TCPA plaintiff Chet Wilson exploded
- 48 minutes ago
- 12 min read
Sadly I have to write another of my "don't be like" blog posts. Another TCPA plaintiff got exploded. Not for fruad, thank goodness, but for character. If you are going to come to court you have to be presentable and my god this is ugly. The case is Wilson v Freeway Insurance Services of America. Our friend Eric Troutman already broke the story (https://tcpaworld.com/2026/05/20/chet-wilson-a-vile-racist-new-filing-suggests-serial-tcpa-filer-with-trap-phone-number-is-also-a-remorseless-bigot-who-dug-holes-for-jews/) but as usual we dive deeper and this case has so much to be learned, and frankly I am just going to cut and paste from the filings. This story comes just on the heels of the Elzen case. What the flip people?
*** It is going to take me a couple days to pull all the meat out of these filings so check back for updates or pull the files and read them.
Here is the complaint.
Here is the motion to block certification.
Here is Edgar Barboza's declaration which deserves (and will get) its own blog post.
And here is the nuclear blast for today, Ryan Watstein's declaration.
1. My name is Ryan D. Watstein. I am an attorney and co-founder of Watstein Terepka, LLP, an approximately 25-lawyer firm based at 75 14th Street NE, Suite 2600, Atlanta, Georgia 30309. I am over the age of 18, of sound mind, and competent to make this Declaration.
I make this Declaration based on my personal knowledge.
2. I am counsel of record for Defendant Freeway Insurance Services of America, LLC (“Freeway”) in this action. Based on my active participation and supervision of all material aspects of the defense of this action and others, I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein. 3. As noted below, I have defended around 700 class actions in 30+ jurisdictions across the country as lead counsel. My firm and I also prosecute select class actions for plaintiffs.
5. As reflected in that table, Plaintiff has filed nearly 100 putative TCPA class action complaints in federal courts across the country in less than two years.
6. At least 43 of those cases have already been settled or otherwise resolved before any class was certified.
7. I am not aware of a single Wilson case in which he has sought or obtained contested class certification. And my understanding, based on a conversation with Plaintiff’s counsel, is that he has only obtained one class settlement.
11. Over the course of my practice, I have defended somewhere around 700 class actions nationwide, probably around 600 of which were TCPA class actions. I have also handled well over a thousand non-class TCPA claims.
12. Based on that extensive experience, I know that, in the case of an individual settlement, plaintiff’s counsel takes the vast majority of the recovery—often more than 90% and in some cases more than 99%. [This is crazy] By definition, nothing goes to any class member in any such settlement.
13. Individual settlements in cases styled as TCPA “class actions” average $50,000 or more each, depending on who the plaintiff’s counsel is and a variety of other factors. It is not uncommon to see individual TCPA settlements over $100,000 and some cases settle individually for many multiples of that. In almost all instances, individual settlements are vastly in excess of the maximum statutory damages. This is what is known as the “extortion premium.”
14. On or about May 6, 2026, Plaintiff published a public video on Facebook captioned “Got some holes need filled boys & I need to know who’s with me on this one.”
15. In that video, Plaintiff made violent antisemitic statements, including referring to Jewish people as “parasites,” calling them “Bolshevik fu**ing jews,” and stating that he has “holes fu**ing dug already” for them.
16. The video was previously available at the following address: https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=27325585293726458&id=100001050671199. After I told Plaintiff’s counsel that we would be including it in this motion, it was removed from the internet, as noted below.
17. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of a screenshot of that post.
18. Plaintiff has had posts removed from Facebook on more than a dozen occasions for “incitement to violence,” “hate speech,” “bullying,” and “harassment.” That is according to his own Instagram post, which actually shows the removed posts and that he has been suspended from Facebook for that reason.
19. He refers to Facebook derisively as “f*ggbook”—a homophobic slur—and has bragged publicly about being removed from the platform.
20. Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of relevant Instagram posts reflecting these statements.
21. In a separate public Instagram post discussing his genetic ancestry results, Plaintiff bragged about not having “a fkn trace of knuckle dragger” in his genetic results.
22. Attached hereto as Exhibit G is a true and correct copy of that post.
23. According to a Google search I conducted, that term is a racist epithet used to evoke simian imagery against Black individuals.
24. That’s not the worst of it. Talking about reparations to families of former slaves, Wilson said this on October 30, 2025:
So all you motherf***ers can suck a d*ck. F*** you mother***ers. Whining about how we owe you some f***ing sh*t ... F*** you dude. You lazy piece of sh*t. Get the f*** up and go get a job … You were a slave before you got sold off. Your own f***ing people sold you off. How the f*** do I owe you sh*t? You mother f***ers didn’t pick a Goddamn nothing off my f***ing trees. F*** you. I don’t owe you sh*t. I don’t owe you motherf***in sh*t. If anything, we gave you something better dude. You’d f***ing be named W*ngT*ng f***ing something in the f***ing, in a mud hut chucking spears in the brush motherf***er … There ain’t no white privilege. If anything, it’s black privilege … I ain’t slaving my life away to feed you f***ing knuckle-dragging piece of sh*t. F*** you.
25. Attached hereto as Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of that post. The video is available at https://www.instagram.com/p/DQcJsJBCY3k/?hl=en (last accessed on May 15, 2026).
26. His vitriol and violent rhetoric also extends to the LGBTQ+ community. Speaking to parents of transgender people on October 23, he stated “I would love to punch some motherfuckers in the head. I would love it. But I’m smart. I ain’t gonna fucking do stupid shit with witnesses. But, the time will come.”
27. Attached hereto as Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of that post. The video is available at https://www.instagram.com/p/DQKQERdDyvI/?hl=en (last accessed on May 15, 2026).
28. Plaintiff also publicly operates and promotes a group devoted to helping people “circumvent[] taxation” and avoid what he characterizes as enslavement by the federal government.
29. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of a post reflecting those statements.
30. Wilson posts his 999-9999 number online, including on social media, and invites people to contact him on it.
31. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of an Instagram post reflecting an example of such a statement.
32. The Heidarpour Law Firm, PLLC (“Heidarpour”) is a law firm based in the District of Columbia whose principal is Andrew Heidarpour.
33. Based on my firm’s personal experience in dozens of Wilson cases and demand letters, Heidarpour plays a recurring behind-the-scenes role in originating and profiting from Plaintiff’s TCPA lawsuits, even when other attorneys appear as counsel of record.
34. My firm has personally received demand letters from Heidarpour threatening Wilson TCPA claims against approximately one dozen of my clients that have not yet resulted in filed lawsuits.
35. Despite the Heidarpour Law Firm’s financial interest in the outcome of Wilson’s cases, it has almost never been disclosed as an interested entity in the Certificates of Interested Persons filed in those cases, or in similar certificates in cases in other districts. See, e.g., Kotlarsz v. Platinum Choice Healthcare LLC, 9:24-cv-80835, ECF No. 4 (S.D. Fla. July 9, 2024) (failing to disclose Heidarpour as an interested party, despite the fact that he originated the case); Lyman v. Quinstreet, 23-5056, ECF No. 3 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2023) (same); see also Ex. A.
36. Public records show that Farideh Heidarpour, an employee of the Heidarpour Law Firm and the mother of Andrew Heidarpour, pleaded guilty in the Western District of Oklahoma to healthcare fraud. See United States v. Heidarpour, Case No. CR-11-109-M, ECF No. 146 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 14, 2012).
37. She admitted to executing a scheme that defrauded multiple federal agencies by willfully and intentionally billing for medical services that were never performed. Id. 38. She was sentenced to over a year in federal prison and was prohibited from participating in any provider that bills federal health benefit programs. Id., ECF No. 194.
39. Farideh Heidarpour and a co-conspirator, also a member of the Heidarpour family, paid nearly $1.7 million to resolve an accompanying False Claims Act civil case. See United States ex rel. Lammers v. Heidarpour, Case No. CV 08-3411 WHA (N.D. Cal.).
40. After Farideh Heidarpour’s release from prison, the family entered the TCPA litigation business.
41. Fred Heidarpour—Andrew’s father—converted Abante Rooter & Plumbing, Inc., a family-owned plumbing company, into what functioned as a TCPA claim mill. According to public federal court filings, Abante Rooter acquired over 20 telephone lines and filed more than 70 putative TCPA class actions in the Northern District of California alone, represented by the same plaintiff’s counsel in each case. See Abante Rooter v. Signify Health, 2024 WL 1421279 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2024).
42. As mentioned above, Farideh Heidarpour now works at the Heidarpour Law Firm and, according to public reviews, appears to carry out much of the work of generating TCPA lawsuits associated with Heidarpour Law PLLC.
43. As demonstrated by the screenshots of Google reviews below, Ms. Heidarpour assists potential clients with their cases:
44. Neither Mr. Heidarpour’s website, nor any other site located to date, identifies any other assistant, secretary, or intake coordinator, besides Ms. Heidarpour, nor any other female employee. No other female employee is mentioned by name in any of the more than 100 reviews we were able to find online.
45. Google reviews discuss additional conversations with a female employee that, given the lack of other female employees, appears to be Ms. Heidarpour:
46. Everything in this section of this declaration is based on public information or facts that have already been shared with opposing counsel. None of this waives any privilege or work product protection over our investigative files. With that said, based on my personal experience defending dozens of TCPA claims originated by the Heidarpour Law Firm on behalf of Wilson and other plaintiffs, I have observed a consistent pattern: false or meritless claims are packaged and referred to outside litigation counsel who may not know the claims’ true provenance, and the claims are abandoned only when the underlying fraud is directly exposed.
47. Over the course of my practice, my firm has defended dozens of claims originated by the Heidarpour Law Firm. On numerous occasions, we discovered evidence that the lead forms underlying those claims appeared to have been filled out by the plaintiff himself or by someone with a financial interest in the litigation—in some instances through IP address evidence tracing the form submissions to the plaintiff’s geographic location, including in at least one case a remote town with only a few thousand residents. When confronted with this evidence, outside litigation counsel—to whom the Heidarpour Law Firm had referred the cases—dismissed with prejudice in an attempt to avoid sanctions.
48. In addition to filed cases, my firm has received dozens of pre-suit demand letters from the Heidarpour Law Firm threatening TCPA class actions against my clients on behalf of Wilson and other plaintiffs. On multiple occasions, after we responded in writing, suggesting that we had evidence the claims were manufactured and describing what we believed to be an ongoing fraudulent scheme, the Heidarpour Law Firm abandoned the claim without any response. It disappeared entirely. To my knowledge, none of those abandoned claims were subsequently filed or referred to other counsel. Ever since we let the Heidarpour Law Firm know that we suspected fraud, not a single demand letter that we responded to (and thus that the Heidarpour Law Firm knew we were on the other side of) has resulted in a lawsuit. That was a marked change from before we told them about the suspected fraud, when they used to refer cases we responded to out to litigation counsel all the time.
49. More recently, the undersigned represented several defendants in cases brought byanother serial plaintiff, Sara Taylor. The parallels to this case are shocking. After obtaining a new telephone number in 2024 and connecting with the Heidarpour Law Firm, Taylor became the named plaintiff in at least ten TCPA class action lawsuits in less than a year—after her number was submitted to dozens of companies through hundreds of lead forms designed to appear as though they came from Missie Gosset, a felon with multiple federal fraud convictions living roughly 100 miles away with a similar phone number. VPNs and remote-access tools were used to make the leads appear to originate from Gosset’s hometown and IP address, though Gosset denied submitting the leads. When we shared those findings and the other information about the Heidarpour Law Firm described above, outside counsel dismissed both cases with no payment. Despite filing 25 back-to-back class actions before we revealed the suspected fraud, she never filed another case—her last filing was in August, 2025.
50. The Wilson cases are following this same pattern. Recently, the Heidarpour Law Firm sent one of the undersigned’s clients a demand letter claiming Wilson received text messages in violation of the TCPA. But this instance proved that someone was not accidentally inputting Wilson’s 999-9999 number into lead forms to avoid calls. That’s because the sole reason someone would have entered their name into this lead form was to receive free timely stock alerts. Why would someone go to the trouble of putting a fake number into a lead form where the only point was to get texts? Proving the answer to our question, when confronted with this information, the outside counsel to which Heidarpour had farmed the claim dropped the claim completely.
51. The instances described above are representative of a broader pattern I have observed across dozens of matters. In case after case, claims originated by the Heidarpour Law Firm are abandoned with prejudice when the underlying facts are investigated and defense counsel shares its suspicion of fraud with opposing counsel.
52. To determine who submitted the contact request form, Freeway has served or will shortly serve targeted written discovery seeking information about Plaintiff’s devices, phone records, IP addresses, iCloud access, communications with Heidarpour, Plaintiff’s history of submitting contact request forms, and his broader TCPA litigation history. Freeway has also requested or will soon request a forensic inspection of every electronic device Plaintiff used during the relevant period, noticed Plaintiff’s deposition, and served third-party discovery on Apple, Inc. and Plaintiff’s phone carrier.
53. Freeway also attempted to locate Dorianne Plageman, whose name appeared on the contact request form. After conventional investigative means failed, Freeway retained a former FBI agent with approximately two decades of investigative experience. Drawing on that experience, the investigator could not locate her emotely. He then traveled to both Orland and Oroville, California, spoke with multiple people associated with nearby addresses—including the manager of a mobile home park where Ms. Plageman reportedly lived—and still could not locate anyone who had heard of her.
54. Additional third-party subpoenas to the Heidarpour Law Firm (for records relating to how it originated and referred this claim and others) are forthcoming.
55. On April 8, 2026, I conferred with Plaintiff’s counsel Andrew Perrong via Zoom regarding the relief sought in this motion—specifically, the denial of class certification on adequacy and predominance grounds. Mr. Perrong rejected the proposal. He claimed, inaccurately, that this Court had already found Wilson to be an adequate class representative. And as recently as this morning, Plaintiff’s counsel intended to add claims and another defendant to this action.
56. On May 15, 2026, I again spoke with Mr. Perrong to confer about Plaintiff’s request to add a new claim and a new defendant to this case. Mr. Perrong was again dismissive and was not interested in engaging in a discussion about his proposed amendment. Before we got off the cal, I repeatedly asked him if he knew his client had posted hate speech online. He repeatedly refused to answer the question. He instead became furious and ended the call.
57. I then called Mr. Perrong’s co-counsel, Anthony Paronich, who I know well. I told Mr. Paronich about the significant hate speech we had discovered online. I also told him that we were about to file our motion to deny class certification and that we would be addressing the Heidarpour Law Firm’s and Wilson’s involvement in what we believe is litigation fraud, and that we would be seeking discovery directly from the Heidarpour Law Firm to prove it. This conversation occurred less than 24 hours after Freeway served dozens of discovery requests specifically aimed at investigating the suspected fraud.
58. In response, Mr. Perrong immediately emailed, offering to dismiss this case with prejudice, apparently trying to play their sudden about-face off as related to Plaintiff’s hate speech, which had been occurring for years. Given that purported reason, we responded with something along the lines of “Great, since that’s your concern, you will dismiss all of Mr. Wilson’s cases then, right?” We also asked whether Plaintiff would agree to pay the expenses Freeway incurred preparing the motion to deny class certification that Mr. Perrong refused to agree to more than a month ago. Mr. Perrong immediately declined, presumably without ever speaking with his client about it. The email chain is here:
59. Almost immediately thereafter, Mr. Perrong filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s own case with prejudice. When I pointed out that it contained several false representations about the above exchange, he hurriedly withdrew that motion without prejudice, indicating they would re-file it after they heard back definitively from us on whether we would agree to let them dismiss the case with prejudice.
[Images see the pdf file to read]
60. In the meantime, the undersigned continued to ready this motion for filing. When we went to insert links to Plaintiff’s hate speech, we discovered that multiple links had been taken down, including the video where Plaintiff threatened Jewish people with violence. The link now says “This content isn’t available right now.” See https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=27325585293726458&id=100001050671199 (last accessed May 15, 2026).
*** This story will be updated
Got a Case Like This?
If you’ve encountered similar issues with telemarketers, debt collectors, or bankruptcy-related harassment, we might feature your story in a future blog post. Email your situation or legal filing to peter@nwdebtresolution.com or nathen@nwdebtresolution.com.
📞 Call: 206-800-6000 / 971-800-6000
📧 Email: peter@nwdebtresolution.com
Note: The opinions in this blog are mine (Peter Schneider) and do not constitute legal advice. If you're considering suing over illegal robocalls or Do Not Call list violations, contact me for a legal consultation.