Thursday, February 11, 2010

Turks and Caicos Proceedings Against Klaus Hofmann, David Rocheford, Norman Sorensen and Steve Thompson

We have received requests as to the status of the Turks and Caicos damages proceedings. We are currently awaiting a response from Hofmann, Rocheford, Sorensen and Thompson. However we can affirmatively update you as follows:

1. On July 29th, 2009 the Turks and Caicos Court of Appeal dismissed the Plaintiffs’ appeal against the order of the Supreme Court of April 23, 2009 which directed that there be an immediate Inquiry as to the damages suffered by the Defendants as a result of the wrongful grant of an injunction and appointment of a receiver.

2. On September 14th, 2009 the Supreme Court assessed the Defendants’ legal costs in relation to the injunction proceedings.

3. On December 17th, 2009 following unanswered correspondence the Defendants filed an application for the taxation/assessment of their legal costs of the appeal hearing before the Court of Appeal. A hearing date of January 28th, 2010 was notified late to the parties and the Plaintiffs were unable to attend. No new hearing date has been set.

4. On January 25th, 2010 the Defendants sent a summons to the Supreme Court asking for an order that unless the Plaintiffs file a defence to the Points of Claim on the damages inquiry the Plaintiffs be debarred from defending. The summons has not yet been returned by the Court and no date for hearing has been set.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Canada's Elliott Companies file US$120 million counterclaim in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Transmitted At: 2010-02-10 08:00


Attention Business Editors:

Canada's Elliott Companies file US$120 million counterclaim in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

TORONTO, Feb. 10 /CNW/ - On February 1, 2010, Canadian real estate developers Fred Elliott, Derek Elliott and the Elliott Companies filed a defense and a US$120 million dollar counterclaim in the District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami) against Klaus Hofmann and 175 others. The 356 page document, filed by the Elliott Companies before U.S. District Judge Alan Gold, comprises the Elliott Companies' Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaim to a lawsuit originally launched by Hofmann and others on March 3, 2009. The lead counsel for the plaintiff groups were Michael Diaz, of the Miami area firm Diaz Reus, LLP, and Hilda Piloto of the Chicago based firm Arnstein & Lehr, LLP. Mr Diaz pulled his plaintiffs out of the lawsuit in October, 2009 by filing a voluntary dismissal.

Among other things, the Hofmann Complaint accuses the Elliotts and their companies of mail and wire fraud, money laundering and violations of the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) Act. The Elliotts and Elliott Companies deny all such allegations, which they state are wholly without merit, and vow to vigorously defend the same.

In their Answer, the Elliotts and Elliott Companies allege that the lawsuit was orchestrated by James Catledge and his Impact companies, including Impact Net Worth, Impact America and NetWorth Solutions, all based in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Answer alleges that Catledge and Impact were contracted by the Elliotts to be exclusive U.S. sales agents for Elliott real estate products. The Answer further alleges that Catledge and Impact misrepresented the status of their securities and real estate licensing (they had none) and actually provided false documentation to the Elliott Companies suggesting that Catledge and the Impact agents did have valid regulatory licenses. The Answer goes on to state that, in response to misrepresentations regarding licensing and "grossly deficient" sales practices, the Elliott Companies terminated Catledge and Impact in June, 2008 and issued a demand letter in October, 2008, demanding payment of US$29,000,000 in compensation for damages caused by Catledge and Impact. In response, the Answer alleges, Catledge and Impact launched the Hofmann lawsuit. The Answer goes on to state:

Upon information and belief, in October 2008, Catledge, in an effort to

deflect attention away from himself, and in order to take revenge on the

Elliotts for asserting claims against him, began a brutal campaign to

discredit and destroy the Elliotts and their companies with litigation

and defamatory publicity spanning multiple jurisdictions, including this

one.

The Elliott Companies' Florida legal team (Peter Russin and James Moon of Meland Russin & Budwick, P.A.) focused on a number of core affirmative defenses including, among other things, Plaintiffs' failure to state a claim, after 11 months of litigation, failure to add James Catledge and the Impact entities and agents as indispensible parties and the failure, to supply sufficient (or in some cases any) documentation in support of the Plaintiffs' claims.

The Elliotts and Elliott Companies counterclaimed against many of the Plaintiffs for failure to pay on their purchase promissory notes, which helped cause the Elliott Companies' financial difficulties, and against all Plaintiffs in the amount of $120 million for damages caused by abuse of process. Specifically, the Elliott Counterclaim alleges that Catledge, Impact related individuals, Diaz and Piloto essentially conspired with the Plaintiffs to put the Elliott Companies out of business. The Counterclaim alleges that the elements of this abuse of process included obtaining ex parte injunctions against the Elliott Companies in Florida, the Turks and Caicos Islands and the Dominican Republic. (The Florida injunction expired and was not renewed by the court and the Turks and Caicos Islands injunction was overturned due to misrepresentations made to the Turks and Caicos court.) The Elliott Companies allege that, as a result of these actions, the Elliott Companies' resort properties at Cofresi and Juan Dolio, Dominican Republic, were foreclosed upon, resulting in a loss to the Elliott Companies of approximately $120 million, based on appraised values.

Fred and Derek Elliott were introduced to Catledge in 2004 who, at that time, was principal of what the Elliotts understood to be a legitimate financial services company offering mortgages, annuities, insurance, mutual funds and real estate/time share products out of Henderson (Las Vegas), Nevada. Catledge owned and still owns a web of network marketing companies known by various names such as Impact, Inc., Impact America and Net Worth Solutions. From 2004 through 2008, the Elliott Companies exclusively contracted Catledge and the Impact Entities and their representatives (sales agents) to offer and sell Elliott Company resort - related vacation ownership products to individuals in various jurisdictions, including the United States. Catledge and Impact are currently being prosecuted for securities fraud and registration violations in Idaho and are under investigation by the SEC in Utah.

Derek Elliott, President of a number of the Elliott Companies, stated: "This was never a "ponzi-scheme" or "ponzi-like" scheme. At all times sales were fully backed by inventory. It cannot be more apparent that Catledge and his attorneys instigated and directed the litigation strategy against the Elliott Companies in a very effective pre-emptive strike to deflect blame and to short circuit our planned litigation against Catledge and the Impact Entities."

The Elliott Group of companies was founded 35 years ago by Canadian Frederick C. Elliott. The Elliott Group which described itself as "a real estate company in the hospitality industry", developed the well regarded Sun Village - Cofresi Resort on the north coast of the Dominican Republic.

The Elliott Group was the most recognized Canadian hotel group in the Dominican Republic. The expansion of the Sun Village Resorts brand to the south coast of the Dominican Republic, was underway with their Juan Dolio resort development, formerly set to open in 2010. The Elliott Group employed over 400 people in the Dominican Republic, prior to the launch of the Hofmann Plaintiffs' lawsuit, all of whom lost their jobs as a result of the suit.

For further information: see www.sunvillageresorts.blogspot.com; Lowell Hall, Director Operations, LH Metropolis Communications, lowell@lhmetropolis.com, (C) (416) 887-1636

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

February 1, 2010; The Elliott Companies File Detailed Response, Affirmative Defense and Counterclaim of $120M

On February 1, 2010 a 526 page filing was submitted to the Florida courts on behalf of the Elliott Companies. Within the filing is a very detailed Affirmative Defense and Response to the Allegations stemming from the complaint that Michael Diaz and Hilda Piloto orchestrated on behalf of James Catledge and the ECC in March of 2009.

Included in the filing (which is attached below) is a full detail of the history of the Elliott Companies as well as factual details of what and why Catledge did what he did with his ECC committee to destroy everyone's assets.

Incredibly after finally being able to review of the Klaus Hofmann Plaintiffs documents after 11 months of litigation, allegations and defamation, they completely fail to properly state a claim or to have filed proper particulars. It was not about proof, it was about destruction.

Elliott Corporate Answer/Affirmative Defenses/Counterclaim $120M

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26444364

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Appeal of Improper Sale of Sun Village October 7, 2009

After the closure of Sun Village, the property was scheduled for public sale and auction. We are told that there were several buyers present on October 7, 2009 in the Puerto Plata courtroom. Strangely there was only one bid for $4.3M. While the decision making process was out of the Elliott Group's control on this fateful day, they did did have legal counsel in the courtroom to observe and witness the sale process. Former manager Joaquin Duenas tried to keep the Elliott Group counsel from within the courtroom for obvious reasons. A fraudulent sale had been planned. Joaquin Duenas was observed speaking in advance of the sale with the new purchasers (and has been seen with them in the days and months to follow). Duenas and others are currently under investigation.

Our hotel, appraised months before at $58M was sold for a mere $4.3M.
As a result of the devastating effects of this sale, the Elliott Group has filed a full appeal on the fraudulent sale of the property and is sure to be successful. A group of investors are forming a management committee that support the appeal made by the Elliott Group. The committee will make all go forward management decisions.
A formal Advisory Committee will follow will be elected by shareholders and will collectively make all go forward decisions.

Your participation is welcomed. Please contact: sunvillageinvestors@gmail.com

Saturday, February 6, 2010

James Catledge, Brent Borland Form "Canyon Acquisitions" Affiliation After Being Terminated by The Elliott Group in June 2008

In the fall of 2007 while the Elliott Companies continued to question and demand answers from Catledge and Impact about the misrepresentations they had made to clients and the Elliott Group attorney's, James Catledge formed his "new" partnership. It was at this time that he teamed up with Brent Borland of Canyon Acquisitions from Phoenix Arizona. In the Spring of 2008, Catledge began to re-direct Sun Village timeshare sales to Canyon Acquisitions.

Catledge and Borland move on to Belize
From information received, some of the Catledge and Borland projects are in Belize and known as the Placencia Resort and the Placencia International Airport. Clients have just now started to ask questions of these latest misrepresentations that have been made.

Brent Borland and Wayne Robbins of Canyon Acquisitions pose for a photograph in front of James Catledge's private aircraft, "Impact One" on January 22, 2011, days prior to their January 26 investment sales seminar in Belize.

From: Fan photos from Canyon Acquisitions LLC


Brent Borland, CEO and Founder with Wayne Robbins, President
Added January 22
Added by Helene to "Canyon Acquisitions LLC,"

Turk and Caicos Islands Damages Claim Proceeds against Klaus Hofmann, Norman Sorensen, Steve Thompson and David Rocheford

The Elliott Companies Turks and Caicos Litigation and Damages Claim is proceeding. Costs have already been awarded to the Elliott Companies for the wrongful actions taken by the ECC and now the damages evaluation process is underway.

A Brief History from court filings relating to the Turks and Caicos Islands and the improper actions taken by Klaus Hofmann, David Rocheford, Steve Thompson and Norman Sorenson are below. While it is well known that they are Catledge and Impact puppets, they will be held accountable for the irreparable damage they caused to the Elliott Companies and their investors.


123. On March 3, 2009, a combination of so-called "innocent investors" (Klaus Hoffman, David Rocheford, and Steve Thompson) and Impact agent investors (Norman Sorensen) filed a class action in the Turks and Caicos Islands on behalf of "all other persons, which I estimate to number about 1500, who form a class of persons who have contracted with the Defendants concerning the acquisition of time shares, and fractional condominium interests in resorts located in Puerto Plata and Juan Dolio in the Dominican Republic."

124. This combination of investors also took an ex parte TRO obtained in the U.S. to the Turks and Caicos Islands and used it to obtain an ex parte TRO from the Turks and Caicos Islands court.

125. In obtaining the Turks and Caicos TRO, Plaintiffs and their counsel never informed the Turks and Caicos court of the expiration of the U.S. TRO, and made additional misrepresentations concerning the background and status of this matter. After the Turks and Caicos court learned of the Plaintiffs’ deceit, on April 9, 20098 the court discharged the TRO, stating:

"This case causes me some disquiet. The timing of an application of this nature at the same time as a similar action in Florida, the failure to mention so many clearly important material facts in an affidavit prepared by an attorney specifically for an ex parte application, the subsequent manner in which the order was publicized and the failure to take similar action to advise of the amendment to the original order all add to that disquiet."

Quote from Turks and Caicos Chief Justice Gordon Ward

February 5, 2010 SEC Investigates Impact Networth LLC

The  Salt Lake City SEC is actively investigating James Catledge and Impact.

The Catledge and Impact litigation and unsupported defamatory email and media campaign has cost all of us greatly and was done in an effort to keep this investigation from them. The SEC has subpoenaed the documentation taken from the Dominican Republic for review. The remaining support of Impact's violations with their insurance, mortgage, annuity and other product violations will be found with review of Catledge's documentation that was in the control of Tom O'Hagan and Brent Goodrich as well as his Cook Islands and Nevada bank accounts.

Important Information below: Taken from recent court filings prove that the Elliott Companies were lied to by Catledge and Impact. Action was taken by the Elliott Companies, however Catledge's "cult like" ability to influence people's thinking led to a puppeted lawsuit and formation of the "ECC" by he and Richard Smith to destroy all assets and try to cover their malfeasance.

The Sun Village property was only one of Catledge and Impact's products. They were and may still be heavily involved in mortgages, annuities and insurance as well as their other real estate ventures including their projects with Catledge's partner Brent Borland and Canyon Acquisitions from Phoenix Arizona.
Almost 2 years out of Catledge's web, The Elliott Companies can clearly see that Catledge had these motives from day one.
Important Court Filings Proving Catledge's Malfeasance. Taken from Affirmative Defense and Counterclaim Filed Before The Southern District of Florida Court, February 1, 2010.

103. Importantly, as a requirement for Catledge and the Impact Entities and agents to sell such resort-related vacation ownership products, Catledge and the Impact Entities were required to hold valid state and federal regulatory licenses.


104. Catledge and the Impact agents made affirmative representations to the Elliott Companies and their attorneys that Catledge and the Impact agents did, in fact, have valid state and federal regulatory licenses.

105. However, in January 2006, the Elliott Companies discovered that Catledge and the Impact Entities and agents did not have valid state and federal securities licenses, nor did they have state time share licenses. The Elliott Companies further discovered that Catledge and the Impact Entities and agents had provided false documentation to the Elliott Companies (upon which the Elliott Companies reasonably relied) suggesting that Catledge and the Impact agents did have valid regulatory licenses.

106. Specifically, the Corporate Defendants discovered that (1) Catledge's registration with an NASD member brokerage firm was terminated as of July 13, 2005, (2) Impact was not an NASD member brokerage firm, (3) neither Catledge nor any other member of Impact held a current valid regulatory license.

107. Upon discovery of Catledge and the Impact agents' failure to hold proper regulatory licenses, the Corporate Defendants demanded that Catledge and the Impact agents immediately obtain proper valid regulatory licenses. However, after several promises made by Catledge, and hundreds of thousands of dollars spent by the Corporate Defendants to prepare compliant documentation (which Catledge and the Impact Entities failed to use) Catledge and the Impact agents were ultimately unable or unwilling to get proper licensing.

108. Accordingly, on October 17, 2008, the Elliott Companies (called the Elliott Group) issued a demand letter (the "Demand Letter") upon Catledge and the Impact Entities pursuant to which the malfeasance discovered by the Elliott Companies was detailed.

109. Specifically, the Elliott Companies advised Catledge as follows:

As you know, Impact/Net Worth have "sold" considerable amount of Elliott product over the last four or so years. In doing so, Impact/Net Worth and James Catledge personally have received payment of tens of millions of dollars in commissions.



It has become painfully obvious that these "sales" by Impact/Net Worth have been grossly deficient, for the following reasons (without limitation):



1. Impact/Net Worth have failed to utilize compliant documentation provided by Elliott Group and developed by Elliott Group at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars.



2. Despite signed agreements to do so, Impact/Net Worth have completely failed to obtain requisite broker and agent registrations required in connection with such sales.



3. Impact/Net Worth have grossly misrepresented Elliott products to purchasers.



4. Impact/Net Worth have engaged in reprehensible sales practices, designed to maximize sales and commissions payable to Impact/Net Worth, without regard to client needs. In this regard, a number of clients have been encouraged by Impact/Net Worth to apply or lever virtually their entire asset base for the purpose of purchasing such product.



5. Impact/Net Worth misrepresented and manipulated Elliott [Group] into promoting offerings with an almost exclusive goal of maximizing commissions to Impact/Net Worth.



6. Impact/Net Worth have libeled and slandered the Elliott Group throughout and have actively impeded Elliott Group's efforts to raise funds.



7. Impact/Net Worth have acted in bad faith disregard of their contractual and fiduciary obligations to the Elliott Group.



8. Impact/Net Worth's overall conduct in this regard has been fraudulent.



As a result of the aforementioned malfeasance by Impact/Net Worth, the Elliott Group faces massive costs in cleaning up the resulting mess. Examples of this include dealings with the State of Idaho Department of Finance, which have cost the Elliott Group $1.2 million to date, the Spalding Litigation in California, with exposure to the Elliott Group of $5-10 million, and threatened rescissions by scores of purchasers.



Elliott Group considers that James Catledge, as the directing mind of Impact/Net Worth and the principal beneficiary of the malfeasance and frauds of Impact/Net Worth, is personally liable for all liabilities and obligations of Impact/Net Worth.

Friday, February 5, 2010

Filed Court Documents Prove that Sun Village Is Not A Ponzi Scheme

The use of the term "Ponzi Scheme" was used by Catledge and his PR firm for the Plaintiffs to use to influence the media and courts in an effort to deflect their severe liability that the Elliott Group had held Catledge and Impact accountable to for and, ultimately termintated them for in June 2008.

It has also been mentioned that the PR Firm Proby and Associates that prepared all of the libel and slander for Michael Diaz and Hilda Piloto is also the PR Firm for Thomas Scott 's (Special Master) law firm Cole, Scott and Kissane.

Detailed Excerpts are taken from court filings: Sun Village is Not a Ponzi Scheme

23. As for the Special Master’s "Ponzi" allegation, this merely parrots the unsubstantiated allegations in the Hofmann Plaintiff’s original Complaint (as well as in the Aguilar and Hofmann Plaintiffs' defamatory publicity campaign that followed), which attempted to fabricate a civil RICO claim. The Special Master provides no substantiation, no particulars and no explanation as to his rationale for parroting this allegation. In fact, there was no Ponzi or "Ponzi-style" scheme. There was no doubt reckless disregard shown for the interests of all parties by Catledge/Impact, but for the Special Master to assert that the Corporate Defendants engaged in a Ponzi-style scheme without affording due process is indicative of his bias in this matter..


24. A "Ponzi scheme" is defined (by The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition c. 2009) as: "A fraud disguised as an investment opportunity, in which initial investors and the perpetrators of the fraud are paid out of funds raised from later investors, and the later investors lose all funds invested."

25. This definition was never applicable to the fractional ownership and timeshare products offered by certain of the Corporate Defendants, for the following reasons:

a. All Sales Were Covered by Inventory – There was no "fraud" (a necessary component of a Ponzi) because all fractional and timeshare sales at both Cofresi and Juan Dolio were fully covered by inventory. All purchasers were specifically allocated timeshare intervals or fractions in units that matched their purchases.

b. The Juan Dolio and Cofresi Properties had Enormous Value – According to the Cofresi appraisal [DE 508] and the Juan Dolio appraisal (attached hereto as "Exhibit A"), which were commissioned to be done by certain of the Corporate Defendants by independent appraisers, these two properties had an April, 2009 value, net of mortgages, of over $100,000,000. Both projects were viable. Cofresi was virtually 100% complete and it was an operating resort with an excellent reputation. Juan Dolio was 75% complete (discussed infra at ¶ 75). The Juan Dolio business plan, filed at DE 241, demonstrated that there was a viable plan for completing the Juan Dolio project and meeting the project’s obligations. It was not the actions, inactions or "scheming" of the Corporate Defendants that destroyed these businesses and their value. Rather, it was the deliberate strategy of the Hoffman Plaintiffs, the Aguilar Plaintiffs, their respective attorneys and, most importantly, their true "puppet master," James Catledge, (utilizing the litigation, the publicity campaign, direct contacts with suppliers, customers and banks and the improper Dominican injunctions in an effort to obfuscate his own misdeeds) to drive these businesses and the so-called "Elliott Defendants" (including the Corporate Defendants) out of business and into the ground. This they have virtually succeeded in doing, destroying over $100,000,000 worth of assets and any real hope of any recovery by any such Plaintiffs. The Special Master added insult to injury through his mishandling of his "Monitor" duties (pursuant to the July 17, 2009 Order [D.E. 528], which is under appeal), which was the final nail (or series of nails) in the coffins of these projects.

c. Non-Use Fees were not Guaranteed – Any references to "guaranteed" payments were concoctions of the rogue Catledge/Impact sales force, as more fully discussed infra at ¶¶ 39-42 herein.

d. Non-Use Fees were Budgeted – The payment of non-use fees during the construction period at both Cofresi and Juan Dolio was budgeted as essentially the equivalent of the cost of construction financing. The overall amount actually paid ($12,068,382, as set out at page 12 of the Report) was consistent with what the Corporate Defendants reasonably believe construction financing interest costs would have amounted to.

e. Residence Sales were Intentionally Stopped – It became apparent, in May-June, 2008, that the Cofresi and Juan Dolio projects were experiencing financial difficulties, partially due to the deteriorating economy and ongoing financial meltdown, which began in late 2007. It was recognized that these projects would have difficulty continuing to pay non-use fees (which were beginning to exceed anticipated and acceptable levels). As a result, the sale of Residence timeshare interests was halted and the payment of non-use fees was suspended (in anticipation of a restructuring). These steps are hardly consistent with the carrying on of a Ponzi scheme. In fact, they are diametrically opposed to the steps that a Ponzi perpetrator would have taken.

f. The Plaintiffs Refused to pay on their Promissory Notes – As discussed in the Juan Dolio business plan [D.E. 241], Juan Dolio was owed approximately $32,000,000 in promissory notes, taken as part of the sale price for fractional interests. Commissions had been fully paid to Catledge/Impact on these notes. Collection of the notes would have generated sufficient proceeds to fully pay out the Juan Dolio banks and complete the project. Therefore, at the outset, when the notes were received, Sun Village Juan Dolio Inc. had every expectation that it would be able to fully deliver on all sale obligations. It could not have been foreseen that the Catledge/Impact masterminded litigation and business destroying strategy would essentially repudiate the notes (without, of course, a concomitant refund of the commissions paid thereon). A loss of this magnitude would have been devastating to any enterprise. It is disingenuous in the extreme for the Plaintiffs (and the Special Master) to re-characterize the Juan Dolio and Cofresi projects as a "Ponzi-style scheme" in the face of their very significant contribution to the failure of the business model.

Thursday, February 4, 2010

October 17, 2009 Michael Diaz Abruptly Files Voluntarily Dismissal of the Aguilar (Catledge/Impact Agents) Complaint

On October 17, just 10 days after the improper sale of the Sun Village Resort and Bungalows, James Catledge's attorney, Michael Diaz abruptly and voluntarily dismissed the complaint and allegations that just months before he found so compelling. Through the Catledge and Diaz partnership they maliciously manipulated and misrepresented to the world wide web, the video tape deposition "clips" of Derek Elliott and posted on youtube just hours after being taken. They prepared defamatory press releases, purchased services from PR firm Proby and Associates in Miami to obtain a self promoting Diaz artilce in Businessweek, and sent out literally hundreds of defamatory and libelous emails. All to cripple the Resort's ability to operate cause severe circumatances to operate a business from.

Diaz had accomplished Catledge's mission. The damage had been done and his job was done. The Elliott properties had suffered tragic blows.

Some clients that were solicited by Michael Diaz and Hilda Piloto for their legal services and by Catledge and the ECC into paying Diaz and or Piloto are aware of the liability that Catledge and the ECC have caused and the severe malpractice exposure against Michael Diaz and Hilda Piloto with and including the Florida Bar.

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Abrupt Closure of Sun Village Resort and Bungalows September 2009

In September 2009 The Sun Village Resort and Bungalows was abruptly closed. The Elliott Group strongly opposed the decsion to close the resort property and cited the damages that would follow in the tens of millions of dollars.

The closure was the result of several months of litigation, defamation and interference with contractual relations orchestrated by James Catledge, CEO of the Impact Companies , Klaus Hofmann and the Aguilar (Impact Agents) Plaintiffs. Together with their lawyers, they abused process and misrepresented to the courts in Florida, Turks and Caicos Islands and the Dominican Republic.

The motivation for the destruction was simply to deflect the severe liability that Catledge and the Impact agents had made by affirmative and fraudulent representations and providing false documentation to the Elliott Companies and their attorneys that appeared to show that Catledge and the Impact agents did have valid state and federal regulatory licenses when, in fact, they did not.

Catledge and Impact were fired and removed from Sun Village in June of 2008.


Catledge was paid over $40M which included pre-paid commission on notes due from purchasers in the amount of $36M which was never collected by Sun Village. His goal was to strip as much money from the company as possible and then leave it vulnerable to him and his partners. Sun Village Cofresi and Juan Dolio are not the only product or property that has suffered from James Catledge. He has done this before and may still be operating under the same motives elsewhere.

Following the termination of Catledge and Impact, the Elliott Group served him with a demand letter on October 17, 2008. It was at this time that James Catledge with Richard Smith from Utah formed the "ECC" and Hired Michael Diaz and Hilda Piloto to execute what would be a litigation strategy of lies, defamation and the goal of destruction.

Demand letter from the Elliott Group to James Catledge/Impact on October 17, 2008.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/26441962