Exercise caution as Thomas Signorelli has been reported to engage in fraudulent activities. We anticipate his appearance on American Greed shortly. The business model of his company resembles that of a pyramid scheme. Instead of providing funding, he misappropriates the funds and indulges in lavish living. The individual in question appropriated funds from multiple vendors and absconded from the area.
It has been reported that the individual in question has been involved in multiple instances of fraudulent activity, with sums of 80,000 and 75,000 being among the reported amounts. There are ongoing investigations into several cases of fraud allegedly involving this individual, who is said to have engaged in deceptive practices with numerous individuals. He removed the pitcher from his website.
He appears to engage in fraudulent activities by repeatedly establishing new business entities and opening bank accounts.
The individual in question has both federal and state tax liens.
The following report will provide an overview of his operational methods and rationale for recommending an investigation and avoidance.
Kristine Wang versus Thomas Signorelli
Kristine Wang initiated legal action on October 29th, 2020 by filing a lawsuit for breach of contract against Thomas Signorelli. The present case has been filed in the Downtown Superior Court of Santa Clara, California, which falls under the jurisdiction of Santa Clara County Superior Courts. The presiding judges for this case are Mikkelsen, Laurie, and Iravani-Sani, Nahal. The current status of the case is “Disposed of – Other Disposed.”
Fremont Bank and Signorelli
Fremont Bank filed a lawsuit for Contract – Another Contract against Signorelli on August 25, 2021. The aforementioned case has been filed in the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse of Contra Costa County Superior Courts, situated in Contra Costa, California. The current status of the case is listed as “Pending – Other Pending.”
Acer Environmental Inc. versus Oakside Capital Inc.
ACER ENVIRONMENTAL INC initiated legal action against OAKSIDE CAPITAL INC on August 24th, 2016 by filing a Small Claim – Another Small Claim lawsuit. The aforementioned case has been filed within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County Superior Courts, specifically at the Van Nuys Courthouse East situated in Los Angeles, California. The presiding judge for this case is Richard F. Walmark. The current status of the case is “Disposed of – Judgment Entered.”
Hemmeter v. Signorelli et al
On November 21st, 2022, Hemmeter initiated legal proceedings by filing a lawsuit for Contract – Debt Collection against Signorelli. The present litigation was initiated in the U.S. District Courts, specifically in the Florida Southern District Court. The presiding judge for this case is Rodolfo A. Ruiz, II. The current status of the case is listed as “Pending – Other Pending.”
Robert Mckee, et al vs Thomas Signorelli, et al
On June 13, 2022, the plaintiff, Robert Mckee, initiated legal proceedings by filing an Other lawsuit against the defendant, Thomas Signorelli. The aforementioned case was submitted to the Broward County Circuit Courts, specifically the Broward County Central Courthouse situated in Broward, Florida. The presiding judge for this case is David A. Haimes. The current status of the case is listed as “Pending – Other Pending.”
Alleged violation of the Business Opportunity Fraud Act of Washington has been attributed to Westgate Advisors, Inc. and its principal, Thomas Signorelli
Thomas Signorelli has been indicted by the United States government for his involvement in a toilet rebate scam.
As per the Complaint filed against Thomas Signorelli, he was interrogated by federal and city agents regarding his involvement in the negotiation of TRP checks that were fraudulently obtained. These checks were processed through a corporate bank account that he had control over in the state of New Jersey. As per the Complaint, it is alleged that SIGNORELLI provided false information to the agents during questioning regarding the number of proceeds he retained from the checks and the reason for retaining them.
According to recorded evidence, Thomas Signorelli purportedly made a statement acknowledging that he provided false information to the agents. Specifically, he claimed to have received solely $12,000, which constituted payment for accounting services rendered. As per the Complaint, it has been stated that Thomas Signorelli instructed a cooperating witness not to disclose to the agents that the cash he had received was his fee for cashing the checks. According to recorded evidence, Thomas Signorelli purportedly advised the witness to “clean up” their records.
You May Also Like To Read:
David Wilkinson Morgan Stanley – Epitome of Greed
Lisamarie Bourke – Drugs, Promiscuity and Lies
Secured Investment Corp: Trickery, Skepticism, and Illegality
