Dear Mr. Marques,
We acknowledge your official release to BECM Inc., again noting that the phrase “the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing” could not be more apt with respect to myWorld/Lyconet/Lyoness. The representations in your letter compares well with “cave paintings” as you lose yourself in untenable, easily refutable accusations. Like your predecessor, your statements and accusations are UNTRUE, MISLEADING and DAMAGING.
I have already officially requested the company several times to contact unsatisfied members in order to find a solution that all parties can agree to. Unfortunately, your company has either completely blocked this suggestion for the most part, or offered unacceptable settlements tantamount to outright rejection. Note that a company was planned to take on what was referred to as “inherited liabilities” with a Viennese lawyer a few years ago when Lyconet was in planning. This project was obviously given up for the sake of a multilevel marketing scheme that generates at least 90% of total income of Lyoness/Lyconet and/or myWorld group according to the last current official assessment.
We obviously approach larger companies listed as partners with their own corporate IDs on the Cashback World website. Every member can and should do this as doubts are more than justified in many cases. Experience has shown that larger alleged partner companies have only been listed through obscure affiliate programmes on the Cashback World site without the companies knowing of any direct cooperation or partnership. Examples: Allianz, ERGO, BMW Bank, BAWAG BANK, etc…. we would be happy to publish the original letters from the respective PR offices of these companies.
You write: „On the contrary, all proceedings referred to by Ecker and Co have either not been pursued by the authorities or have been terminated. „The trial before the Federal Court of Australia ended on October 23, 2015 with a resounding and unconditional judgement that Lyoness Australia was NOT operating an illegal scheme““ In Austria, too, the Higher Regional Court of Vienna confirmed on April 12, 2016 that Lyoness does not operate a chain or pyramid scheme within the meaning of Section 168a of the Criminal Code.“
This claim makes no sense. The myWorld companies were not new companies but routinely cycled existing Lyoness/Lyconet companies with new company and owner names as was customary business practice at Lyoness. Especially as on further examination, the legal notices on the respective websites state the following: “Performance of service for all products shall be provided through mWS myWorld Solutions AG ……….”
Lyoness/Lyconet/myWorld have been claiming at the courts for years that the contracts, general terms and conditions and agreements concerned are old and have long since been updated, but the same mercilessly litigious thread has always run through “new” contracts throughout the Lyoness/Lyconet company history. And the myWorld group has nothing to do with this but is still controlled by the same group of people in the directorship headed by Hubert Freidl. Who do you think is willing to buy this?
Your letter on acquittals refers to a ruling from the year 2015, which itself was panned by the local press as highly questionable.
On the other hand, you forget to mention the final judicial decision in Norway from 31 May 2018 condemning Lyoness/Lyconet as a pyramid scheme and banning it. The ruling also prohibited newly established successor companies from continuing this activity. Lyoness/Lyconet ignored the ban, and the Norwegian Competition Authority (Lottstift) reported this to the police.
Also note: (1) https://lottstift.no/en/om-oss/aktuelt/lyoness-must-stop-illegal-pyramid-activtiy-in-norway/. , (2) http://www.bekm.us/norway-lyoness-shopping-network-continues-to-operate-despite-an-official-ban/
The Italian Competition Authority AGCM, like the Norwegian supervisory authority before it, decreed the business practices of Lyoness/Lyconet as wrongful (incorrect or illegal) on 19 December 2018 and imposed, inter alia, a fine of €3.6 million.
Also note: (1) https://www.agcm.it/media/comunicati-stampa/2019/1/Vendita-piramidale-e-promozione-ingannevole-sanzione-da-oltre-3-milioni-a-Lyoness , (2) http://www.bekm.us/lyoness-following-norway-italy-now-also-prohibits-lyconet-practices/
Poland’s Office of Competition, UOKiK, classified Lyoness as a pyramid scheme by official decree on 30 December 2019. Funds had to be reimbursed.
Also note: (1) https://biznes.gazetaprawna.pl/artykuly/1453526,lyoness-piramida-finansowa-program-lojalnosciowy.html?fbclid=IwAR0L6zTEAukbAKw1Ykh0yWwmu71utvqL , (2) http://www.bekm.us/lyoness-has-now-been-officially-branded-as-a-pyramid-scheme-in-poland-polands-office-of-competition-and-consumer-protection-uokik-has-classified-lyoness-as-a-pyramid-scheme-by-official-dec/
The actions of your company at sports clubs are not partnerships, only sponsoring arrangements. Referring to them as partnerships is just window dressing intended to project a false impression of integrity towards existing and future members.
Your reference to “bogus claims” at BECM Inc. is false and simply a lie. The BECM Inc. has been contacted by allegedly deceived members themselves; fishing for customers is more your business style.
It would be easy to determine whether the satisfied and refunded customers listed on www.bekm.us/rating were not once actual members of Lyoness/Lyconet. A few minutes studying the results of a Web search on Lyoness/Lyconet with open eyes would reveal that the representations in your letter are blatantly absurd. Feel free to litigate if you think you have any ammunition against BECM Inc. – we will take it in our stride. BECM Inc. has made and will continue to make payments to Lyoness aggrieved parties.
Your members from the Asian-Pacific region should have the German Wikipedia entries translated for them.