This Is How They Do...
You know, if I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times. My blog was never intended to be a LuLaFest. I started my blog to talk about things that are important to women, moms, parenting. I had intended to cover shopping and fun opportunities a mom could do from her home while being there, raising her children. So many women want to give more, feel like they contribute more, and assign their own worth to the bringing in of money into the home. How could I not discuss DS and MLM when so many of these women are involved in them? Some participate and are happy from day one to the very end. Some walk in expecting dreams and find themselves in a nightmare. When I endorsed this company on my blog originally, I didn't get the angry emails from LLR's attorneys. They don't care what you say, as long as you're lying in their favor. But if you tell the truth, share your own experiences, and vow to help others who want theirs shared- they don't like that. When I stated my opinion, my experience- which every resident of this country is afforded to do, LLR paid me no mind. I'm going to digress here for a moment, because you, the reader need to hear this. Read it, sing it if you must- outloud, so that you can understand my words clearly. YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO SHARE YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH WHOMEVER YOU CHOOSE. If you are telling the truth, there is nothing a company should be able to do to you. I'm not an attorney, I don't pretend to be, but the definition of libel and slander all fall on to one issue: TRUTH. If it's true, and you can prove it, you shouldn't be worried. Yes. I understand that you signed a contract that says that you must represent LLR in the best light- while you're a consultant. They can sue you for sharing, but they would have to prove wrongdoing. They can go after you, but they have to prove their case. But now that I'm reaching other women who feel wronged and scared and even threatened, LLR is starting to really dislike me. And you know what? That's ok. I don't like them either. I've spent a good bit of time debating before I decided to write this article. I'm opening myself up to a lot of backlash from LLR over this, but you know what? It's just another example of the bullshit way this show is run. Several weeks ago, I got a letter from Alex, one of LLR's attorneys for the defective leggings case. In this email, he asked me to preserve anything I may have encountered regarding defective merchandise, including my own defective leggings. I didn't keep them! I called him immediately, and we had a long, pleasant talk. In this conversation, I explained to him that I had no interest in the defective leggings case, was not a party to it, and wasn't really interested in participating. He had been concerned about some of the information I have in my possession and how I came about it. There was some concern that I may have come about it illegally, but he didn't indicate HOW that would have happened. I explained that I share information presented to me, and in journalistic capacity, I don't have to ask where it comes from. As long as I'm not telling people to go hack something, they can send me whatever they want to send me. Essentially, LLR's issue is with the people sending me the information. But, again, acting in a journalistic capacity, I am not inclined to share my sources. Further, these people are sharing in a whistleblower capacity. They believe they have been wronged, believe LLR is responsible for the wrong, and that this information has been hushed for too long. Regardless, if they were going to sue anyone, it would be the people that have broken a contract, not the person reporting on the topic. He wanted me to tell him what I wanted. I assume that meant to "make me go away". He told me to write a proposal and he'd give it to his clients. I joked that they should consider bringing me on as a consultant, but I wouldn't end up getting paid. I didn't want money taken from housewives. We ended the call on a friendly tone, and hung up. So, I didn't hear anything from them for a while. Then, in the last couple weeks, there was another issue that occurred. A person was originally put in my path on referral from a friend because of his keen ability to quickly search out public records. Arrests, property ownership, tax info, patents, trademarks, etc. He was a regular bloodhound for this type of stuff and I welcomed him as a source of information. It made my job easier as I didn't have to tediously search government sites and submit endless FOIA requests. He'd do it, and I could go back to the mountains of emails I was getting from one consultant after another writing in to tell me how wronged she was. A part of this task of researching this company has grown into being a source of comfort for the women that write me. They need someone to tell them they aren't crazy for feeling hurt. For feeling lost. Mistreated, etc. When your own upline is verbally abusive to you, calling you a failure and a loser because you decided this isn't a job for you- it's nice to have someone that understands. Someone that won't judge you there- just to listen to you, and validate that your feelings matter. I enjoy being there for these women. I've grown quite fond of many of them, and even some that originally wrote in to criticize me have seen a change in LLR, and are now sharing their stories with me. Anyway, after a while, I had been getting some crazy messages and I wanted to trace where they were coming from. I had asked this volunteer individual for some assistance with it. In the simplest terms I can use to explain the chain of events that followed, this individual coded a contact form for my web page that would give me an electronic signature that I could give to the police if the messages didn't stop. What I didn't know was the way this person coded the contact form gave him access to the emails sent to me through the form. He had coded it to either copy him on the email or send it to him as well. My responses came from gmail, so those were not intercepted by him. Long story short, he gained unauthorized access to privileged and confidential emails to me. By the grace of God, nothing extremely sensitive had come in from when he added the form to when I discovered the issue. I immediately removed the form, and confronted this person about it. I'm going to step backward now for a moment. Before the email incident had occurred, that same individual had messaged me that he somehow accessed a portion of LLR's back office and "could have caused havoc" if he wanted to. I asked him if what he did was legal. His answer was in the affirmative. He then explained to me that this thing he discovered could essentially open up people to secure information being accessible from outside. I asked him to provide me a step by step of how he accessed the data, and I advised him I would be alerting the FTC and LLR. He told me he had already done that, and if I published this info in any way, I would potentially wave a blinking sign for any hacker to come in and attack the vulnerable portion of the site. He said that he would forward me his contact to the authorities, and then I didn't hear about it again. Shortly after, he alerted me to some personal consultant data that was readily accessible on LLR's map site. He provided me a copy of his letter to LLR's main counsel, discussing the issue. He then provided me a copy of their response. The response from LLR wasn't the- "Oh my gosh, thanks for telling us!" that you would expect, based on how this person had explained they found it. The letter was basically stating that the information was pretty well hidden in an obscure url and what would possess you to go looking for it, and why did you think that was a job for you to do? This last issue was happening in tandem with this individual accessing my emails illegally. Now, I want to be very clear here. I don't have to ask anyone how they came about their information, but I don't want any question about the legality of MY actions. So when someone says- Oh I got this for you. I say how? If it was "Oh, see, my cousin's sister sent it to me..." I'm ok with that. Or "I took if from my mentor's group page." It's published. I'm ok with that. But, hey there, I may or may not have hacked into this company's computer. No. I'm not ok with that. I don't want that info, and I don't want to be attached to that. So then it started sinking in. Maybe the attorney I spoke to knew something I didn't about this person. Maybe that's why he insinuated that I had some information acquired questionably. While I was confronting this person about what he did to my email form, I asked about the original letter he claimed to have sent to LLR about the potential hole in the website security. He told me he got a cease and desist letter from this same attorney that sent him the response to the second issue.
I didn't believe him. So I called LLR's general counsel. I began to explain why I was calling. I explained the email issue, and then I asked about the website vulnerability. He had no clue what I was referring to. I told him that the person in question made reference to getting a cease and desist from LLR. The attorney claimed that never happened, but admitted that the letter I saw with regard to the second issue was sent by him. But then, the conversation turned. He basically accused me of hiring this person with the intention of having them hack the system. He said that he felt the information I was getting was acquired illegally. I explained that I have never hired nor paid anyone to get me ANY information. That because of the nature of the hacking issue, I'd be willing to give him the entire conversation with this person, and my participation in any action against him (as he didn't just mess with LLR's system, but again, I get sensitive information, and his illegal interception of these emails could put someone at risk). The tone of the attorney was generally a threatening one. He advised me that he'd be following up with me and other members of counsel the following week. Instead, he sent me an email, basically demanding that I preserve all communications, and that I immediately provide him a list of anyone that has given me information, what information I was given, and their contact info. He stated that LLR might take action against the hacker, might take action against anyone else that gave me info, and eluded they might take action against me. So let me get this straight. I call you to tell you about someone that may have hacked your system... and you get aggressive with me? talk about damned if you do, damned if you don't huh? Clearly, this is a scare tactic, and I responded and told him I would not be giving him anyone's contact information. They are speaking to me in confidence, and I am not required to ask them how they come about their information. I did, on both occasions, with both lawyers, state that I would give them redacted information (info with anything identifying the source removed) if they could provide me a list of the items they felt were attained by me illegally. Of course neither have provided me any such list. They just expect me to compile all this information and send it on over because they have accused me of something. I have decided to share these emails because I don't attack this company. Any information I am provided may or may not be included in an article, and I am only reporting on the information given to me. I stated to the attorney that I felt singled out because I own my blog, and am not a writer for CBS or Yahoo. But even though both those outlets have taken a liking to the shitshow that is LuLaRoe, none of those reporters have been sent any demands. LuLaRoe likes to scare people. I see it every day in posts from various uplines talking about how LLR is going to sue this person or that person, or how a consignment shop is afraid to accept second hand LLR because they were told they would be sued. I have faith in our judicial system, and where there is no shortage of suits filed AGAINST LLR, I don't see them going after a lowly consultant that dropped out of the program or a blogger sharing the misfortunes of those that lost money in this program. I also find it funny that on more than one occasion, I have defended LLR, yet they can still try and claim I'm attacking them. Most recently, I defended their Americana collection after getting pushback and criticism over a legging print being too close to the Liberian flag in design. That was quoted in a Yahoo article. But LLR still thinks I'm out to get them. What are they going to say next? Tortious Interference? Give me a break. My goal is not and never was to bring the company down. Only to expose the inconsistencies and half truths they constantly produce. I wouldn't have anything to talk about with regard to LuLaRoe if the information that was provided to the consultants was clear, concise, and reasonable. If anyone else has received threatening or demanding letters or communication from LLR, I would like to know about it. Here are the communications from their attorneys.
This is the first. I responded to him via telephone conversation.
Here is the second, and my response:
