Seek and you shall find. You want the truth you cant handle the truth.
Gentlemen if you have access to legal software you can obtain the filled complaints.
It is interesting because it also contains evidence and email communications.
This is the big picture in short summary from a legal friend.
The founder Kipping approach Bleam Tech with offer to invest in Bleam
and also to acquire Bleam and merge bleam with VPLM.
Looks like the founder Kipping and VPLM had no intention of living up
to the deal. Basically kipping pretty much created the deal for himself
and vplm while the president of vplm agreeing to the whole deal.
Moving forward Mr. Kipping had no money and flat broke and did not
have the money and could not raise investments to do the deal.
I guess they entered into a deal on false premises of "Promissory Note"
and also talks about VPLM having great assets, revenue, investors and great prospect.
According to the alledged complain these great prospects were all fraudulently
and vplm had no money, investors or any assets.
Now to ex partners (disgrunted) alledged that they are 50% owners of Bleam without legal
contract or document but just hearsay. This is where it gets tricky. Kipping and vplm having knowledge
of this alledged claim advises the bleam owners to move forward with the deal anyways as it sounds
like baseless allegations. So I guess the orginally VPLM attorney dropped the case - how can you represent a client with dirty?
Its rare to see attorney dropping a client unless they do not believe the case.
So the parties moved forward with the deal. Bleam requested the payments as agreed upon from Kipping
and voip pal but I guess there had no intentions of making good on the deal because at the time both
kipping and vplm had no money, no revenue or assets. As you can also see from the fillings i do not think vplm have made
more than $1000 per year in revenue.
The bleam decided to abandone this deal. I guess at this stage vplm was in sticky situation
as it had promised investors and press releases etc about this entire deal which looked great for the company.
VPLM filed a suit against Bleam and the founders and the other two alledged owner(callarc).
I do not understand why these two alledged owners (callarc) were dragged into this. Does not make much sense to me.
The two alledged owners refused to be part of the case and basically ignored the complaints. Thats why there is the default
againts them.
Bleam countersued VPLM for intention fraud. Moved forward and also sued Mr Kipping and added him together to this case.
So as it stand it is VPLM sue Bleam for not disclosing other owners (alledged).
Bleam Counter Sues VPLM and Kipping together. If this matter ever goes to court would be interesting to see more in details.
Does not look good at all and seems that this case is created with ill intentions in mind.
So vplm claim of other ownership (the callarc guys) refuse to be part of this, now what? How can u continue with a case
when the main defendants that alledged or brought about the case refuse to participate?
Regarding Kipping it seems that maybe this case is more than just civil. Maybe the bleam guys putting forward evidence for more charges? - I dont know.
The problem i see here - intentionally entering into a contract and not having the means is somewhat fraud not only civil but criminal.
Does it make sense why the patents are maybe assigned to two new companies we have never heard of? I dont know...raises more questions than answers.
I know there are pro vplm insiders on this board but before you try to discret this please conduct your own research.
This analyse is my personal opinion based on what has been publicly filed. It is not intended to discret anyone or a company.
Messy situation.
AI
