Vest and his attorney have flat out lied to the courts and sent a letter to the court that it was “untrue.�

Vest’s two sons loaned Vest 7.5 million when he was in financial trouble. Now Vest has disowned his sons and refused to repay. Vest has even gone as far as telling them to “prove it� and “sue me� Vest was the trustee on his oldest son’s account and without permission or knowledge that account was cleaned out by Vest. Vest’s own mother accused him of fraud and forgery by signing her name to a note issued to her when she helped her son start his business.

If Vest does this to the people that love him and he claimed to love. Is it that hard to believe that he would lie and decieve his customers?

Vest is living large in Dallas with a new 300K+ Maybanc car and new home in the works of millions. He hasn’t paid a dime to his sons and in fact left one holding the bag for his current home. They are broke and he is riding around in a 300K car.

There is a class action lawsuit against True.com filed in Dallas. If you have been ripped off by True.com contact: filed by Washington D.C. based Tycko & Zavareei LLP along with Dallas, Texas based Crews, Shepherd & McCarty LLP.

District Court of Dallas County, Texas, and is titled “Wong v. True Beginnings, LLC.� True Beginnings, LLC

It is time for the FBI, IRS, SEC, DTP, Dallas DA and Texas DA to investigate Mr. Vest.

I had a premonition that things would go well in Springfield. Hey, it’s the Land of Lincoln and Illinois is the state where I was born!

But superstitions aside, the members of a House Judiciary Committee really carried the day here with their probing questions and clued-in skepticism about HB 563, the Internet Dating Disclosure and Safety Awareness Act.

Take Rep. Jim Sacia for instance. He’s an ex-FBI agent that really knew the difference between background checks and criminal screenings. He said that criminal screenings—the kind contemplated by all of the state online dating bills, were incomplete and too easily defeated to mean anything.

First, Rep. Sacia described the kind of thorough background check that makes use of lots of input data to dig deep into one’s personal history. It requires having providing such personal information as social security numbers and fingerprinting. This is the kind of analysis I had performed on me before I was admitted to the D.C., Georgia and Virginia bars.

Then he described the criminal background screenings that True.com obtains from Rapsheets. This check requires only credit card information and a birth date. But it only provides felony conviction and registered sex offender information.

But here’s the whammy: in many states–including Florida and Illinois–only a small percentage of counties report to a central database accessible by companies that provide criminal background screenings for online dating providers.

So…a criminal screening provides limited data from a limited pool of people…and legislators are—through mandated disclosures—wanting to imply that they’re good for consumers?

Rep. Sacia understood the false sense of security that would result from passing the bill. But so too did many of the other members of the committee. And they overwhelmingly voted against HB 563.

Which makes me feel for the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Bradley. I think he’s just one of the many legislators that have been bamboozled by Herb Vest and True.com. Related to this, my colleague Steve DelBianco has a blog post where he explains a recent New York Times article about True and hopes that legislators aren’t fooled by the false promises behind True.com’s propaganda.

Some of you may remember my post Discouraged Advocate Seeks Legislators that Refuse to Coddle where I describe my jadedness upon coming back from Tallahassee. For now, color me optimistic.

Why does True claim they do background checks on everyone. That is false. Vest even admitted it. Without personal ID there is no way to get correct background checks. True needs to post warnings about accuracy of their checks.

Background checks don’t show mentally ill people, perverts, emotional and verbal abusive people, sex addicts, drug users, liars and cheats, porn addicts, swingers, rapest and murderers that haven’t been caught.

How about that “Free” trail. It isn’t free at all. True charges upfront. Why doesn’t true put a renewal notice once the “free” trail is up? Or how about answering the darn phone?

Why do customers have to take those stupid test? What is True using the information for. eharrony does require anyone to test.

Why is True the most expensive at 50 bucks? Vest claimed background checks cost him a $1.50, so where is the rest of it going the Boob ads?

Why did Vest rip off his kids and why won’t he pay them back?

What is in the lawsuit that Vest is afraid for the public to see? so he had it sealed?

What about Vest using a detective to stalk his ex for more then 5 years, even after he got married?

What about Vest wanting to reduce the divorce rate and expose married people. Vest is on his 3rd marrage. Vest’s records only show 1 marriage and 1 divorce. If Vest’s record isn’t correct how do we know True’s records are correct?

What not refund the people that has been ripped off. Sell and use the money from the building Vest bought.

What happen to all those Match former employees that Vest said he would protect?
Did Vest get/use Match information from those employees?

Who has/is/will sue True.com and Herb Vest?

My profile page doesn’t have those options, but I filled it out ages ago, so I really can’t comment on the location of the checkboxes.

If I did not specifically initiate a wink, it’s fake, or inauthentic. Call it what you want, that’s a tricky grey area that you can argue about all day long. My point is that these winks are dishonest, inflate pageviews, time spent on the site and most importantly get people’s hopes up for no reason.