Sverdlovsk Region Court makes MMM -2011 representative pay 100,000 RUR back to customer
28 July 2014 (15:12)
July 28, 2014. Sverdlovsk Region Court sustained the claim laid by a private investor against MMM-2011, a financial pyramid, regarding the payment back of 100,000 RUR which the plaintiff handed over to the defendant, the pyramid’s so-called over-man, the court’s press officer reports.
According to the files relating to the case, the plaintiff met the pyramid representative via MMM-2011 website. The organization’s website stated that the money invested in the scheme would yield some profit. Despite all the disclaimers and warnings that could be found right on the site, the plaintiff gave their first ‘installment’ to the organization representative. The latter, in his turn, placed the money in his own account. All in all, the plaintiff gave the over-man over 100,000 RUR.
‘When the man realized that there was no profit coming in, he demanded for his money back, but his demand was turned down because the organization allegedly had no more money. The investor then took the case to court, providing all the necessary evidence relating to the transfer of money,’ the press officer explains.
The court of first instance rejected his claim, since the investor had been warned about the risks relating to doing business with MMM-2011. Sverdlovsk Region Court overruled the court of first instance’s verdict. It was determined that the money had been neither presented nor given away for charity, and no actual transaction took place: there was no contract signed, and neither party had any obligations. The court ruled that this was a case of unjust enrichment of the defendant at the plaintiff’s expense.
The defendant must now pay the money back to the plaintiff and cover the legal costs.
According to the files relating to the case, the plaintiff met the pyramid representative via MMM-2011 website. The organization’s website stated that the money invested in the scheme would yield some profit. Despite all the disclaimers and warnings that could be found right on the site, the plaintiff gave their first ‘installment’ to the organization representative. The latter, in his turn, placed the money in his own account. All in all, the plaintiff gave the over-man over 100,000 RUR.
‘When the man realized that there was no profit coming in, he demanded for his money back, but his demand was turned down because the organization allegedly had no more money. The investor then took the case to court, providing all the necessary evidence relating to the transfer of money,’ the press officer explains.
The court of first instance rejected his claim, since the investor had been warned about the risks relating to doing business with MMM-2011. Sverdlovsk Region Court overruled the court of first instance’s verdict. It was determined that the money had been neither presented nor given away for charity, and no actual transaction took place: there was no contract signed, and neither party had any obligations. The court ruled that this was a case of unjust enrichment of the defendant at the plaintiff’s expense.
The defendant must now pay the money back to the plaintiff and cover the legal costs.
 | Embed to Blog |  | Subscribe to Newsletter |  |