Amway et al
A new lawsuit has just surfaced. Filed in the state of Washington, the plaintiffs, former Direct Distributor, name Amway, Brad and Julie Duncan, Samir Attalah, World Wide Group, and others. The accusations are remarkably similar to the other suits we've familiar with: fraud and misrepresentation regarding the motivational tools business, systematic looting the the defendants' business for their own profit, and criminal profiteering. These are spiced with accusations of sexual misconduct, theft, and extortion, all with Amway's knowledge and collusion.
Plaintiffs claim that Attalah defrauded members of their downline in an investment scheme in which Attalah, not surprisingly, made money while they lost money.
In mid-1993, one of plaintiffs' downlines, Roger Connolly, was being "counseled" by Samir Attalah concerning his Amway business. In violation of Amway rules, Samir Attalah used his influence and status to pressure Mr. Connolly into taking out a $20,000 loan so that he could invest that sum of money in a land development scheme. Mr. Attalah represented to Mr. Connolly that he was investing money into the scheme and guaranteed his investment and return. Mr. Attalah never disclosed that he was to receive twenty percent (20%) for each investment solicited. At or about the same time Mr. Attalah also used his influence and status in World Wide and Amway to pressure other downlines to Kathy Taylor, including, but not limited to, Patrick Schultz.
In early to mid-1995, Mr. Connolly and Mr. Schultz were informed by Mr. Attalah that their investments had "gone bad." Mr. Attalah never informed them that he had actually made money off of their investments.
They also accuse Attalah of sexual misconduct with a 19-year old distributor in their downline:
In early 1993, Samir Attalah began dating and having sexual relations with one of the plaintiffs' downline sponsors, a 19-year-old woman. This relationship lasted until August of 1993 when Mr. Attalah's intentions to continue a sexual relationships with her in private while courting other women in public became clear. Disgusted with Mr. Attalah, this young woman stopped attending meetings and dropped out of the plaintiffs' business. Mr. Attalah was confronted by the plaintiffs about this relationship, but Mr. Attalah assured her that her business would not be affected.
Later, when Attalah discovered that Ms. Taylor knew of his investment scheme involving her downline, he and Duncan embarked on a smear campaign.
In late 1995 and early 1996, after Mr. Attalah became aware that Ms. Taylor knew about his failed business dealings with Ms. Taylor's downline sponsors, defendants Attalah, Duncan and World Wide engaged in a campaign of defamatory statements to individuals in Ms. Taylor's Amway business in an effort to undermine her status and authority as an Amway distributor for the ultimate purpose of enriching defendants Attalah, Duncan and World Wide.
Eventually, they exerted their influence, about which they had bragged to Taylor, and had Amway cancel her distributorship.
On numerous occasions between 1993 and 1995, defendants Attalah, Duncan and World Wide represented that they had the authority, political connections and clout within Amway to cause Ms. Taylor to lose her business.
On November 26, 1996, they succeeded in having her distributorship revoked. Subsequent to that, adding insult to injury, they refused to buy back product and tools which she had every legal right to return -- and which they had every legal obligation to repurchase.
These accusations, occurring as they do with such regularity, raise an enormous question: wouldn't it make economic sense for Amway to clean its Augean stables? If the misconduct weren't there, the lawsuits wouldn't be either.
Home Send E-Mail Read E-Mail Links Read Articles Visit Book Corner
This page was last updated on Aug-28-98