Explore your opportunities! Create an account or Sign In
The most trusted and popular consumer complaints website

coverall franchisees


owners are brain dead

Complaint Rating:  75 % with 4 votes
75% 4
this is for all of you brain dead coverall frinchise owners who can't make your business work. you DO NOT WORK FOR COVERALL<YOU WORK FOR YOU!!! i have been a franchise owner for 21 yrs.my wife and i run a very succesful franchise, because we take responsibility for it, not blame coverall.all you people want to do is moan because everything is not being handed to you.you have to work in this business, forget about hiring people.YOU ARE SELF EMPLOYED, YOU DO NOT WORK FOR COVERALL!!!
Complaint comments Comments (56) Complaint country United States Complaint category Cleaning Services / Laundry


Sort by: Date | Rating
N  4th of Oct, 2011 by    0 Votes
Well, there you go again 1st amendment, lying to your "adhoring public" aka Jonathan Fortman...Let us go over this one more time, just for the record:
a) Jonathan Fortman is a second tier attorney that has to report to his children in order to learn things such as Internet Troll and Shill.
b) Jonathan Fortman is trying to cash in on the SEIU and BIG Labor money that liss-riordin has been getting and just discovered that even Big Labor thinks he is a joke!
c) Coverall can/will still file an appeal on earlier ruling
d) Coverall has quit selling franchises in MASS only
e) Liss-Riordin hasn't won a cleaning franchise case outside of MASS
f) 1st amendment's own lawsuit is on purpose being "sidelined" for lack of funds
g) No awards have been given out...

So in a "nutshell" both you and Fortman are losers!
N  27th of Oct, 2011 by    0 Votes
If you are working for coverall or have in the past worked for them in California please give me a call as soon as possible.

N  27th of Oct, 2011 by    0 Votes
So, you trying to do more legwork for Liss-Riordin? Think it's funny how your case against Jan-Pro is going nowhere, now you are trying to "piggy back" onto Coverall Ruling in MASS! Have you spoken to TEAM FORTMAN lately? Are you finally realizing that outside of the state of MASS that NOTHING is going to happen? SEIU won't support anything for Liss-Riordin anymore either without another victory soon...Might want to try another avenue.
N  27th of Oct, 2011 by    0 Votes
To Lying source, the jan-pro case is going very well. Why does it bother you that I have met some people who work for coverall and are getting ripped-off? I'm a freindly person who simply warns people about these Ponzi Scheemes if people want to organise and protest and take action it's there right..

If you have been ripped-off by coverall in California please give me a call as soon as possible.

By the way Lying source will you ever tell us your name? Probably not because you are a scared little mouse.

N  5th of Nov, 2011 by    0 Votes
1st amendment, you, Fortman, Liss-Riordin have no answer for me, Here I am an industry veteran standing up for the nearly 100, 000 owner-operators performing quality services on a nightly basis throughout the U.S. They are currently cleaning over 2.5 BILLION dollars per year of commercial cleaning accounts and top quality accounts at that... Problem for you and the other 100 (your number) or so, disgruntled, uncaring, underperforming owner-operators is that SEIU and Big Labor after their miserable attempt trying to get commercial cleaners to unionize decided to "get into bed" with companies such as Many Large National Providers and make an agreement that if they could get rid of the "franchise based commercial cleaning companies" they could begin increasing costs, wages and UNIONIZE all facilities overa a certain size and/or geographic area. HERE"s the problem, outside of MASS, there have been only minor victories... THEY need a BIG ONE to pop and soon...All of a sudden companies like Coverall have awoken and aren't going to SETTLE any more! 1st amendment, Fortman, Liss-Riordin your days of Easy Money are over...IF you don't win something soon and do it outside of MASS then SEIU will pull the plug, they've got to put all money into trying to change an election in 2012!
N  26th of Dec, 2011 by    0 Votes
To Lying source Hey you keep hidding like a Rat in a Cave. You still won't give me your name or where you live. I guees you have much to HIDE so you won't say your real name.

Don't let these criminals intimidate you. If you have been ripped-off by a cleaning franchise Ponzi Scheme Like a Judge recently compared them to you can do the following.

1. File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission www.Ftc.gov

2. File a complaint with the Attorney General www.Justice.gov

3. Organise with other cleaners and look for an attorney or lawfirm and get Justice.

Coverall has many Lawsuits and it looks like the Goverment will come down on them soon.
N  27th of Dec, 2011 by    0 Votes
1st amendment, aka Dude Love, aka I love America, aka SEIU Stooge... Glad to see that liss-riordin was able to secure your safe passage back from Mexico! Was getting worried about you...Hope your Jan-Pro lawsuit is still going on? Wait a second, that is still in hiatus isnt it? What happened, got a feeling you were about to lose, therefore, just asked for continuance again? Time is running short for you isn't it?
N  28th of Dec, 2011 by    0 Votes
To Lying source, Your still avoiding the QUESTION? What is your real name? What is your real name ? Why do you hide like a RAT in a Cave ? Be a Man and say who you are. What is your name and why are you so afraid to say who you are ?

The Lawsuits are going well. Don't let this Rat from corporate intimidate you. If you have been Ripped-off by a cleaning Ponzi Scheme like a Judge recently compared them to you can take action to get Justice.

The following are things that you can do.

1. File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. They are a Goverment agency with the Power to take action. They can and will go into a building with armed police officers and agents and take action. You should file a complaunt with the Federal Trade Commission. www.Ftc.gov They will take action once they get enough complaints . Your complaint with them is confidential. WWW.FTC.GOV

2. File a complaint with the Attorney General let them know that these companies are in violation of the Rico and Raqueterring Acts. WWW.Justice.Gov

3. Let your local News Stations and newspapers know what is going on with these cleaning companies and how they are a "Ponzi Scheme" Thats what a Judge recently said.

4. Organise with other cleaners who have been ripped-off. When you go to pick ip your paycheck talk to everyone.

5. Look for an attorney or Lawfirm. There is many pursuing lawsuits at this moment.

6. Picket and warn other people of this Scam!

6. If you call me I can give you a copy of the lawsuit and more information. Jerry 909-684-1837
N  30th of Dec, 2011 by    0 Votes
1st amendment, are you and the owner of unhappyfranchisee.com and Jonathan Fortman going to get together soon in St. Louis? If so, let me know and I will be more than happy to buy all three of you an ice tea! Heck, I'll even buy dinner... The owner of unhappyfranchisee.com is on food stamps and has to have a telethon at least twice per year to raise enough cash to keep things going. Fortman's got a car with 250K miles on it and he is your SAVIOR! Only reason Liss-Riordin isn't part of this issue is the fact she was smart enough to get SEIU and the union dues to pay her salary! Looking forward to 2012!
N  10th of Jan, 2012 by    0 Votes
To lying source,

2012 is here and we are going to fight harder than ever. I will never give in until we get Justice. I think my congressman is going to be very interested in hearing of how these Ponzi Scheme cleaning rackets are ripping of many of his constituents. Oh and here is another article, hope you enjoy because I have more coming.

The following is an article from bluemaumau.org 12-31-2011

Shannon Liss-Riordan: Petite Sledgehammer

BOSTON — An attorney in a boutique Boston law firm, Lichten & Liss-Riordan PC, has gone after giants and won. Many with deep pockets, who employ some of the country's largest law firms, are licking their wounds and probably asking themselves if having been a little fairer in the first place may not have been the easiest route.

It's not just franchisors who are wary of her. Franchise owners too. She has won restaurant tip cases. Liss-Riordan focuses on class action litigation involving failure to pay wages, overtime, gratuities and minimum wage. She took on franchisors who pretended their employees were franchise owners.

Representing pole dancers, waitresses and newly immigrated franchisees, she is known as a champion of the little guy. Her legal wins have gained a reputation in the state, the country and the franchise world.

Her clients dub her "Sledgehammer Shannon."

In August of this year, attorney Liss-Riordan had the final win in a franchise case she was representing. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court smacked Coverall janitorial franchise system with a huge bill for labeling its employees franchisees. The high court ruled that the franchisor must pay back franchise-related fees, including promissory note payments, additional business fees, franchise fees and insurance payments.

Another Boston-based attorney, Seth Stadfeld, explains that janitorial services like Coverall find customers through the national office, call them, collect money and then give back to the franchisee what's left over. He explains that most franchisors aren't like Coverall. "The money flows uphill (franchisees collect money from customers and pay royalties up to their franchisor), while in Coverall and cleaning service franchises, the money flows downhill, " says Stadfeld. "In Coverall, the customer relationships flow downhill. It is the franchisors that determine whether you can service the customer or not. For purposes of independent contract status, that really is different."

Experts think the ruling that franchisees can be disguised employees will ripple down to other franchise systems and other states.
N  10th of Jan, 2012 by    0 Votes
1st amendment, now we are in 8 years since Liss-Riordin first took on the various cases that she has... How much money has actually been paid to the supposed "disenfranchised"? Absolutely ZERO! She has some legal victories, but at the end of the day, the only one with a judgement against them is poor old Aiwah! 1st amendment, you should be the one along with Liss-Riordin who should go to jail for deception. With a track record of calling everyone in, deceiving them into thinking the franchisor is the only reason for their failures in life, the only one responsible for them not making any money, the only one responsible for being on food stamps etc... What about Personal Responsibility? 2012 will be an interesting year for sure...
N  7th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
To lying source its not 8 years its 3. You are such a liar and a COWARD because you are to chiken to say who you are. If you have been ripped-off by jan-pro there is several things that you can do.

1. File a complaints with the FTC Federal trade commisiion www.ftc.gov

2. File a report with your states attorney general and us attorney general

3. Talk to everyone that bought into the ponzi scheme and look for an attorney and take legal action

4. You can contact me Jerry at 909-684-1837 I can give you more information.
N  9th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
To Lying source,

Just so you know one of your favorate Lawyers was on the winning side of Justice in this LANDMARK and HISTORIC CASE!

Rhina Alvarenga v. Coverall of North America d/b/a Coverall Cleaning Concepts and Coverall of Boston. Sunrise Senior Living. Inc. d/b/a Sunrise of Arlington, et al (Superior Court, Middlesex County, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Case No. MICV2005-01782-A), filed on May 2, 2005 and Amended on August 8, 2005. Plaintiff, a former Coverall franchisee, filed this eleven count complaint against Coverall and one of its customers, Sunrise Senior Living, Inc. ("Sunrise"), variously alleging common law fraudulent inducement, and claimed damages in the amount of $19, 654.11; violation of the Massachusetts General Laws 93A; the right to rescission; breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; violation of the Massachusetts Minimum

Fair Wage Act; violation of timely payment of wages statute; overtime violations under the Massachusetts Minimum Fair Wages Act; and unjust enrichment. The case was settled and Coverall paid.

Not only that but they also had to pay Rhina Alvarenga unemployment benefits. Coverall didn't want to but Coverall lost in court again.

Coverall North America, Inc. v. Com’r of Div. of Unemployment, 447 Mass. 852 (2006) (amicus) (Supreme Judicial Court held that “franchisee” cleaning worker was employee entitled to unemployment compensation upon termination, not independent contractor)
N  9th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
1st amendment, per liss-riordin's own website, she states she met with and then decided to pursue a legal case against Coverall in 2004... Now I don't know how you count in your country of origin (Mexico), but here in the good ole USA we count from 2004 to 2012 as 8 Years... Hope you and Fortman have fun in the coming month's, I have a feeling this is coming to a head, sooner than later. Once Obama is voted out of office, your cases are history, because the money will be gone from SEIU!
N  16th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
To Lying source,

The Rhina Alvarenga case was concluded back in 2006 it lasted 2 years. The case was won by Rhina Alvarenga. Thats 2 years! Then coverall tried to sue the Goverment LOL, LOL, LOL... The Judge scolded coverall and made them pay the Office of Unemployment and Rhina Alvarenga. The other case was filled in Massachusetts in 2007 so it hasn't been as long as you said. Either way it doesn't matter how long it takes what matters is that we eventually get Justice, Just like Rhina Alvarenga did.
N  17th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
1st amendment, you absolute ###, I'm talking about good ole Aiwah and liss-riordin. Not Alarenga. 2004 till 2012 is still 8 years. I know that in Mexico they don't speak or understand English, but at least you could get Fortman or someone in his office to translate for you...How's your case in California going? Not so well, think there is a common theme, NO WHERE ELSE BUT MASS! Now Fortman is trying to drag Masters into his lawsuit (pretty stupid) in order to gain some traction in Missouri...Pretty sure he is simply "yelling at windmills" and drinking Ice-Tea from the corner mart in his old, broken, beat down Mercedes and still avoiding his child support payments! But at least he has his current wife, former mistress, past employee to lean on in times of trouble.
N  17th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
To Lying source

Still afraid to give us your real name ? Can you tell us why you are so afraid to give us your real name? Why do you hide? I guees that is the way jan-crap and all the other fake cleaning franchisors do business, hide like rats in a cave.

The Pius Awuah case was filled in 2007. It doesn't matter how long it takes as long as we get JUSTICE just like Rhina Alvarenga did.

If you have been ripped-off by jan-pro there is several things that you can do.

1. File a complaints with the FTC Federal trade commisiion www.ftc.gov

2. File a report with your states attorney general and U.S attorney general.

3. Talk to everyone that bought into the ponzi scheme, look for an attorney and take legal action

4. You can contact me i'm Jerry and a plaintif you can call me at 909-684-1837 I can give you more information.
N  19th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
1st amendment, you ###...Liss Riordin first met with the people in the awiah case in 2004. It does matter, and in fact as we still speak, the only one that has any type of judgement in the awiah case, is poor old, dumb, disgruntled, taken advantage of by liss-riordin and exploited by losers like you and Fortman is awiah... By the time the appeals are done, awaih will be back in his native country and still dirt poor thanks to you and liss-riordin.
N  20th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
Lying source your a ###, the Pius Awuah case is diferent than the Rhina Alvarenga case and diferent from the other case settled in 2006. It's 3 diferent cases, two of them were settled a long time ago. You are either very stupid or a Big Dum ###! Do you want me to post all 3 diferent ones?
N  20th of Feb, 2012 by    0 Votes
The following article recently came out on the National Law Journal

Judge certifies class of cleaning workers misclassified as 'franchisees'

Sheri Qualters
The National Law Journal February 13, 2012

A Boston federal judge has certified as a class a broad swath of
purported franchisees of cleaning company Coverall North America
Inc. who are suing the company for misclassifying them as
independent contractors instead of employees.
In a Feb. 10 order in Awuah v. Coverall North America Inc., Judge
William Young of the District of Massachusetts defined the class as
individuals who owned a Coverall franchise and performed work for Coverall customers
in Massachusetts at any time since Feb. 15, 2004, who didn't sign an arbitration
agreement or have their claims previously adjudicated.
Young's recent ruling expanded the class he certified on Sept. 22, 2011, to include
some people who obtained a franchise through transfer. The class includes individuals
who became franchise owners through a consent-to-transfer agreement but did not
receive a copy of Coverall's franchise offering circular, which outlined terms of the
janitorial franchise agreements, including mandatory arbitration.
Eight named plaintiffs claimed in their February 2007 complaint that the company
misclassified franchisees as independent contractors. They also alleged Coverall did
not provide the promised volume of cleaning work to franchisees who paid $6, 000 to
$30, 000. And they claimed Coverall targeted immigrants who do not speak English as a
first language or fully understand the company's legal documents.
Since they are employees, the plaintiffs contend that the company is liable for minimum
wage, overtime and wage law violations. The legal claims include breach of contract,
misrepresentation, deceptive and unfair business practices and unjust enrichment. In March 2010, Young granted the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on the
misclassification claim. In that ruling, he found that Coverall did not meet the second
prong of the state's three-part test that defines independent contractors, which requires
workers to provide services that are "independent, separate and distinct" from the
employers' business.
The other two parts of the test require independent contractors to be "free from control
and direction in connection with the performance of the service" and customarily
engaged in the same trade, profession or occupation that they're doing contractually.
In his Feb. 10 ruling, Young expanded the class to include people who didn't sign an
arbitration agreement and get notice of the arbitration agreement, so "it's a pretty
straightforward commonsense ruling, " said one of the plaintiffs' lawyers on the case,
Shannon Liss-Riordan of Boston's Lichten & Liss-Riordan. "People can't be bound by an
arbitration agreement that they didn't get notice of or a copy of."
Liss-Riordan said the plaintiffs are looking forward to Young's pending ruling on the
"illusoriness" or validity of Coverall's arbitration agreement. "We have challenged the
arbitration agreement as a whole, " Liss-Riordan said.
She also said the case "raises very interesting questions about whether companies
really want to compel hundreds of individuals to go to arbitration or [whether they] are
they hoping they can deter people."
"This case is showing these issues are not going to go away, " Liss-Riordan said." It's
going to be even more expensive and complicated [for companies]."
The plaintiffs have filed a motion for summary judgment on damages, which is slated for
hearing on Feb. 14, based on Young's March 2010 ruling. They're seeking several types
of damages, including: $916, 844.65 for initial franchise fees and additional business
fees; $894, 433.78 for insurance deductions: $106, 535.77 for funds collected to offset
unpaid customer bills; and $122, 932.25 for interest on late payments.
The plaintiffs are also asking for triple damages based on a 2008 amendment to the
Massachusetts law concerning unpaid wages that allowed for the increase in damages.
Aside from that change, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled in 2005
in Wiedmann v. The Bradford Group that courts can treble damages for unpaid wages
when there is a showing of "outrageous[ness], because of a defendant's evil motive
or…reckless indifference" to workers' rights."
"He'll either assess the damages based on the papers or will have a trial in March to
determine those damages for the class members, " Liss-Riordan said.
Liss-Riordan said those amounts don't include fees paid by class members before
February 2004 and after June 2010, or fees paid by the class members added by Young's Feb. 10 ruling. Neither fee category has been calculated, she said.
Lawyers at DLA Piper who represent Coverall were not available to discuss the case.
Coverall did not respond to a request for comment.

Post your Comment

Please check text spelling before submitting a comment
Your attitude towards Complaint Agree Neutral Disagree
Comment text
Attach photos (optional)

Contact Us

Reply to