologies (since that is what the website calls it).
As you have no doubt guessed by now, I am the recipient of a number of unwelcome faxes from Concord on behalf of one of its customers (for what it’s worth, the faxes in question were the sort of thing that is intended to make one believe they have “qualified” for a Disney World vacation at an “amazingly low price” and is in fact an effort to sell timeshares in the Orlando area). A number of these faxes came into my home telephone line, some at two o’clock in the morning, waking myself and my family from sleep. The faxes continued after I called Concord’s so-called “fax removal line” and submitted my telephone number to be removed. I am therefore pursuing some $14,000 in statutory damages against Concord in four different cases in the small claims session of the Superior Court here in Connecticut.
However, what I am finding is that by the time the case reaches a conclusion, the judgment will be uncollectible. The entity that I have to name in the lawsuit is Concord III, LLC, which is the entity that actually sent the faxes in question (which were sent from July through November, 2003). But it will take several months for the case to go through the court process, for a judgment to be issued, and for the matter to qualify for an execution when Concord does not pay (which is what I anticipate). Meanwhile, Mr. Moore has just created Concord Technologies LLC to succeed Concord III LLC. By the time we have an execution, I can reasonably anticipate that Concord III, LLC will no longer exist and/or will no longer have assets, and Concord Technologies LLC will be immune because it is not a party to the case.
If this was a case for hundreds of thousands of dollars, and an attorney was involved, one could probably pierce the corporate veils by declaring all these companies as alter egos for Mr. Moore. Unfortunately, the amount of statutory damages in these cases is not large enough to involve an attorney. Also, in the Connecticut Small Claims session, one cannot name an out-of-state natural person as a party. Both foreign and domestic corporations may be named, but as to individuals, only Connecticut residents may be named as defendants. Thus, without elevating the case to the regular session of the Superior Court, I cannot directly pursue litigation against Mr. Moore.
It does appear that misusing your state’s corporate laws so that he can continue to violate federal law and escape liability has been of great financial benefit to Mr. Moore. A search of the web shows that in 2000, he qualified for a million dollar mortgage on his home (see http://www.pnwt.com/pdfs/Oct26-Nov1.pdf and search within it for “Moore”). If you would like to see the case that we have filed (to ensure that this is no prank or hoax), it may be found on the Connecticut Judicial System’s website at the following link
The entire Complaint in the matter, inclusive of all legal cites and references, may be found on a reserved page of my company’s website at: http://www.intervalegroup.com/MiscLaw -- the document is called ConcordComplaint1-Complete.pdf.
I must assume that there are laws in your state, and people to enforce those laws, that are intended to prevent someone from purposefully dissolving and re-forming one corporate name after another, while maintaining the same address, infrastructure and “presence” in a given area of your state, in order to avoid liability for their unlawful conduct. I would be most grateful for any guidance you could offer in that regard. Very truly yours,
Peter Jay Gould
First, I have filed a small claims suit here in Connecticut against a junk faxer in Seattle, Washington (they’re at www.concordfax.com). Here in Connecticut, you CAN file a small claim against an out-of-state business; you just can’t file against an out-of-state private individual.
If you’re interested in seeing the complaint in the case (it incorporates much of the model Complaint featured on your website), I’ve put it online at www.intervalegroup.com/MiscLaw (it’s the only document in that folder, called ConcordComplaint1-Complete.pdf).
Here’s the trouble. Unlike the case of fax.com, which (from the sound of it) is a single entity, the slimeball who runs Concord keeps dissolving and reforming his company under different entity names. Based on searches of the Washington Secretary of State’s website, the company was originally called Concord Technologies, Inc. In 2001, it re-formed as Concord III, LLC, but continued to use the same business address, the same website (which still says “Concord Technologies”), and the same corporate appearance. In other words, exactly the same company (and the same owner, Christopher Moore), just a different corporate entity. Then, a month ago, Moore did it again: he just created a NEW entity called Concord Technologies LLC. Although Concord III, LLC, is still listed on the state website as a valid corporation, I’m gonna go out on a limb here and guess that it no longer has any assets, and that they’ve all be transferred to Concord Technologies, LLC.
That means that I have to sue Concord III, LLC, because THEY are the entity that sent the junk faxes I received, Concord Technologies Inc no longer being in existence and Concord Technologies LLC not having come into being yet; but by the time I get a judgment in the case, Concord III, LLC will no longer exist and/or won’t have any assets, Concord Technologies LLC won’t have any liability in the case because THEY didn’t send the faxes, and Moore laughs all the way to the bank.
Any suggestions on dealing with companies that do this? I can’t sue Moore personally because you can’t file against an out-of-state individual in the small claims session.
Currently, Chris C. Moore (a.k.a. Christopher L. Moore ) resides at 1212 3rd Ave. W in Seattle. He is 39 yrs old, being born 1/27/65. He bounces around between Portland, Or., Ann Arbor, Mi., Chicago, Il. and Seattle, Wa. This dates back to 1986 and as recent as of Feb. of this yr. ( He does not stay in one spot very long )