Aspiration Financial LLc, is the moving force green or greed

           Aspiration Financial LLC is a non bank that claims to care about the planet. For each purchase you make using your Aspiration debit card you can opt in to round up to the nearest dollar and donate that portion towards planting trees. So in other words if you buy a soda n pack of gum for example for 4 21 that remaining 79 cents is donated. 

          I joined this financial instruction years ago and I absolutely loved it! I loved it until that financial institution showed me its true colors! This is another story from first hand experience folks. Use caution when choosing to bank with this financial institution. I own a small business under the name of Eazy Creations. 

          Back before I had the problems I had with this financial institution, my business kept my family going. I started this business for one reason only, to help my better half achieve his lifetime goal because he helped me achieve one of mine and it meant the world to me! Now before I explain some of my reasoning behind this article I'll advise you to look on this website

https://www.depositaccounts.com/banks/aspiration.html

Deposit Accounts, this one

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/aspiration.com

Trust Pilot, and finally this one

https://www.bbb.org/search?find_country=USA&find_text=aspiration&page=1

          Now these aren't the only places you'll get real reviews but it's a good start. You'll also see some of the fake reviews posted. This is where my research of learning how to represent myself in court got started. So in the summer of 2021 I received a small business grant from the SBA. I was cautious how I used the funds because of the grant's purpose. 

          I also had a separate account that I used for personal spending. So I kept them separated. On 07/23/21 I received that deposit into this Aspiration account. Now many of you that have experienced the issues I have have been told that Aspiration does not hold business accounts. This contradicts the ASPIRATION FINANCIAL, LLC CUSTOMER ACCOUNT AGREEMENT that you signed when signing up. 

          In the agreement it states that you can have joint accounts AND ENTITY ACCOUNTS. So don't let this financial institution fool you. It is ALSO not a bank, it's a broker dealer with a cash management account and if you actually go read that agreement carefully you'll learn a lot. It may be necessary to educate yourself on the inner workings of this institution. 

          Also research the actual number of trees planted ProPublica is one of my favorite sources and they wrote an article on the number of trees actually planted here's that link. OK moving on I will tell you this from personal experience you can fight this non bank for your monetary loss all you want but unless you've got plenty of money to throw away on a lawyer odds are you will likely lose. 

          I'm a sore lover of a lawsuit against this non bank. I lost $5,500 to them. Here's the maddening part, get ready for this. After many emails and app enquiries and receiving no response I called this institution to speak to a representative. The rep verifies my identity phone etc and then without giving me a chance to speak said "Please be advised Aspiration is ceasing all forms of communication with you effective immediately" and then the call was disconnected. 

          In disbelief after the first call I attempted to call back but received the same result. By the third call my phone number was blocked! I initiated a FINRA claim under the impression I was able to do this without a lawyer. Being that I had tons of proof to back my claims I was certain I couldn't lose. Man was I wrong. So I noticed my funds were being depleted quickly. I logged in to look at my transactions. 

          Anyone who uses this institution knows there is a $1000 dollar a day withdrawal limit. I noticed the very day I received my deposit $1912.00 was withdrawn from my account or at least that's what the record reflected. I brought this to the reps attention via email after a couple of emails in an attempt to convince me what I had seen, took screen shots of, and what my monthly account statement reflected was wrong, 

          I stopped hearing from them all together. At that point I was locked out of my account as the app said for security purposes, my phone number was blocked, and the institution became completely unresponsive to my emails. I later learned that I was placed on a "Cease communications silent solve" as the discovery paperwork stated. So this institution decided to turn the tables and shift blame on me! 

          They handed my account over to the United States Secret Service and accused me of fraud. Smart move maybe if I was actually fraudulent. I proactively sent the Secret Service a petition. The agent who I will never forget was so kind to me. When we spoke we went over my previous years tax forms among other things. He noted that my taxes seem to align with one another year after year so that looked normal. 

          He kinda chuckled and said most people send in a 2 or 3 page petition. I sent in a 380 plus page petition so he did believe that I was not fraudulent. I suppose that was an attempt to deter me from following through with the lawsuit! It didn't, however the end result was the same. I was completely blindsided by the FINRA arbitrator. 

          At that hearing the one witness that the financial chose to appear the day of the hearing was a former employee of FINRA. He was employed for nearly 8 years with them just before our hearing. My arbitrator was clearly partial to the financial institution. He refused to hear anything about FINRA rule violations or misconduct. In fact he strictly stated that we were only focusing on my monetary loss. 

          His demeanor during the hearing was not ethical in any way. Up until right before the hearing we were scheduled for an in person hearing. Right about two weeks before the hearing he backed out and decided he was only willing to do a virtual hearing. I should have known then something was wrong. However I had already been called paranoid by Aspirations counsel and I allowed that to influence my own judgment. 

          I felt maybe I was starting to get paranoid and overthink things. I trusted in the system and trusted that my arbitrator would remain neutral but that was a huge mistake. 

So after the hearing I was working on filing a motion to set aside the arbitrator's decision. Keep in mind I have no prior experience on how these things work. I had no idea what properly stating a claim for which relief can be granted meant. 

          In fact I'm still learning that process because it's more complex than it sounds for someone with no knowledge. Ultimately the end result was just before my filing deadline, I had experienced a very traumatic event. My home was unlawfully searched by Cps the chief of police and my landlord which I now am attempting to challenge in court. All they had discovered during that search was that my home was a mess. 

          It was a coordinated attack however and threw me into such a state of shock that it took months to comprehend the level of malice it took for those individuals to plan the invasion and the following chain of events. Anyhow, I was so distracted with the situation

I MISSED THAT DEADLINE! The point of this article is to bring awareness to those of you who use this institution or are considering it!        

         You'll do your research first if you're smart. This company probably spends a large chunk of their revenue on just marketing. So you have to sort of dig to find the truth meaning if you click on the links above scroll until you see a negative review once you find one you'll be surprised at all the others that follow.

          I may not have prevailed at my lawsuit but I still follow the reviews from time to time and last I checked they're still doing this to people. I have no idea how they're still operational. I read a review that said a person committed suicide because of this institution. I've read reviews that this institution has locked accounts just after receiving deposits from social security someone then back pay checks, and it caused homelessness. There is a petition you can also sign on change.org if you have experienced it.

https://github.com/eonlegal/Aspiration

          The purpose is to obtain enough signatures to have them investigated. I'll tell you when we reached the discovery stage you would be surprised how many different ways they proved me to be right with their own documentation. Also they had a data breach which was not disclosed to all customers. I know first hand my account was accessed using two factor authentication by a FINICITY platform. 

          From what I understand, it's a banking platform. USING TWO FACTOR AUTHENTICATION to log into my account. It's all in the documents THEY sent me. I was able to tie those logins from FINICITY to using my own email. There was one other banking platform that was using two 2FA to sign into my account as well. This took place around the same time they admitted to having a data break. 

          Yet they claim my account was not affected. My card was locked and shut down though. I just recommend anyone using this institution for banking services use heavy caution. That's just my opinion, if you're lucky and it's not happened to you, I've not brought these facts to your awareness and given you multiple sources of information to confirm my story. I will also provide a photo of my bank statement showing 1912 withdrawn while the limit is $1000 just for good measure. 

          I just truly do not want this institution to get away with any more fraudulent activity. It's truly a shame they have not been reprimanded thus far. I HAVE LOST ALL FAITH IN FINRA 

Discrimination, retaliation, and bias are unequivocally unacceptable and should be always be challenged

Here's a case law I learned about today that many of you will find useful! If you feel your right to equal protection has been violated this one will help. If you been treated indifferently by a court. For example in a juvenile dependency case harsher restrictions have being placed upon a person such as forcing a person to pass 5 clean drug screens before permitting any contact or visits with your children although that individual has never harmed their children, never neglected the children ect. Yet a person who has been proven to have harmed their child is given lesser restrictions. 

This type of treatment is an example of your equal protections right being violated under the 14th Amendment. 

If you've experienced this and can prove it you may very likely have grounds to initiate a 42 USC 1983 claim in court. You also have the option to choose between initiating in state court or federal district

Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 120 S. Ct. 1073, 145 L. Ed. 2d 1060 (2000). A plaintiff in a class-of-one equal protection claim does "not allege membership in a class or group" but rather must allege in its complaint: that a defendant intentionally; treated plaintiff differently than others similarly situated; without a rational basis.- in BISON CONTRACTING CO., INC. v. HALIKOWSKI, 2013 allowing Equal Protection claims brought by "class-of-one" where the plaintiff alleged, among other things, that "there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment - in 545 HALSEY LANE PROP., LLC v. Town of Southampton, 2014

 I am aware that numerous individuals have made similar claims about their experiences, and I can personally attest to having gone through it as well, with evidence to substantiate my assertions. I strongly believe that a significant portion of my readers who are currently involved in CPS cases or have dealt with them in the past may not have been aware of this information. It is crucial to emphasize the importance of equality in all situations. Discrimination, retaliation, and bias are unequivocally unacceptable and should be always be challenged.

. 

Exercising the right to remain silent

When individuals are taken into custody, law enforcement officers are required to read them their Miranda rights, which include the right to remain silent. Similarly, during Child Protective Services (CPS) investigations, individuals retain the right to remain silent, despite the absence of a formal Miranda warning. This article explores the importance of understanding and applying the Fifth Amendment's right against self-incrimination in the context of CPS interactions.

The Right to Remain Silent

The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." This principle, commonly known as the right to remain silent, extends to CPS investigations. Families should be aware that they have the right to avoid self-incrimination by refusing to answer questions or provide information that may potentially incriminate themselves or their family members.

Protecting Yourself and Your Family

To protect yourself and your family during a CPS investigation, it is crucial to exercise your rights effectively. Consider the following steps:

1. Seek Legal Guidance: Consulting with an attorney experienced in family law can help you understand your rights and provide guidance on what information to disclose and what to avoid. An attorney can also assist you in navigating the complexities of the CPS process.

2. Keep Detailed Records: Maintain a record of all interactions with CPS, including dates, times, and the content of conversations. Document any requests made by CPS officials, as well as your responses. These records can serve as valuable evidence and help ensure accurate documentation of the investigation.

3. Exercise Caution: Be mindful of what you say during CPS interactions. Remember that anything you disclose may be used against you if the case proceeds to court. It is essential to strike a balance between cooperation and protecting your rights.

4. Utilize Technology: In today's digital age, recording interactions with CPS can be beneficial. Many smartphone applications allow for easy recording of conversations. However, be sure to comply with relevant state laws regarding recording conversations and seek legal advice if uncertain.

Conclusion

When individuals are taken into custody, law enforcement officers are required to read them their Miranda rights, which include the right to remain silent. Similarly, during Child Protective Services (CPS) investigations, individuals retain the right to remain silent, despite the absence of a formal Miranda warning. This article explores the importance of understanding and applying the Fifth Amendment's right against self-incrimination in the context of CPS interactions.

The Right to Remain Silent

The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." This principle, commonly known as the right to remain silent, extends to CPS investigations. Families should be aware that they have the right to avoid self-incrimination by refusing to answer questions or provide information that may potentially incriminate themselves or their family members.

Protecting Yourself and Your Family

To protect yourself and your family during a CPS investigation, it is crucial to exercise your rights effectively. Consider the following steps:

1. Seek Legal Guidance: Consulting with an attorney experienced in family law can help you understand your rights and provide guidance on what information to disclose and what to avoid. An attorney can also assist you in navigating the complexities of the CPS process.

2. Keep Detailed Records: Maintain a record of all interactions with CPS, including dates, times, and the content of conversations. Document any requests made by CPS officials, as well as your responses. These records can serve as valuable evidence and help ensure accurate documentation of the investigation.

3. Exercise Caution: Be mindful of what you say during CPS interactions. Remember that anything you disclose may be used against you if the case proceeds to court. It is essential to strike a balance between cooperation and protecting your rights.

4. Utilize Technology: In today's digital age, recording interactions with CPS can be beneficial. Many smartphone applications allow for easy recording of conversations. However, be sure to comply with relevant state laws regarding recording conversations and seek legal advice if uncertain.

Conclusion

Understanding and applying the Fifth Amendment's right against self-incrimination is crucial when dealing with CPS investigations. Families should be aware that they have the right to remain silent and should exercise caution during interactions with CPS officials. Seeking legal guidance, keeping detailed records, and using technology responsibly can help protect your family's rights throughout the investigation process.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article about Child Protective Services (CPS) is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for personalized guidance. The author and publisher of this article are not liable for any reliance on its contents.

The Sixth Amendment, does it apply to a CPS investigation?

 The Sixth Amendment guarantees individuals the right to legal counsel. This right applies to CPS investigations, particularly if the case progresses to court. In my case my counsel has been ineffective. I've had three hearings and 3 different public defenders. Not once have any objections been r2paised for me. One of those lawyers also assisted in filing a retaliatory eviction against me suing me for $15,000 in damages that do not exist and per diem for each day in the home since Feb 05, 2023 despite rent being paid. I had to file my own motion to remove him from my case. I was surprised the judge addressed the motion as he failed to address any of my constitutional claims in a separate motion I filed. 

The Sixth Amendment provides the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. In the context of CPS investigations, this right becomes relevant if the case proceeds to a hearing or trial. It allows you to challenge the credibility of witnesses and present counter-evidence to support your case. I've never seen anyone take a case to trial. Nor have I ever heard of CPS disclosing information like this. In fact I've never heard of anyone's lawyers in these types of cases actually requesting discovery. I know none of mine have. 

If your CPS case reaches the stage of a trial, the Sixth Amendment ensures your right to an impartial jury. This means that the jury should consist of individuals who are unbiased and have no preconceived notions about your case. The selection process should adhere to established rules to ensure a fair and unbiased trial.

The Sixth Amendment is supposed to safeguard individuals' rights during CPS investigations and subsequent legal proceedings. Understanding these rights and how to enforce them is a challenging issue many have no knowledge of. If you are dealing with CPS it is advisable to consult an attorney experienced in family law to navigate the legal complexities and ensure that your rights are protected. If you can't find a good attorney, I recommend educating yourself of these processes. It's complicated no doubt but we do have rights and it's up to us to exercise those rights.

Understanding the Fourth Amendment with Cps Investigations

 When dealing with Child Protective Services (CPS) visits, it is important to understand your rights under the Fourth Amendment. If you withhold consent, CPS must establish probable cause and obtain a warrant from a judge or magistrate to conduct a search. Probable cause requires a reasonable belief, based on specific facts and circumstances, that the search will uncover evidence of child abuse or neglect.

To obtain a warrant, CPS must present their case to a judge and provide sufficient evidence or credible allegations to justify the intrusion. A fair judge will review the information and decide whether to issue the warrant. However, there are exceptions to this requirement, such as exigent circumstances where there is an immediate threat to the child's safety.

It's crucial to note that drug tests also qualify as a search, and you cannot be forced to take a drug screen without a court order. CPS must adhere to constitutional principles, including the protections against unreasonable searches and seizures provided by the Fourth Amendment.

Your consent must be voluntary, and you have the right to deny consent and request a warrant before allowing CPS agents to enter. By exercising this right, you ensure that the Fourth Amendment's protections are upheld and the visit is conducted lawfully. CPS agents should respect these rights and limit their search and seizure activities to areas directly related to the child's safety or well-being, avoiding unnecessarily invasive measures.

It is understandable that refusing consent may raise suspicion in some cases. However, it is important to recognize that some social workers may not always have the child's best interests in mind, and their motivations for initiating services can be driven by malice or financial incentives. If you feel intimidated by CPS, they may try to coerce you into agreeing to things you wouldn't normally agree to under normal circumstances.

While I am not a lawyer, I speak from personal experience and knowledge. I have heard troubling stories and witnessed concerning situations involving CPS throughout my lifetime. Seeking assistance from an attorney as soon as a CPS agent visits is wise.

If you believe that your Fourth Amendment rights were violated during a CPS visit, you can seek legal remedies to address the violation. This may involve challenging the admissibility of evidence obtained during an unlawful search or seizure or filing a civil lawsuit against CPS for violating your constitutional rights.

Understanding Substantive Due Process: Safeguarding Fundamental Rights Against Government Intrusionp

 Substantive due process is a constitutional principle that is derived from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The concept of due process ensures that the government respects and upholds certain fundamental rights and liberties of individuals, protecting them from arbitrary or unjust state action.

Substantive due process focuses on the content or substance of laws and government actions, ensuring that they do not infringe upon the fundamental rights of individuals without a justifiable reason. It places limitations on the government's ability to deprive individuals of life, liberty, or property without proper legal procedures and substantive justifications.

The principle of substantive due process recognizes that certain rights are inherent to individuals and are not to be infringed upon by the government, regardless of the procedural safeguards in place. These fundamental rights include, but are not limited to, the right to privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to marry, the right to procreate, and the right to bodily integrity.

To determine whether a law or government action violates substantive due process, courts apply a standard of review. The level of scrutiny depends on the nature of the right involved and the importance of the government's interest in regulating that right. The three levels of scrutiny commonly used are rational basis review, intermediate scrutiny, and strict scrutiny.

Under rational basis review, the court examines whether the law or action has a rational connection to a legitimate government interest. This level of scrutiny is applied to laws that do not involve suspect classifications or fundamental rights. If the court determines that the law is rationally related to a legitimate government interest, it is generally upheld as constitutional.

Intermediate scrutiny is applied when the law or action impacts a fundamental right or involves a classification based on a protected trait such as gender or legitimacy. The court examines whether the law or action substantially advances an important government interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Strict scrutiny is the highest level of scrutiny and is applied when the law or action infringes upon a fundamental right or involves a suspect classification such as race or national origin. To pass strict scrutiny, the law or action must serve a compelling government interest, and it must be narrowly tailored, meaning that there are no less restrictive alternatives available.

Through substantive due process, the courts act as a safeguard, protecting individuals from unwarranted government interference in their fundamental rights. It ensures that laws and government actions are grounded in legitimate purposes and do not unduly infringe upon the rights and liberties of individuals.