: Claim No: KB-2026-002571 In the High Court of Justice King’s Bench Division 29 July 2026 Before: Mr Justice Fordham Between: HXS -v- Daniel Ryan Kane Robert Samms Dylan Nelson The person or persons unknown (a) who have communicated with the Claimant by email from the email address dannyryan_94@hotmail.co.uk; or (b) who have communicated with the Claimant by ordinary text message from +1 917 722 9086; or (c) who has communicated with the Claimant by WhatsApp numbers +1 940 601 2821 and +44 7423 436872; or (d) who have communicated with the Claimant by Telegram accounts @edm2181 and @dg96dg; or (e) who have communicated with the Claimant via the Seeking dating website; or (f) who use or have used a Revolut account under the name Daniel Ryan with the GB IBAN GB76 REVO 2301 2083 5150 68 and the BIC/SWIFT code REVOGB21; or (g) who use or have used the Wise bank account under the name Kane Robert Sams with IBAN: GB76 REVO 2301 2083 5150 68 and BIC/SWIFT: REVOGB21 The post HXS -v- persons unknown and others appeare[...]
: Claim No: KB-2026-002571 In the High Court of Justice King’s Bench Division 29 July 2026 Before: Mr Justice Fordham Between: HSX -v- Daniel Ryan Kane Robert Samms Dylan Nelson The person or persons unknown (a) who have communicated with the Claimant by email from the email address dannyryan_94@hotmail.co.uk; or (b) who have communicated with the Claimant by ordinary text message from +1 917 722 9086; or (c) who has communicated with the Claimant by WhatsApp numbers +1 940 601 2821 and +44 7423 436872; or (d) who have communicated with the Claimant by Telegram accounts @edm2181 and @dg96dg; or (e) who have communicated with the Claimant via the Seeking dating website; or (f) who use or have used a Revolut account under the name Daniel Ryan with the GB IBAN GB76 REVO 2301 2083 5150 68 and the BIC/SWIFT code REVOGB21; or (g) who use or have used the Wise bank account under the name Kane Robert Sams with IBAN: GB76 REVO 2301 2083 5150 68 and BIC/SWIFT: REVOGB21 The post HSX -v- persons unknown and others appeare[...]
: Alexander Mashinsky, the former CEO of cryptocurrency platform Celsius Network Inc. (Celsius), and his business partners, Shlomi Daniel Leon and Hanoch “Nuke” Goldstein, will pay a total of $16.5 million to resolve the Federal Trade Commission’s charges that they deceived users by falsely promising that deposits made to their cryptocurrency platform would be safe and always available. Mashinsky and Leon have also agreed to a ban on marketing or selling products or services that can be used to deposit, exchange, invest or withdraw assets. Similarly, Goldstein has agreed to a ban on marketing or selling retail products or services that can be used to buy, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute or trade cryptocurrency. In its July 2023 complaint , the FTC alleged that Celsius and its co-founders promised consumers that Celsius was “safer” than a bank or other traditional financial institutions and misrepresented that their deposits were safe because Celsius earned profits at “no risk” to consumers by making secur[...]
: Defendants behind a wide-ranging operation known as Growth Cave, including its co-CEOs, are permanently banned from marketing and selling business opportunities and credit repair programs as part of an FTC settlement to resolve allegations that their scheme cost consumers nearly $50 million. As part of that settlement, Growth Cave’s co-CEOs also will be required to liquidate millions of dollars’ worth of assets, including a multimillion-dollar house, to provide consumer redress. “On day one, the Trump-Vance FTC reprioritized combatting fraud that harms American markets. Today’s successful resolution demonstrates that the Commission is focused on protecting our markets from dishonest actors,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. The FTC sued Growth Cave in February 2025, alleging that consumers were deceived by false promises of significant income. Growth Cave allegedly offered numerous business opportunities, which regularly failed to deliver the promised results[...]
: We can’t go for that (no can do) lfair July 17, 2017 | 11:38AM We can’t go for that (no can do) By Lesley Fair Of course, phantom debt collection – the practice of pressuring people to pay “debts” they don’t owe – harms consumers. But as an FTC complaint demonstrates, when phantom debt collectors strike, they could affect your company, too. According to the FTC , a Florida-based outfit engaged in a scheme to defraud consumers through the collection of debts people didn’t actually owe or the company didn’t have the authority to collect. The complaint charges that the defendants – Hardco Holding Group, S & H Financial Group, Dequan M. Sicard, and Daryl M. Hall (no, not that Daryl Hall) – violated the FTC Act and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. When contacting consumers, in many instances the defendants allegedly impersonated attorneys and threatened to have people thrown in jail if they didn’t pay up on delinquent payday loans – loans, remember, that many consumers didn’t take out in the first place and de[...]