ATLSingles.com

ATLSingles.com, a private dating service headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. Our analysis draws upon open‑source intelligence (OSINT), regulatory filings, consumer complaint databases, adverse media reports, and specialized investigations—most notably the CyberCriminal.com dossier on ATLSingles.com. We dissect domain registration data, corporate structure, personal profiles of key figures, undisclosed relationships, allegations of fraudulent behavior, and consumer protection concerns. Our goal is to furnish stakeholders—prospective clients, regulators, and industry observers—with a clear, evidence‑based understanding of the reputational, financial, and legal risks posed by ATLSingles.com.

Methodology

1. Domain & WHOIS Analysis: We retrieved the WHOIS record for atlsingles.com via who.is to establish registration details and privacy protections

2. Corporate & Regulatory Filings: We examined the Better Business Bureau (BBB) profile and filings to confirm accreditation, business start date, incorporation details, and management contacts

3. OSINT & Social Media: We surveyed LinkedIn, Yelp, PissedConsumer.com, ComplaintsBoard.com, and YouTube for personal profiles, customer reviews, and video investigations

4. Specialized Investigations: We incorporated findings from CyberCriminal.com, which alleges DMCA abuse, perjury, fraud, and impersonation by ATLSingles.com

5. Consumer Protection Databases: We aggregated complaints from BBB, PissedConsumer.com, Yelp, and ComplaintsBoard.com to quantify negative sentiment and refund disputes

6. Financial & Bankruptcy Research: We reviewed financial stability reports from FinanceScam.com and searched public bankruptcy records for any filings or indications of insolvency

7. Legal Proceedings & Media Reports: We scanned legal news outlets and video platforms for lawsuits, sanctions, or criminal proceedings against ATLSingles.com .

1. Domain Registration & Ownership

• Domain Name: atlsingles.com

• Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC

• Registration Date: April 3, 2003

• Expiration Date: April 3, 2027

• Last Updated: April 4, 2025

• Name Servers: ns03.domaincontrol.com (97.74.101.2), ns04.domaincontrol.com (173.201.69.2)

• Registrant Privacy: The registrant and technical contacts are protected by Domains By Proxy, LLC, an ICANN‑accredited privacy service based in Tempe, Arizona

Analysis:
The use of a privacy proxy service obscures the true owner’s identity, complicating accountability and due diligence. While privacy services are common, their use by a long‑standing dating service raises red flags regarding transparency and potential evasion of regulatory scrutiny.

2. Corporate Structure & Business Details

According to the BBB profile, ATLSingles operates as a corporation under the legal name Atlanta Quality Singles LTD, with the following key details:

• Business Address: 1995 N Park Pl SE, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30339‑207

• Accredited Since: October 31, 2014 (A+ rating)

• Business Started: January 1, 1990

• Incorporated: December 27, 2000

• Entity Type: Corporation

• Executive Manager: Ms. Luz Penner

Analysis:
ATLSingles boasts over three decades in business and BBB accreditation, which can engender trust. However, accreditation fees and selective complaint reporting may bias the public profile. Corporate records confirm a legitimate Georgia‑based entity, yet privacy shielding of domain registration and limited disclosure of beneficial owners obscure the full ownership picture.

3. Online Presence & OSINT Findings

3.1 Official Website Content

ATLSingles.com markets itself as a local, private, professional dating service offering in‑depth screening, background checks, and personalized matchmaking. Testimonials on the site highlight “quality singles,” “exceptional staff,” and “real profiles”

3.2 Social Media & LinkedIn

• LinkedIn Profile: “ATL Singles Club” lists a CEO based in Atlanta, but lacks clear connection to ATLSingles.com

• Facebook Presence: Limited; links from BBB profile point to a Facebook page, but posts are sparse and promotional.

3.3 Video Investigations

• CyberCriminal.com Video (YouTube): Exposes alleged DMCA takedowns aimed at suppressing negative reviews and complaints

• FinanceScam.com Article: Highlights reliance on offshore entities and legal challenges without formal bankruptcy filings

Analysis:
While ATLSingles maintains a professional façade online, external OSINT reveals inconsistencies between marketing claims and user experiences. The disconnect between branded content and independent customer feedback suggests potential deceptive advertising.

4. Suspicious Activities & Allegations

4.1 DMCA Abuse & Review Suppression

CyberCriminal.com alleges that ATLSingles.com improperly submitted copyright takedown notices to Google to conceal critical reviews and adverse news, constituting potential violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and perjury under oath

4.2 Fraud & Impersonation

Allegations include impersonating legitimate reviewers, fabricating positive testimonials, and misrepresenting accreditation status—potentially amounting to fraud and unfair competition

4.3 Perjury

CyberCriminal.com’s case file suggests sworn statements were made under false pretenses to suppress negative content, exposing ATLSingles to perjury charges if verified

Analysis:
These allegations, though not yet adjudicated, signal serious legal exposure. DMCA misuse to suppress consumer criticism is increasingly targeted by regulators, and perjury or fraud charges could carry significant penalties, including fines and injunctions.

5. Consumer Complaints & Negative Reviews

5.1 Better Business Bureau (BBB) Complaints

• No refunds/no buyers remorse: Clients report non‑refundable fees enforced via credit card charge, citing Georgia law in fine print

• Inactive Profiles: Customers encounter outdated or inactive matches, undermining value

5.2 PissedConsumer.com

• Rating: 1.2/5 based on 12 reviews

• Cons: Fraudulent practices, no tangible service delivery, high fees ($4k–$7k one‑time) with no return on investment

• Common Complaints: “Save your money,” “Stay away,” “Run—don’t fall for their scam.”

5.3 Yelp

• Review: One customer alleges false BBB accreditation claims during sales interviews yelp.

5.4 ComplaintsBoard.com

• No complaints logged, but automated trustworthiness rating (91%) appears self‑reinforcing rather than evidence‑based

Analysis:
The volume and severity of complaints on consumer‑driven platforms starkly contrast the glowing testimonials on ATLSingles’ own site. High fees, non‑refundable policies, and allegations of deceptive sales tactics present substantial consumer protection concerns.

6. Legal Proceedings & Lawsuits

• No public lawsuits filed against ATLSingles.com in federal or state courts as of April 2025.

• Potential Liabilities:

  • DMCA misuse may trigger counterclaims and statutory damages.

  • Consumer protection lawsuits under Georgia’s Fair Business Practices Act for deceptive trade practices.

  • Class actions for breach of contract or unjust enrichment related to non‑refundable fee policies.

Analysis:
While formal litigation has not yet materialized, the alignment of consumer complaints and specialized investigations indicates ripe conditions for regulatory enforcement or private class actions.

7. Financial Stability & Bankruptcy Risk

• Bankruptcy Filings: None found; ATLSingles.com has not filed for Chapter 11 or Chapter 7 as of April 2025

• Financial Health Indicators:

  • Reliance on large upfront fees.

  • Offshore entity structures hinted by FinanceScam.com, but unverified.

  • Lack of audited financial statements or transparency on revenue streams.

Analysis:
Absence of bankruptcy filings does not equate to financial stability. The high‑cost model and opaque ownership could precipitate cash‑flow issues, especially if consumer lawsuits escalate or regulatory fines are imposed.

8. Undisclosed Business Relationships & OSINT Profiles

• Offshore Entities: FinanceScam.com suggests reliance on offshore affiliates to process payments, potentially complicating consumer refunds and regulatory oversight

• LinkedIn Connections: “ATL Singles Club” CEO profile lacks direct ties to ATLSingles.com, raising questions about affiliate networks or brand dilution

• Sedo‑Parked Domain (atl.singles): Indicates brand protection or potential domain resale strategy, not directly linked to service delivery

Analysis:
Undisclosed or convoluted corporate relationships can facilitate jurisdictional arbitrage, hamper consumer recourse, and obscure true beneficiaries of client fees.

9. Adverse Media Coverage & Reputation Risks

• CyberCriminal.com Investigation: High‑profile allegations of DMCA abuse and fraud

• FinanceScam.com Article: Critiques financial opacity and legal vulnerabilities

• YouTube Exposés: Independent content creators highlight deceptive practices and fake profiles.

Analysis:
Negative media amplifies consumer distrust and can deter new clients. Reputational damage may have long‑term financial impacts, including reduced membership enrollments and increased refund requests.

10. Comprehensive Risk Assessment

Conclusion: Expert Opinion

We conclude that ATLSingles.com exhibits significant risk across multiple dimensions—consumer protection, legal compliance, financial transparency, and reputational integrity. The convergence of specialized investigations (CyberCriminal.com), widespread consumer complaints (PissedConsumer.com, BBB, Yelp), and allegations of DMCA abuse and perjury underscores systemic issues that merit immediate attention from regulators and prospective clients alike. We recommend:

1. Regulatory Review: State consumer protection agencies should investigate potential violations of Georgia’s Fair Business Practices Act and DMCA misuse.

2. Legal Preparedness: ATLSingles.com should proactively audit its compliance, revise refund policies, and cease any misuse of copyright takedown procedures.

3. Transparency Measures: Public disclosure of beneficial ownership, audited financial statements, and verifiable success metrics to restore trust.

4. Consumer Advisory: Prospective clients should exercise caution, demand clear contractual terms, and seek independent legal advice before committing significant fees.

Our investigation reveals a pattern of deceptive practices and structural opacity that pose high risks to consumers and stakeholders. Only through rigorous regulatory enforcement, corporate reform, and informed consumer vigilance can these risks be mitigated