Luis Ruelas Sued For Improper Business Practices!
More tea continues to spill out about Teresa Giudice’s fiancé, Luis Ruelas so maybe Margaret Josephs opinions was just her way of looking out for her friend. Unfortunately, Teresa doesn’t feel Margaret is being an authentic friend.
Meanwhile, Real Housewives of New Jersey star Teresa Giudice’s fiancé, Luis Ruelas, has a history of being in legal hot water…
CelebnReality247.com reports that several people have sued the NJ-based businessman and his company, Digital Media Solutions, over allegedly illegal practices.
According to reports via Page Six who obtained copies of at least three complaints filed throughout 2021 that accused Ruelas’ digital advertising company of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
Legal experts have reported, the law “restricts telemarketing certain phone calls, text messages, and facsimiles. It also places restrictions on the use of automatic dialing systems and artificial or prerecorded voice messages.”
In a since-dismissed complaint filed on Jan. 1, 2021, in Florida, plaintiff Graham Hooper alleged Digital Media Solutions engaged “in unsolicited text messaging with no regard for consumers’ privacy rights.”
Some of the messages – submitted as part of the lawsuit – were allegedly sent on June 11, 2020, and solicited goods and services such as “free months of insurance” and car deals.
“Defendant’s unsolicited text messages caused Plaintiff harm, including invasion of his
privacy and annoyance,” the court documents state. “Defendant’s text messages also inconvenienced Plaintiff and caused disruption to his daily life.”The complaint was filed as part of a class-action lawsuit from other parties who made similar allegations. Each sought a minimum of $500 in damages for each violation.
However, in October 2021, Hooper voluntarily dismissed the complaint.
A separate since-dismissed complaint filed by a woman named Kelly Schultz on July 27, 2021, in Florida alleged Digital Media Solutions placed cold calls and sent unsolicited telemarketing text messages with shortened web links which “redirect consumers to their websites to solicit Defendant’s products, including but not limited to, Quotza.com, which sells auto insurance quotes.”
Schultz claimed Ruelas’ company pulled her number from the Do Not Call registry, and caused the Plaintiff “annoyance, nuisance, and invasion of privacy, and disturbed the use and enjoyment of her phone, in addition to the wear and tear on the phone’s hardware (including the phone’s battery) and the consumption of memory on the phone.”
That case, however, was also voluntarily dismissed in March 2022.
But before the second complaint was dismissed, a third person filed a similar complaint in California in December 2021.
Aaron L. Johnson alleged Digital Media Solutions (DMS) placed calls to him using an “artificial or prerecorded voice,” causing a “great deal of frustration and inconvenience.”
The plaintiff is seeking $500 for each call made that allegedly violated the TCPA. It is unclear how many calls Johnson received.
DMS denied all the allegations in a response filed on Feb. 7, 2022. As of March 14, 2022, that case was still open.
In Spring of 2021, DMS was under fire yet again for a separate allegedly shady business practice.
The Delaware-based company was accused by an Illinois company called Insurance King Agency, Inc of “false advertisements” and “copyright infringements,” according to documents obtained by Page Six.
The attorneys for the plaintiff argued in a notice sent in May 2021 to DMS that when internet users typed “insurance king” in the search bar, they were brought to an ad which made a “false association” with their client and also offered a $19 a month insurance quote. “We have found no evidence to suggest that you in fact offer car insurance for $19 a month as advertised,” the letter further stated.
Insurance King Agency, Inc officially filed a complaint with the US District Court of Southern California on Aug. 31, 2021.
However, DMS responded to the complaint in October 2021 and denied all the allegations via their attorney, citing the Fair Use law as part of their defense.
“The claims made in the Complaint are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrines of fair use, nominative fair use, and/or descriptive use,” the court document states. They also noted a “lack of irreparable harm,” among other defenses.
That case remains open. The most recent event was that DMS filed another response to an amended complaint on Feb. 22, 2022.
