Signal Scams seriously harms e-retailers

A good reputation generally means a higher level of consumer confidence and more general sales in addition to. Signal Scams, platform edited by SAS HERETIC and ScamDoc(whose editors are Jean-Baptiste Boisseau and Anthony Legros) claims to be a company that helps consumers not to be scammed, the reality is quite different, these platforms greatly harm individuals and especially legitimate e-commerce, as such, we have investigated for you :

The 2 sites published by HERETIC are the following : and

What is Signal Scams?

A simple database or anyone can report a scam by stating all the details related to it including: a number, a website, the identity, the individual he claims to be a scammer or scammer. As for the rest, we will leave the creator of this so-called "revolutionary wonder" that no one would have thought of before selling his product (listen carefully, this site would be "a reference in France and Europe" we walk on the head "the idea would have come to him through his own online advertising site" which we will talk about just below) :





It must be admitted that since the time of their ad site "Toopac" and even from the launch of their site Signal Scams, they were already not unanimous (more enemies than friends) if we refer to an old discussion : Click HERE

What is ScamDoc?

A platform, which automatically judges website URLs via a very inefficient algorithm, based on deceitful, ineffective and totally outlier formulas specially designed by this same scam vigilante (Anthony Legros editor of the HERETIC publication) - This "site", using a semi-fake robot, since after investigation, just about any computer scientist is able to set up an algorithm of this kind in a very short time. : relies on the Whois (see definition for lay people) and other data that are not factual, to judge the sites at all and informs consumers (who have absolutely no knowledge of what data this platform works on) whether it is good to buy on this or that site.

Why would the creation of this article tell us, since the goal of creating a site to report scams or scams of all kinds (Signal Scams), then to add another platform described as "revolutionary" to judge whether a particular site is trusted by typing its simple domain name (ScamDoc) in order to obtain a trust rating that is 1% to 100% would be legitimate and could save the whole world from all crooks to the white collar? It's not true, You'll understand below why :

Why Signal Scams Is a Big Harm to Businesses :

PremRank is an online reputation management site. Over the past 2 years, we have been assigned by many companies and individuals with e-reputation cleanup requests against multiple abject reporting pages from Signal Scams. To understand what a site or individual reporting page looks like, which can be put by everyone online at the click of a button, see the screenshot of a reporting page below

* Source : Page de signalement
A reporting page Signal Scams contains the date, email, name or pseudonym and URL of the reported site. The page itself, with the subtle logo featuring the word "Scams" looks for the shot very aggressive, but that's not all, imagine how you would feel and the state in which you would be if you would find this kind of content after a Google search on the name of your site, the name of a loved one or your own name :

* Source : Recherche

How Signal Scams Becomes Illegal and Dangerous :

The site, in itself, seems to display a rather positive image in the eyes of any Internet user (simple and old-fashioned design, but rather neutral) as well as legal mentions that would lead to believe that everything is designed for the good of all, has ended up becoming popular among computer novices: it has certainly allowed many individuals with no computer knowledge to avoid the few scams that 90% of the population already knows (scams lecoin , overtaxed calls, grazers, love scams, etc. and that's the only good positive that our team has recognized.

but, and where we are bordering on illegality, it is for all other people reported illegitimately, by filling out a simple form, clicking on a validation link and we find a lot of it (we will not talk about the case of our clients to remain neutral in this article). Many are denigrated, defamed, insulted and unable to assert their right to withdraw after an illegitimate reporting page was reported to the site's publishers. HERETIC SAS or by sending an email to their team : Targeted Internet users complain about a company that does not deign to respond to emails, does not moderate its site, and does not absolutely verify the authenticity of the reports

HERETIC SAS: several convictions from the website Signal Scams

The argument of this company to defend itself is fortunately not admissible by the opposing parties who have already filed a lawsuit against them for denigrating services, it is currently debating: "The host of content therefore makes available a means that Internet users are free to use and is not responsible for the content put online." (see their legal mentions). However, this argument is abject and for good reason: the editor (Anthony Legros) invents a dummy law because until proven otherwise, he is responsible for its sites, their content and the moderation of them, it is not a host but he hosts them and is responsible for it in the eyes of the law and any courts. See their latest conviction : Click on this link

More and more companies are daring to talk about it, and are filing complaints :

We have recently, following the case of a client, been put to the petition Against Signal Scams having collected more than 400 signatories had been put online, we will not judge its authenticity, but the elements it brings are undoubtedly undeniable and frightening for a company that should have an ethic. The author of the petition believes that a false report of a competitor with regard to his site would have bankrupted his company, discrediting him in front of thousands of Internet users who typed his brand name through search engines (the famous link strongly discredited them). He accuses Signal Scams of not moderating content, harassment, here's his argument :

* Source : Pétition Signal Arnaques

Let us remember the law anyway: In accordance with theSection 29 of the Act of July 29, 1881 which defines defamation as "any allegation or imputation of a fact that impairs the honour or consideration of a natural or legal person for which the fact is imputed" and insult as "any outrageous expression, words of contempt or invective that does not contain the imputation of any proven and proven facts.": the denigration of products or services is an act regularly condemned on the basis of theArticle 1240 of the Civil Code on civil liability.

But that's not all, according to him the individual behind the company HERETIC even sells on the site of his own company to resell advertising space (take advantage of the misfortune of others to get rich, which is not very ethical for the moment), we understand there that it is not in the interest of this deceitful company to moderate the reports Signal Scams since more clicks they will have , more money they will earn : 



Filing false notices in the service of denigration, abusive reporting :

But, it's still not over... This petition which, according to its author, would have allowed him to identify cases identical to his own in order to launch a class-action lawsuit highlights other even more serious facts, the filing of positive false reviews for their sites, the same opinions against which Signal Scams warn their readers (if there are any real ones), a simple example here:

Parallel negative reviews removed by Signal Scams :

Again according to this individual, real negative reviews would be deleted, while false positives "spammed" by managers would take over during this time: illegitimately targeted legal or physical persons would therefore be unable to give their opinion or to do anything to end the ordeal that causes them this site :

About the financial flow of advertisements :

HERETIC SAS has a capital of more than 80,000 euros, this seems huge for a site similar to a voluntary association (but stuffed with Google Adsence advertising that we advise you to report). If we follow the statement of the manager and the subsidiaries of his partner, we find a astronomical revenue generated by the gains from their advertising viewed by all Internet users who browse their site at the expense and thanks to the names of denigrated brands that generate clicks through search engines :


Source: Infogreffe

Let's talk about their second Platform ScamDoc :

Needless to complete our article for "ScamDoc", the description of their incompetence has already been made and demonstrated more than a year ago in the video of a very famous Belgian blogger named David Licoppe (more than 10K views) :

sound article about ScamDoc in our opinion, we fully relate the objectives, the lack of competence, the damage caused to thousands of sites and the earnings of the leaders of HERETIC SAS. According to him, his ScamDoc note was changed as a result of its online posting and he was even asked many times to have it removed.

Overall conclusion on these methods :

In view of the facts mentioned in this article, it is undeniable that in 2021, the scam is still present and that the business of anti-scam is not always as clean and reliable as it appears. Before you report a site that you consider suspicious, ask yourself if it is really worth it and try to settle amicably with the merchant site beforehand because you may in turn end up in court for defamation in the same way that the hosts of Signal Scams and ScamDoc were. Instead of getting justice, it is much more fruitful to file a complaint and go to a court with jurisdiction over the matter. Let's not forget that these platforms are there to generate a unique interest: funds, that all this belongs to a private company and that under no circumstances can it help you get a refund. We are in a country of law where the legislation takes over the denunciation.

⬅️ Go back to the blog