Receiver accuses Jason Cardiff of inappropriate conduct

A court-appointed receiver has accused Jason Cardiff of trying to leverage legal objections to extract improper favors from the receivership estate.

The Redwood Receiver filed a motion alleging that Cardiff and his company VPL Medical are weaponizing fee disputes to pressure the receiver into decisions that benefit them illegally. The timing of two events last week struck the receiver as particularly suspicious.

On January 16th, Cardiff and VPL filed objections to receivership fee payments. The objection challenged the receiver's compensation in a pending Supreme Court case. The arguments echoed failed attempts by Cardiff and VPL to shut down the entire receivership—efforts already rejected by both a trial court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

A day and a half after filing those objections, Cardiff made his move. On January 17th, he contacted the receiver requesting $1,800 in COVID-19 relief funds that the IRS had deposited into a receivership account.

What alarmed the receiver wasn't just the request itself. Cardiff explicitly asked the receiver to keep the transaction secret. He specifically requested that the receiver not tell anyone else about the request and not involve the lawyers handling the case. Only after the receiver declined and explained that notice was required did Cardiff back down and acknowledge the need for transparency.

The receiver interpreted Cardiff's tactics as an attempt to pressure the receiver into bending decisions in Cardiff's favor while keeping it hidden.

"The timing of Cardiff's inappropriate request may be viewed as attempting to have the Receiver wrongfully bend the Receiver's decisions to favor Cardiff, and to cover that up," the receiver wrote in court documents.

The core dispute centers on VPL Medical, a company the receiver continues to operate. Cardiff and VPL have consistently fought the receivership through legal challenges, but courts have rejected their arguments repeatedly. Now the receiver suspects they're using fee objections as leverage—essentially saying: help us get better terms, or we'll make your life difficult through litigation.

The receiver maintains that VPL Medical could operate profitably and legally, but progress has been glacial. The company faces persistent management problems, facility issues, and equipment breakdowns that require ongoing attention and resources.

For any turnaround to succeed, the receiver argues, those involved in the receivership must commit to legal operations and proper expenses—not pursue financial advantages through the back door or pressure the receiver into breaching fiduciary duties.

The receiver is asking the court for clear instructions on how to proceed with VPL's continued operation. A concurrent report on VPL's status shows a company still struggling but making incremental progress. The receiver wants guidance on how to move forward while protecting the integrity of the receivership process.

🤖 Quick Answer

What accusations did the Redwood Receiver make against Jason Cardiff?

What specific actions prompted the receiver's allegations?
Cardiff and VPL filed objections to receivership fee payments on January 16th, challenging the receiver's compensation in a Supreme Court case, repeating arguments previously rejected by both trial court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

What does the receiver claim about the timing of Cardiff's actions?
The receiver found the timing of recent events suspicious, particularly the filing of fee objections and their proximity to other developments in the receivership proceedings.

🔗 Related Articles

- BlackOxygen Organics class-action alleges supplement toxicity
- Vstream TV domain seized by MPA, IXQ TV shut down
- Paul Burks files criminal trial brief
- 63,000 TelexFree investors ripped off 831,000 victims
- MGH Global Vision Review: Anti-cancer & matrix recruitment