Ronald Reb Beiber, REBCO, Grow anything foundation, growanythingfoundation.org Mislead individuals into investing into a product he does not own. Withheld materially significant facts Sacramento California
Beware, this individual is claiming he has ownership of a "patent," "patent pending" or a "provisional patent." He did originally file for a patent, yet it was assigned to another party years ago, therefore he has no ownership of the product in question; at least from 2011 until this posting, as for the future, that may be different. Additionally, he is claiming his previous work as a "patent," which it was not.
He is withholding materially significant facts during due diligence and misleading individuals into becoming investors. Investor money is being routed through a non-profit organization.
If solicited by him for investment, be sure to research/google his ownership of any variation of a patent he is claiming ownership of. Be sure to ask for historical contracts to ensure he can legally raise money for anything he is claiming he is affiliated with; an attorney would have good advice in this situation. I would suggest you have an attorney or investment advisor review any documents he is asking you to contractually agree to.
If he claims any start up costs, request to see accounting records, bank statements, invoices, receipts and tax returns.
I did invest in the company he illustrated and unfortunately did not catch the patent assignment. He did not admit or mention word of his disconnect from the "patent" until he was approached with the information, which was well after he secured funding from me.
Please complete your due diligence to the fullest extent possible.
1 Updates & Rebuttals
misled investor
California,also be sure to inquire about this....
#2Author of original report
Sat, October 18, 2014
Be sure to read the contract regarding when he assigned the patent in exchange for money. You'll see that he also effectively sold the company trademark name, any equipment it purchases, it's accounts receivables, he was required to maintain the domestic and international patent status until it was perfected, he is contractually prohibited from raising money from new investors, and he was to launch the company with no more money than what was in the subject contract. Speak to an attorney, you'll find that Ronald Reb Beiber cannot start a new company nor a new patent until the subject "loan" is retired or forgiven; the current holder of the patent will have rights against the new company and patent, which is understandable, as it secures that party's position so Reb will not undermine their contract.
After reading the contract, you should question if you were to provide capital, does that capital ultimately belong to a third party, is Reb using it to support his lifestyle since he hasn't worked in a number of years, where has the hundreds of thousands of dollars raised, post assignment, gone that he was contractually obligated not to raise, and why is he using a non-profit bank account to run all the money through. This is where you may consider getting your attorney involved.
Read through that contract carefully, as you'll see Ronald Reb Beiber essentially not only sold all claims to the product in question, yet he has violated or is in default of most, if not all, terms in that contract.