Email Article Print Article

APG - Asset Protection Group.

By Rob Lambert - Email Editor

Date : Sep 01, 2006

Last week I promised the latest on Bill Reed and Asset Protection Group. As you may remember, the FTC stepped in a few weeks ago and filed an action against APG, Reed and Rick Neiswonger based on inflated income claims that were in violation of an FTC order against Neiswonger from the late 90s. The federal judge in Missouri to whom the FTC case was presented appointed a receiver over APG, which has been carrying out APG's "business," such as it is, ever since.

About a week and a half ago, a class action lawsuit was filed in federal court in Las Vegas against Reed, Neiswonger and APG. It was served on them last week while Reed and Neiswonger were giving a "training" to new APG "representatives." For those of you who want to read the complaint, click here, for the exhibits, click here.

I spoke with Randall Edwards, the lawyer who filed the case against APG. I've known Randall for a while now-in fact, he's even written a couple of newsletters for me-so I was sure I'd get an earful about the case.

Surprisingly, Randall was fairly reticent about the case. Instead of going into a great deal of detail about APG, Reed, Neiswonger and the FTC, Randall simply told me to read the complaint.

"It pretty much speaks for itself," he said.

Indeed it does. The complaint takes direct quotes from Bill Reed's book, "BULLETPROOF A$$ET PROTECTION," in which he says, among other things:

If a federal judge could locate an asset, he could seize it. A rational person would argue that this is illegal, unconstitutional, or at least, immoral. And they would be right. But federal judges are appointed for life; to appeal their decision takes years, and it costs a fortune! (Page 23, "BULLETPROOF A$$ET PROTECTION").

Camouflaging your assets is the first step in implementing any asset protection plan. Remember, if a federal judge can find an asset, he can seize it. Conversely, what he can't find, or doesn't know about, he can't touch. Although I enjoy advertising bulletproof asset protection, the prescription for making an asset bulletproof is first to make it invisible. (Page 25, "BULLETPROOF A$$ET PROTECTION").

The second possible response to the question on the location of your assets "Where are your assets?" goes like this:

"I don't have any assets." This is the response I prefer. Short, clean, and direct. Like a perfect murder, the questioner may have a dead body, but in no way is it connected to you.

The first step to privacy and making your assets invisible is the use of a Nevada corporation. Or a series of them. First, let's take a quick look at how a corporation works. (Page 44, "BULLETPROOF A$$ET PROTECTION").

Which leads us back to the fundamental precept of any effective asset protection plan: What a judge can't find, he can't seize. And, when asked about your assets, you want to be able to say, "I don't have any assets," not "I've got assets - but you can't get them." (Page 87, "BULLETPROOF A$$ET PROTECTION").

Your best and only true protection from a prying question is to be able to answer honestly and truthfully that you don't have the answer. When I'm asked for the names of the owners of any corporation, I can answer cleanly and quickly that bearer shares were issued and I have no idea who has them. It would be like asking me who has the $100 bill that I spent at the grocery store. I gave it to the checkout girl, but I have no idea what happened to it after that. Bearer shares are the key to privacy. You can't disclose what you don't know. (Page 105, "BULLETPROOF A$$ET PROTECTION").

The complaint then goes on to show convincingly that "bearer shares," as marketed by APG, are simply a fraud (I've always thought that they require either perjury or some form of unbelievable "willful ignorance"), and then makes claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy, breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, unfair trade practices, unauthorized practice of law, violations of Nevada's "little RICO" racketeering act, unjust enrichment, and a host of other claims, all arising from APG's marketing of its "Asset Protection system."

The complaint is brought as a class action.

When I asked Randall about that, he said, "Well, we're just in the beginning stages of this case, so we haven't got a class certified yet. What that means is that the federal court has to be convinced that there are enough people out there whose claims are 'common' with those of my clients', and that it would save time and effort to handle all of them in one case in one place instead of spread all over the country in various courts." He went on to explain, "The report from the receiver shows that there were just under 2,000 people who spent just under $10,000 each to become APG 'consultants.' A lot of them never made enough money selling the APG products that they earned back what they'd paid over to APG, and an even bigger number of people never made a dime. I think that the court will certify them as a class, but that decision hasn't come before the court yet."

I also asked Randall about whether he'd been contacted by APG representatives, now that word is trickling out about the lawsuit.

"I've been inundated with calls," he said. "An awful lot of people want desperately to tell their story to someone, and a lot want to be named as plaintiffs in this lawsuit. Frankly, because we're at the beginning stages of the case, there's not much I can tell these folks except to watch and wait." He then explained, that because there is an order from the Missouri court regarding lawsuits against APG, Reed and Neiswonger, it's unclear at this point what steps the Nevada court will take, and when.

"I'm sort of watching and waiting myself," he said.

I guess I'll take sort of a "watch and wait" attitude myself at this point. I can't imagine that any court that takes a close look at the Asset Protection Group "program" as sold by Reed and Neiswonger is going to conclude that it's anything but a sham and a fraud. Just a quick look at Reed's own published words gives you the flavor of what the case is all about. I mean, who in their right mind would compare an Asset Protection program to "a perfect murder?" That's just asking for trouble, in my opinion.

I've been predicting APG's downfall for some time now. I'll keep you updated as things move along.

RELATED ARTICLES:

• Protect the equity in your home
• Asset Protection Plans
• C.A.L.M. Introduction
• Get educated on Asset Protection