7 July 27 - August 2, 2023 miaminewtimes.com | browardpalmbeach.com New Times | Contents | Letters | news | night+Day | CuLture | Cafe | MusiC | miaminewtimes.com MIAMI NEW TIMES | CONTENTS | LETTERS | RIPTIDE | METRO | NIGHT+DAY | STAGE | ART | FILM | CAFE | MUSIC | A Friendly Face Angelo Jose Sarjeant’s legal troubles date back long before the fallout from Disruptive MCA. In 2017, Enoc Martinez claimed in Miami- Dade court that Sarjeant and his father, An- gelo A. Sarjeant, were illegally retaining funds that he had entrusted to them as part of the Sarjeants’ “investment program” involv- ing the purchase of several vehicles. Martinez said he received only two of six promised ve- hicles and that his money for the remaining four cars was never refunded. A judge granted a final judgment against the Sarjeants for $640,000 in favor of Martinez. Also in 2017, claimant Luigi Quercia sued the father and son in Miami, alleging that they fraudulently induced him into investing in a foreign money-exchange business. Quer- cia claimed they had “no intention of using [his] money for the proposed business plan” and that they made minimal payments to him before ceasing reimbursement altogether. Quercia’s case was dismissed for lack of prosecution in 2020. More recently, a 2021 civil case alleged that the younger Sarjeant and Delgado (his wife) defrauded plaintiff Henry Arteaga out of more than $120,000. Arteaga claims he in- vested the money with Delgado in exchange for a 20 percent interest in another cash-ad- vance company, this one called DIDG Invest- ments LLC. Arteaga alleges the couple made off with his money and spent it to bankroll their rent, restaurant outings, and luxury items, includ- ing high-priced horses and equine sport ac- tivities, one of Sarjeant’s hobbies. “Angelo Jose Sarjeant Ponceleon and Day- anna Delgado conspired to convince the plaintiff to loan the monies to DIDG Invest- ments knowing fully that they thereafter would divert the monies... to themselves, their family members, and to other entities,” the lawsuit claims. While many investors who’ve alleged big losses on deals tied to Angelo Jose Sarjeant have never met him, Arteaga claims to know the man in the flesh. While living in Miami, Arteaga spent time with Sarjeant and his fam- ily and toured a Doral office where Delgado and Sarjeant ran their business, he says. Arteaga says Sarjeant, a Venezuelan native who came to the Miami area with his family as a youth and attended high school in Doral, has a warm personality and a good sense of humor. “He’s so lovely. If you met him, you would like him,” Arteaga says of the younger Sar- jeant. “He makes you feel comfortable. You can go to his house, and he makes barbecue for you.” Social media posts show Sarjeant has an affinity for equine sports and has participated in ranch sorting tournaments, where partici- pants wrangle confused cattle on horseback. He won a Southeast Regional competition in the all-handicap level at the 2022 Ranch Sort- ing National Championships in Georgia. According to Arteaga, Sarjeant also took a liking to expensive watches and luxury vehicles. “He spends money to show other people he’s a millionaire — it’s part of the ‘movie,’” Arteaga opines. While Arteaga claims Sarjeant is behind DIDG, Sarjeant denies as much, saying he shouldn’t be named in Arteaga’s case in part because he isn’t a registered officer of the com- pany. The defense team also argues that the fraud allegations are vague and that the law- suit was filed in the wrong format — as a claim for individual damages, as opposed to an ac- tion known as a “shareholder derivative” case. DIDG filed a counterclaim alleging Arteaga took information from the company “with the intent to build a business which would be essentially a copy of the business that Sarjeant built and compete with defen- dants.” Arteaga’s case against Delgado, Sarjeant, and DIDG is still pending in Miami-Dade cir- cuit court. Feds Claim Deceptive Trade Hearing stories of Disruptive MCA stirred up stinging memories for those who suffered losses in the Driver Loan program. One investor tells New Times she lost tens of thousands of dollars in Driver Loan while caring for a newborn child and helping her mom through a battle with pancreatic cancer. Like Mark’s Disruptive MCA situation, she came across Driver Loan through a Face- book ad directing her to marketing materials that promised “amazing returns,” as she phrased it. She first invested in Driver Loan in 2020 and encouraged her mom to do the same until they had more than $100,000 tied up in the company, she says. “I worked really hard for that money. I came to the U.S. from South America around 2008 and learned English in four months,” says the investor, who asked not to be named out of fear of retaliation by Angelo Jose Sar- jeant. “I got a degree and started working some high-paying jobs, and it was going really good for me. But when my mom got cancer in March 2021, the game plan changed for me completely.” When Driver Loan stopped paying, she didn’t have the heart to tell her mother right away, she says. In her family, she was known as a tech-savvy, meticulous researcher who al- ways did her due diligence in financial deals. “I have that reputation in my family, espe- cially my mom. She knows what I’m about,” she says. “I had to go to my family and ask for money. I’m almost 40. I’m not supposed to be doing that. But this guy put me through all that. I’ve missed out on so many opportuni- ties because they didn’t return my money.” Driver Loan’s business was centered on is- suing loans to Uber and rideshare drivers, among other recipients, which allegedly to- taled more than $30 million before the CFPB moved to shut down the business. Beginning in 2020, Driver Loan solicited investors or “depositors” to fund those loans, which it touted as legitimate investments. In actuality, the CFPB alleged, the company was misleading borrowers about the loans’ inter- est rates, which reached usurious levels as high as 900 percent APR in some instances, according to the regulatory action. “The company deceived depositors seek- ing a safe rate of return while deceiving ride- share workers about the cost of its 900% APR loans,” said the CFPB’s then-acting director David Uejio. The bureau has been seeking a contempt order against Angelo Jose Sarjeant for more than a year, claiming he has failed to repay Driver Loan investors and refused to address questions about undisclosed accounts where Driver Loan funds flowed. In court filings last year, Sarjeant claimed he paid back approximately $1.7 million of the $2.9 million Driver Loan judgment against him but was broke and unable to pay the remainder. “As I mentioned before, I have all the in- tentions of paying back all investors, but l don’t currently have the funds,” he wrote in a note to the court, docketed in early 2022. In August 2021, roughly three months af- ter Sarjeant entered into the stipulated judg- ment with the feds, Disruptive MCA started soliciting investors on a dedicated Facebook page, which became spotted with motiva- tional platitudes and celebrity quotes. One post from June 2022 declared, “Become a Buyer Member today and start earning pas- sive income!” “Making money is art, and working is an art. And good business is the best art,” the company’s post from October 2022 states, quoting Andy Warhol. [email protected] The 777 Brickell Ave. building where Disruptive MCA listed its address Photo by Haydn Blackey/Flickr
