In November of last year, GSPartners issued a legal notice to the US-based YouTube channel Grit Grind Gold.
Grit Grind Gold and its owner Chris Saunders were the targets of a harassment lawsuit brought by GSPartners on December 16.
The only defendant included in GSPartners’ Virginia lawsuit is Saunders.
Saunders is the owner and operator of the “Grit, Grind, Gold” YouTube channel, “Grit, Grind, Gold” Instagram account, “Grit, Grind, Gold” Facebook page, and “@24KaratChris” Twitter handle.
Saunders has spent the most of 2021 generating information that is critical of GSPartners through his many Grit Grind Gold accounts.
Plaintiffs in the GSPartners lawsuit include
German-based Gold Standard Bank; GSB and GSPartners owner Josip Heit; Antonio Euclides Meneses de Gouveia, a high earner and GSPartners promotion from South Africa; and Michael Dalcoe, a top earner and GSPartners promoter headquartered in the US.
Saunders is accused by GSPartners
started publishing films on the GGG YouTube Channel that made several untrue and slanderous claims regarding GSB, its leaders, and agents.
Saunders has now posted at least ninety-nine (99) videos on the GGG YouTube Channel as of the filing of this lawsuit.
Funny enough, GSPartners’ lawsuit challenges Saunders’ mention of their affiliation with Harald Seiz’s Karatbars International Ponzi.
From 2011 through 2020, Karatbars employed hundreds of sales representatives who sold various gold goods to clients around the world and made substantial commissions.
According to knowledge and belief, Harald Seiz, the company’s founder, and CEO founded Karatbars in 2011.
In addition, from 2018 to 2020, Karatbars offered the “V999 Token,” which is marketed as the first cryptocurrency with gold backing.
According to knowledge and belief, criminal and regulatory inquiries into Karatbars’ business operations have been made in many jurisdictions:
Authorities in Namibia deemed Karatbars a pyramid scam in May 2019.
The Florida Office of Financial Regulation denied allegations that Karatbars had a Florida banking license in October 2019.
The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) of South Africa issued a warning to the public in November 2019 telling them not to do business with Karatbars.
Karatbit Foundation was granted a cease and desist order in November 2019 by Germany’s financial authority, BaFin, which also required the business to satisfy unresolved claims.
The Financial Markets Authority of New Zealand released a warning on Karatbars in May 2021.
As a result of this different criminal and regulatory investigations, it is believed and further information that Karatbars has developed a reputation as a fraudulent, pyramid scheme that has damaged investors.
Because Josip Heit served as the previous chairman of the board for Karatbars, this fury is laughable.
Heit was hired by Harald Seiz to manage the failed cryptocurrency Ponzi scam of Karatbars.
Heit stood in front of irate investors as Karatbars’ Chairman of the Board following its failure in 2019.
Late in 2019, Heit and Seiz parted ways. Early in 2020, GSPartners debuted as a Karatbars offshoot.
But rather than addressing any of that, GSPartners works to muddy the waters between the two businesses.
In terms of both law and reality, Karatbars and GSB are not the same things.
First of all, GSB and Karatbars are two distinct legal companies.
While GSB was registered in 2020 as GSB Gold Standard Corporation AG, Karatbars was incorporated under German law in 2011 as Karatbars International GmbH.
Second, there is no business link of any type between Karatbars and GSB at all, whether it be a parent, subsidiary, sister, related, or associated one.
Third, the proprietors of Karatbars and GSB are different. According to knowledge and belief, Mr. Harald Seiz, the company’s founder, owns 100% of Karatbars, whereas Josip Heit 100% of GSB.
Fourth, there is no joint venture, partnership, or another type of economic connection between Karatbars and GSB. In conclusion, GSB and Karatbars are not the same things.
All of that may be accurate, but it has no bearing on Heit’s time spent working for Karatbars or the fact that GSPartners is a spinoff.
Despite this, Saunders has made false and defamatory claims that Karatbars and GSB are the same organization on several occasions.
Practically speaking, Karatbars’ launch at the time was a copy of GSPartners’. Given that Heit was responsible for Karatbars’ unsuccessful conversion to a cryptocurrency scam, this is hardly shocking.
Heit and GSB produced Karatbars’ numerous shitcoins using a free script. The same was done for G999 and GSPartners.
Before the involvement of Heit and GSB, Karatbars was a gold-based pyramid scam.
GSPartners promoter plaintiffs Tony de Gouveia and…
Michael Dalcoe, too?
They were both past top earners at Karatbars.
Along with Heit, De Gouveia and Dalcoe abandoned ship. Like some of the top earners at Karatbars at the time and their subordinates.
The fraudsters behind Karatbars were permitted by GSPartners to advertise the same dishonest business strategy under a different brand.
What G999 is to GSPartners, V999 is to Karatbars.
As of the filing of this complaint, Saunders’ remarks that falsely equate Karatbars with GSB have been seen a total of at least 205,283 times.
Despite knowing that his claims were untrue and that GSB and Karatbars are two entirely different organizations, Saunders has consistently conflated GSB with a group that is notorious for lying and fraud.
Well, who would have thought GSPartners wasn’t a Ponzi scam clone? Oh, right.
In conclusion, GSPartners is still a spinoff of Karatbars despite surpassing its securities fraud with the introduction of several shitcoins and an NFT scam.
That is the background of GSPartners. What is, is what is.
Instead of addressing GSPartners’ involvement in a Ponzi scheme and securities fraud, the tired “iF we were iLlEgAl, We’D hAve bEeN sHuT dOwN!” justification is advanced.
The GSB, its owners, and its representatives are not running a Ponzi scheme.
There have been no criminal or regulatory investigations into GSB about claims that it may be operating a Ponzi scheme, nor have any of the company’s principals or representatives been prosecuted, much less found guilty, of engaging in a Ponzi scheme.
GSB, its owners, and its employees—more particularly, the plaintiffs—have not and are not now involved in any illegal or immoral behavior.
There have been no criminal or regulatory investigations into GSB, its principals, or agents about potential crimes or acts of moral turpitude. Neither the GSB nor its principals or agents have been charged with, much less found guilty of, any crimes or acts of moral turpitude.
According to this fallacious reasoning, Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme wasn’t one until the SEC launched a lawsuit in December 2008.
The Madoff Ponzi scam has been under investigation since at least 1964. However, the Ponzi scheme didn’t start operating until 2008.
Scammers frequently use the justification in bad faith “but we haven’t been shut down.” It disregards the fact that regulation is reactive and that criminal behavior is illegal whether or not authorities intervene.
Here, GSPartners and Heit use the absence of enforcement action against them as justification for their legality.
Imagine that the DOJ and/or SEC launched legal action against GSPartners and Heit the following week. What basis would that action have?
It would be based on the actions of GSPartners and Heit, namely their operation of a Ponzi scheme using G999 and other shitcoins.
Regardless of the SEC and/or DOJ’s actions, that behavior continues. Regardless of whether GSPartners and Heit are ever prosecuted, it is prohibited under US securities law (offering/selling unregistered securities) and the US Code (wire fraud and money laundering).
Lack of civil or criminal enforcement of regulations does not establish validity.
On the day this complaint was filed, Saunders’ claims that GSB, its principals, and its agents are involved in a Ponzi scheme had been falsely viewed a total of at least 205,283 times.
With the knowledge that these claims are untrue and that GSB, its principals, and agents are not operating a Ponzi scheme, Saunders made each of these assertions with the malicious purpose that his words would damage GSB’s operations and image.
It is telling that GSPartners offers no proof that Saunders was aware of or is aware that GSPartners is not a Ponzi scheme.
Following them are GSPartners and Heit, who are irate by OneCoin parallels.
Investors bought one coin, got more than one coin, then cashed out their remaining investments, turning one coin into a Ponzi scam.
In GSPartners, this is precisely what takes place. Including all MLM cryptocurrency Ponzis.
However, GSPartners mistakenly blames OneCoin’s fraud only on the mining falsehood without addressing that;
The price of OneCoin was in reality set internally rather than based on supply and demand in the market, even though it was purported to have been mined utilizing mining services managed and run by OneCoin.
Although there was undoubtedly a component of OneCoin’s scam, it is not the main reason why OneCoin was a Ponzi scheme. Furthermore, it is not the reason GSPartners and OneCoin are comparable in that they are both shitcoin Ponzi schemes.
Yet again, GSPartners rambles on about the two businesses being independent legal entities rather than addressing it;
GSB and OneCoin are not the same things, legally speaking or practically speaking.
First, GSB is made up of two distinct legal companies. Konstantin Ignatov and Ruja Ignatova incorporated OneCoin as a corporation under Bulgarian legislation in 2014, but GSB was registered as GSB Gold Standard Corporation AG in 2020.
Second, there is no business link of any type between OneCoin and GSB, including parent, subsidiary, sister, related, or associated.
Third, the proprietors of OneCoin and GSB are separate entities. According to information and belief, Josip Heit owns 100% of GSB whereas Konstantin Ignatov and Ruja Ignatov controlled 100% of OneCoin.
Fourth, there is no joint venture, partnership, or other type of commercial agreement between OneCoin and GSB.
To sum up, OneCoin and GSB are two distinct organizations.
None of it alters the fact that GSPartners and OneCoin both use their respective coins to carry out Ponzi schemes.
BehindMLM heard about a kangaroo court decision that was allegedly rendered ex-parte in Ukraine in July 2021.
It turns out that BehindMLM wasn’t the only target of this failed attempt to restrict criticism of GSPartners.
About a case filed by GSB against Saunders and his GGG YouTube Channel and GGG Instagram Account (the “Ukraine Complaint”), a Ukrainian District Court made a ruling on June 18, 2021.
In the Ukraine Complaint, Saunders was accused of publishing false comments regarding GSB, its agents, and its executives as well as fabricating images.
The Ukrainian District Court ruled in favor of GSB and issued an injunction requiring Saunders to take down the “deliberate defamations” he posted on his GGG YouTube Channel and GGG Instagram Account after carefully examining Saunders’ statements and the evidence presented by GSB about the substance of statements and representations made by Saunders on his GGG YouTube Channel.
Saunders was unaware of the Ukraine proceedings, much like with the BehindMLM decision, and there was no due process.
Intriguingly, neither GSPartners nor Heit are connected to Ukraine.
Heit has become enraged by both BehindMLM and Saunders’ disregard for the ex-parte kangaroo court procedures in Ukraine.
Saunders ignored the Ukrainian Take-Down Notice, refused to take down the “deliberate defamations,” and subsequently posted fifty (50) videos on his GGG YouTube Channel that contained similar false and defamatory claims. Saunders did this despite knowing that doing so would violate the Ukrainian Take-Down Notice.
Once more, GSPartners offers no proof that Saunders was aware of any of the allegedly false and defamatory claims included in the fifty films.
Heit is particularly enraged by Saunders’ ridiculing of GSPartners’ stop and desist letter from November.
Saunders is currently using the Cease and Desist Letter to actively promote these false and defamatory statements to his viewers by posting a copy of the letter on his GGG Facebook Channel and creating videos about it on his GGG YouTube Channel, rather than using it as a guide to help him determine which false and defamatory statements to retract.
And it appears that these strategies are succeeding since one of Saunders’ most popular videos of all time is the parody of the Cease and Desist Letter that he released on his GGG YouTube Channel on November 18, 2021.
The business takes issue with Saunders’ content since he exposed Heit’s GSPartners Ponzi scam.
appear on YouTube, Google, and other search engines when potential clients of GSB are looking for information online about GSB.
Due to this, GSB, its principals, and agents have lost—and continue to lose—thousands of dollars per month in client revenues, business connections, and business possibilities, including significantly more than $75,000 in lost income.
Since 2020, it is uncertain how much money GSPartners affiliates have lost by investing in G999.
GSPartners contends that Saunders’ exposure to the G999 Ponzi scheme violates two grounds of action.
Defamation in and of itself, as well as unfair interference with commercial prospects.
The case docket shows that Saunders was served on December 29.
The complaint has been served on Saunders, and he has until February 11 to reply.
Keep checking back as we follow the case.
12th February 2022 update On February 11th, Chris Saunders submitted a request to dismiss.
On March 11, there will be a hearing on the motion. My next case docket check is scheduled for March 12th.
Updated on March 12, 2022. On February 15th, the GSPartners asked for more time to reply to Saunders’ motion to dismiss.
The defendants from GSPartners were granted an extension until March 4th by the court.
The hearing on the motion to dismiss has been postponed until March 16th as a result. My next case docket check is scheduled for March 17th.