Hot Rod Forum banner

Update on Streetbeasts lawsuits and George G. Levin

299K views 124 replies 52 participants last post by  JGK95 
#1 ·
Just wanted to bring everyone up to date on some very interesting developments in the Streetbeasts lawsuit(s), and start a new fundraiser to cover new legal fees. For background, you can check out the original lawsuit post. In a nutshell, 3 frivolous lawsuits have been filed against me by Streetbeasts and its owner, George G. Levin, in an attempt to push for takedown on an article that reveals the connection between Streetbeasts and Classic Motor Carriages, a kit car company that pleaded guilty to federal wire fraud charges. This is a pathetic attempt to bully us out of our First Amendment rights. We haven't budged an inch, and the article has stayed online, largely thanks to donations to our legal fund from Hotrodders.com members.

I saw a thread in which some people had already noticed that George G. Levin, the owner of Streetbeasts and Classic Motor Carriages, has had his name in the press lately, in association with an alleged $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme in Florida. Scott Rothstein, a Florida lawyer, was arrested last week on various federal fraud and racketeering charges, including violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), often used to prosecute the Mafia and others involved in organized crime. Federal agents have been busy seizing Rothstein's assets: mansions, boats, and a car collection that included Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Rolls-Royces, and a couple of Bugatti Veyrons.

Press reports indicate that Streetbeasts's owner, George G. Levin, through various investment companies, allegedly lured people into putting hundreds of millions of dollars into Rothstein's fraudulent investment deals. According to the Miami Herald, Levin has been named as a defendant in a lawsuit that alleges he was a co-conspirator of Rothstein. The head of the FBI's South Florida Division has stated that "The investigation is far from over", and the FBI is now investigating Rothstein's accomplices. Levin has hired a PR firm, and, through his spokesman, maintains that he himself was a victim of the scheme. Here's a photo of Levin and Rothstein together.

The Florida press has picked up on the lawsuits against me, and published links to the wiki article and this forum. See this article for details: Rothstein Feeder George Levin's Ugly Past. More details are in this article: Unveiling Rothstein's Top Investor, and in the Wikipedia article on Scott Rothstein.

How does this affect the lawsuits filed by Streetbeasts and George G. Levin over the wiki article? I don't know, and we might not know for a long time, as the case progresses. Nevertheless, we still need to raise more money to pay for legal fees. So, I'm asking that everyone please take a moment and think of what this website is worth to you. Or, better yet, think about what it's worth to you to be able to speak freely about any company in this industry. Then, consider donating one-tenth, one-twentieth, or one-hundredth of that amount to the legal fund. If everyone who frequented this website did that, then we would have plenty of money for costs and attorney's fees. See this post for more details on donating via PayPal, mail, or by auctioning off a spare part you don't need.

You'll notice a new tachometer fundraising graphic at the top of forum pages to kick off a new fundraising drive to cover legal fees (thanks Doodler and Only Racing for their donations of artwork). If we can push that tach to 10,000 rpm, and raise $10,000, we should be well-equipped to fight this next round, beat back Streetbeasts and George G. Levin, and keep the article online.

Thanks.
 
See less See more
#77 ·
There is nothing curious about deleting (editing/censoring) the written word, the reasons can only be guessed at by me, the forum editor refuses to openly explain and stand up to scrutiny. What is there to hide?

I am not using this forum "yet again' for any self serving interest other than to try to right a wrong, if that is offensive, then so be it!

It is easy to post favorable comments using a friend, yet when one does so openly under one's own name it is criticised as self serving promotion?

You are right, the last post was a while ago, but the wrong has been allowed to stand and time does not make it right. If this happened to you, how would you like it?

This is no grab for free advertising or promotion. This has proved to be the wrong forum for that and as far as breaking the rules of the forum are concerned, I acknowledge that I was wrong. I was new to the internet, possibly naive and foolish and have apologised for my error.

The forum editor chose to disregard the apology and has left all reference to my name and the company name on the thread when it could have easily been deleted so as to preserve the 'commercial integrity' of the forum.

To slag off or insult someone or an organisation in writing without any reason is wrong. The person or organisation so wronged should be allowed to right the wrong without interference or censorship and for the forum editor to allow this defamation to remain in print simply aids and abets the perpetrators and is morally and legally wrong.

The righting of a wrong is a strongly held belief and the right to free speech is in no way impinged by the laws of defamation nor the moral principal of allowing the injured or wronged party to set the record straight.

I understand that this principal may not be shared by everyone.
 
#78 ·
Principal. Let us discuss that a bit further.

If I understand what was said in the locked thread, it seems that- at some point- you represented yourself as an unbiased consumer of your own product. And as that "unbiased consumer", you provided a positive "review" of the product, w/o disclosing that you were- in fact- the purveyor of that product and not merely a "satisfied customer". You had an agenda, or so it would seem, to dupe the unwary by misrepresenting yourself in this manner. So about the post being removed, I'd call it a wash, at worst.

In many cases, this would be grounds for outright banishment. In that you've been allowed to stay, should be an indication to you that your post was what was a problem, not your participation in this forum, per se.

The upshot of all this- the way I see it- is, that post is likely going to stay edited, and to continue harping on this same point could easily be construed as flaming (a punishable offense, IIRC), if it's not spam like you've insisted.

You might not realize it, but you- as I and the rest of us- are here as guests of Jon. There are no "rights" to being able to post here- it's a privilege, and I suggest you start treating it as such.
 
#80 ·
Roland Claude said:
...The only mistake I made was a failure to understand the policy of promoting a business...
That was NOT your only mistake. Back in 2006 you were caught attempting to dupe the members of HR.Com by posing as an innocent consumer, praising the attributes of the dna paint line, but failing to identify yourself as having a financial interest in the product. The thread is here. Fortunately our mods caught your tactics.

Another mistake is your failure to recognize the highly beneficial effects of that thread you are demanding to take down. As noted, a one-time poster came on here and said some negative things about your product. But you know what? The folks on this forum are pretty darn savvy. If we see a new poster, someone we do not know or trust, we basically toss their opinions on the big scrap heap of drive-by complainers and little if any attention is paid.

But then you had an even greater gift horse. A couple of rodders we DO know chimed in and gave your product a thumbs up. For most of us here, that put your product in a pretty good light, and at a minimum negated whatever minor effects the op might have had. It was an excellent example of fairness and free speech in action.

Had you then joined in to simply say something like "I'll try my best to contact that user and remedy any potential problem" (as good marketing and pr might do) you would have scored huge points. Instead you chose to come on that thread, break a cardinal rule for blatant advertising and dredge up a situation which had been off the radar for well over a year. As my father-in-law used to say, "you made your own sandwich". And yes, like it or not, business owners ARE treated differently than non business owners on these forums. And the rules are not only fair but spelled out quite clearly on the site. Just ask the dozens of business owners who participate regularly on HR.Com to help hundreds of rodders every day.

As others have noted, you have appeared on this forum less than 10 times in 4 years...and almost always to promote your own product or raise years-old complaints about being mistreated. And in at least one thread you did that product promotion by trying to deceive our readers.

IMHO, the moderators (and Jon) have been more than fair in their treatment of this situation. They have followed the rules in their treatment of everyone involved.

One final suggestion. You might do well to take a course or two in public relations.
 
#81 ·
I for one enjoy the moderation, there is "free speech" and we do have rules on "free speech" as Americans, you know as well as I do, that not all speech can be tolerated without retribution as in spamming or self promotion, so what is a forum leader to do; moderate. HR is a giant reader and informational website, Jon has taken steps to make this forum highly visible and search engine friendly, yes I can almost find any well written topic come up and point to HR on the net and the mods make sure I'm reading responsible information.

As an administrator for over 11 years myself on my own forum, I found that no one would read the simple rules of spamming or even something simple as business promotion. How many people would like to see an open forum consisting of nothing but posts concerning how good their new product is, this is what blogs are for now.

If I come to a forum and see good content, a family oriented list of topics and informational assistance, I read with the knowing I didn't waste my time coming here. HR gives me this each and every day. The members here give you a balanced opinion / facts and for that it is my first stop on the net when I wake up.
 
#82 ·
This Bulletin Board has some very loyal and strong supporters!

There is an obvious passion and respect for the site, the way it operates and the moderators and editors, even the owner is held up as an example...I respect your respective positions and understand your points of view.

A few years ago when I made the postings, I broke the rules, it does not matter that I was ignorant or did not understand, I stuffed up and accept that I was wrong in commercialising my products or business. I have no argument with anyone about that.

You are all correct in that I should respect the site rules and that my breaking these rules is entirely my fault. The criticism of my mistake are deserved, they have been posted and are a constant reminder to me of my mistake... I have no problem with that. ‘If the cap fits...’

Soon after realising my error, I accepted that I was wrong, admitted my mistake and posted an apology. I do not know what more I can do?

There was no intent on my part to do any wrong or cause harm, defame or malign any person or business.

Free speech is only enjoyed by a small percentage of the World’s population, free speech is a wonderful privilege, people have died for it.... I respect free speech, and more importantly, I respect the right of people with whom I do not agree to express their views in whatever (legal) way they choose.

Most reasonable people do not support and would not tolerate or allow the publication of defamatory remarks about any person or company, which by the way, is against the law in the USA and many other western countries.

All I have ever asked for is that the forum editor removes the defamatory posting and request Google to remove the reference from their search results.

How can this possibly be unfair or unreasonable?
 
#84 ·
Roland Claude said:
This Bulletin Board has some very loyal and strong supporters!

There is an obvious passion and respect for the site, the way it operates and the moderators and editors, even the owner is held up as an example...I respect your respective positions and understand your points of view.

A few years ago when I made the postings, I broke the rules, it does not matter that I was ignorant or did not understand, I stuffed up and accept that I was wrong in commercialising my products or business. I have no argument with anyone about that.

You are all correct in that I should respect the site rules and that my breaking these rules is entirely my fault. The criticism of my mistake are deserved, they have been posted and are a constant reminder to me of my mistake... I have no problem with that. ‘If the cap fits...’

Soon after realising my error, I accepted that I was wrong, admitted my mistake and posted an apology. I do not know what more I can do?

There was no intent on my part to do any wrong or cause harm, defame or malign any person or business.

Free speech is only enjoyed by a small percentage of the World’s population, free speech is a wonderful privilege, people have died for it.... I respect free speech, and more importantly, I respect the right of people with whom I do not agree to express their views in whatever (legal) way they choose.

Most reasonable people do not support and would not tolerate or allow the publication of defamatory remarks about any person or company, which by the way, is against the law in the USA and many other western countries.

All I have ever asked for is that the forum editor removes the defamatory posting and request Google to remove the reference from their search results.

How can this possibly be unfair or unreasonable?
I believe that in your passion to preserve a 100% approval rating, you are failing to realize that no one puts any real significance in the OP's remarks.

Much more telling- IMO- is the members (a moderator among them) who stepped up to debunk the OP's tactics.

This, and ALL forums are filled w/opinion. It's the nature of the beast. And not all opinions will be agreed with. BUT to create a precedent of removing posts because another party disagreed w/them would not be well advised- also IMO.
 
#86 ·
poncho62 said:
We do not delete posts on this forum unless they are duplicates of other posts or are blatant advertising......period.

Wish we could get this thread back on the subject at hand......... :rolleyes:
As a websmaster for alot of large websites, getting anything removed form google or search engines can take forever if not being able to be done at all. Once it's on the net, there are tons of archiver spiders or bots adding to web archives, oudated blogs looking for text of anything to improve their rankings and of course the penalty incurred to this forum / website for having a missing url or 404 page not found, hurts bad.

The topic looks to be innocuos at best now and as the one who started it, they say that you lie in the bed you made so I alway recommend "thinking before you post, it will come back to haunt you".

As for staying back on topic, I hope the mod who took my PM sent it to Jon about adding my token of appreciation to the fund as the year closes, Jon will know what it means about the artwork.
 
#88 ·
back on topic

For what it is worth, I was finally able to get a hold of someone at SB. Was told that he was just temporary and that the company would be closed by the end of the year. Had to order the missing wiring harness from someone else, but not really a big deal. Unfortunately, it seems like most of the techies must have moved on.

Would hate for all the techies to have lost their job, but the message on their VM says the economy is slow and that they may resume at a later date.
 
#89 ·
65galaxie said:
For what it is worth, I was finally able to get a hold of someone at SB. Was told that he was just temporary and that the company would be closed by the end of the year. Had to order the missing wiring harness from someone else, but not really a big deal. Unfortunately, it seems like most of the techies must have moved on.

Would hate for all the techies to have lost their job, but the message on their VM says the economy is slow and that they may resume at a later date.
Congrats man. Perhaps they'll reopen with the same name under a new owner who has both integrity and pride.

I'm very happy with ours, we just don't know enough about the sbc that we're building.

Jay K.
 
#90 ·
JGK95 said:
......Perhaps they'll reopen with the same name under a new owner who has both integrity and pride......
That's what they said when CMC was convicted of wire fraud and the state closed them down. Guess what.... they opened up with the same owner, same sales staff, same employees, same slimy company.....just a different name.
 
#91 ·
Centerline said:
That's what they said when CMC was convicted of wire fraud and the state closed them down. Guess what.... they opened up with the same owner, same sales staff, same employees, same slimy company.....just a different name.
That is something about this has always bothered me a bit.......Do the employees realize whats going on here, and how can they keep working for these guys if they do know?.....Pretty hard not to know, I would think
 
#92 ·
Oh I can answer that one poncho

it is really simple it is called making a living and paying bills. The employees have no other choice,
consider your same question and wonderment, then replace the word CMC or street beast substitute the word government ....... see all the same.
 
#93 ·
Centerline said:
That's what they said when CMC was convicted of wire fraud and the state closed them down. Guess what.... they opened up with the same owner, same sales staff, same employees, same slimy company.....just a different name.
Perfectly stated.

What I was implying was that there should be "NEW" ownership, not anything owned by Levin or any shell company game created by him.

As far as the employee base...

pepi said:
Oh I can answer that one poncho

it is really simple it is called making a living and paying bills. The employees have no other choice,
consider your same question and wonderment, then replace the word CMC or street beast substitute the word government ....... see all the same.
Pepi hit the nail on the head.
 
#95 ·
according to the sun sentinal today after an initial payment of $5,000,000 it seems as though Mr. levin has agreed to a very healthy settlement in bankruptcy court with the remaining assets to be sold off at which time he will give up 85% of his finances while retaining his home and $750,000
 
#97 ·
I wonder if this means good things for the hard working people at Streetbeasts?

Perhaps Bob Southern will be able to run the shop as he's always wanted to and correct the many wrongs others have encountered. I personally know Bob's good peoples as he's who I worked with to get my remaining parts for our '34 Ford back in Feb. of this year.

Jay K.
 
#99 ·
trees said:
Wonder if Levin's scumbag lawyers are willing to continue the lawsuit against Jon? The timing should be ripe for Jon's attorneys to call for dismissal of all charges and file for reclamation of all expenses!!

Trees
The lawyers may not wish to proceed as how are they to be paid if Levin is bankrupt and if he no longer owns Streetbeast so he would have no further interest. As far as the dispositon of Streetbeast most likely the assets will be sold at auction to highest bidder and what that individual will do is unknowable at this time. Most likely the auctioneer will break it into lots consisting of real estate, tooling, inventory, office equipment and other misc items so we have likely seen the end of Streetbeasts.

Sam
 
#100 ·
OneMoreTime said:
................so we have likely seen the end of Streetbeasts.

Sam
On behalf of the entire industry.... WE CAN ONLY HOPE!
 
#101 ·
Yes But he can also come back Even stronger after bankrupt..Most people that file bankrupt (with money) know what to do after and before..I guess he will walk away ''Again''...


Seems Like he has been down this road before..
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top