"The witness, Mr. Shabbat Laurent: net deposit Here within this system, within theCRM Shows how much the client deposited, period. How much he deposited minus bonus, minus withdrawals. It's actually theCRM Gives me asupper management A picture of what the client did. How do I reward the company's customer service person? It's a different story."
From the summary of Kerry - from the combination of Shabbat's testimony that only OFM had access to the plaintiff's database, with the fact and Shabbat's own testimony according to which he produced the plaintiff's CRM - i.e., the database related to it - it emerges that on the relevant dates of the lawsuit, Shabbat had access to the information held by Global, and moreover, this indicates further reinforcement of the connection between OFM and Global.
Thus, from Shabbat's testimony and the evidence that was presented, there is great doubt as to Shabbat's claim that he stopped managing Global in 2013. This is in addition to the concealment of information - which is ostensibly under his control - regarding the identity of the manager who was replaced in his position (insofar as he was indeed replaced).
- Shabbat further claimed, as detailed above, that he did not know which company the plaintiff contracted with (see the details of his version on this matter in paragraph 37 above of the judgment). In the face of this statement, as I added and detailed - in his cross-examination, Shabbat suddenly testified that it was a company from Belize and that he did not know prior to his cross-examination that the plaintiff claims to have contracted with OFM - as to the lack of confidence in this version, the discussion has already been expanded in paragraph 37 of the judgment and I can only note that the lack of reliability on this issue also joins the totality that served as the basis for my determination regarding the lack of credibility of Shabbat's testimony.
- Moreover, another issue that reflects the lack of reliability of Shabbat is the way the company's employees communicate with customers. As for this - apparently in order to cast doubt on the admissibility of the Skype correspondence presented by the plaintiff (which I did not find to accept for other reasons) - Shabbat testified in the course of his long cross-examination that Global's employees did not conduct themselves through Skype. In this regard, Shabbat testified, on page 160, lines 12-14:
"The company operated as a live chat and you are actually uploading something to me called Skype, some kind of Skype that there is no proof from either the lady or the other side that this Skype even came out or was run by my company."