Lawsuit: Pending TheFlameEmperor1 & ItsEgo v. PowerCreaper

[DETECTIVHOLMES]

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


TheFlameEmperor1
Plaintiff

ItsEgo
Co- Plaintiff

v.

PowerCreaper
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
Defendant defrauded the plaintiff by claiming ownership of a plot he does not own, leading to damages of $150,000, The plaintiff lacked ownership of the plot and was unable to deliver it, and refused to return plaintiff’s money, loss of the $150,000 was a significant financial burden on the plaintiff.

I. PARTIES
1. TheFlameEmperor1 (Plaintiff)

2. PowerCreaper (Defendant)


II. FACTS
1. On 20 July, defendant contacted plaintiff on discord, offering S-plot, S046 for sale.
2. Plaintiff shows temptation to purchase the plot.
3. Payment of $150,000 is sent.
4. Defendant acknowledges the received payment and is aware of the transfer of funds.
5. Plaintiff contacts defendant asking for the plot to be transferred and defendant acts clueless and denies any sale.
6. Plaintiff promises legal action.
7. 21 July, Defendant attempts same scam on another person (RavenReap), and again offers S046 for sale, Agreed upon $100,000.
8. RavenReap asks for pretransfer of the plot and defendant refuses.
9. Defendant initiates an explicit, legal contract, and RavenReap writes a confirming statement.
10. RavenReap discovers the Plaintiff’s lack of ownership on the plot, and defendant claims he owes the owner $80,000.
11. Olisaurus123 (plot owner) publicly claims that the defendant’s statement is false.
12. PowerCreaper used the funds to buy a plot (c525) from Plankeeee and resold it to ItsEgo for an $63,000, Promising Co. Plaintiff that they will sell them S046 for $90,000.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff believes defendant violated multiple sections of the RCCA:
1. Breach of Contract
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
An informal, implied contract was created by the plaintiff,
(2) A valid contract is formed when the following legal test is met:
(a) Offer. An offer is a clear and unequivocal communication expressing a party's willingness to enter into a contract, either explicitly stated or reasonably inferred from the circumstances.
(b) Acceptance. Acceptance is the positive and unambiguous response to an offer communicated to the offeror, mirroring the terms of the offer and conveyed through various means.
(c) Consideration. Consideration, an essential element, involves the exchange of something of value between parties, with sufficiency though not necessarily adequacy. Consideration can be tangible or intanglbie.
(d) Intent. Parties must demonstrate a clear intention to create legal obligations for the contract to be valid.
(e) Capacity. Parties entering into a contract must possess the legal capacity to do so. Players with low playtime may lack the capacity to fairly enter a contract.

Defendant and Plaintiff’s contracts met all the legal requirements, thus making it a valid legal contract, and defendant failed to fulfil his legal obligations with Plaintiffs, making defendant liable for the damages.


2. Misrepresentation
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
Defendant lied to the plaintiffs, made false statements about ownership of the plot, Both plaintiffs depended on that information to follow through with their transactions, Plaintiff suffered damages when defendant failed to deliver promised plot. Co-Plaintiff suffered damages since purchase of S046 was promised at a discounted price, if Co-Plaintiff were to purchase c525. Plot was purchased but 2nd end of the deal was not made.

3. Misleading Conduct in Trade or Commerce
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
The defendant’s conduct was unacceptable, Plaintiffs allege, attempts to defraud multiple people with the same scam. A plot is a good, the defendant’s misleading statements caused Co-Plaintiff to believe that he could take ownership of plot S046 if he bought c525, which he did, but S046 was never the defendants to sell. Defendant’s multiple attempts showed guilt and intent.


4. Failure to Deliver Goods or Services
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
Plaintiff was promised S046, even though the defendant never owned a plot, a plot was still promised. Co-Plaintiff was also promised S046, but it was not delivered. Plaintiff alleges damages for not receiving the plot, while defendant had no legal excuse to provide, or to reverse the contract and return the money paid out.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Rescission of $150,000 (In accord to 2. Misrepresentation’s Remedy in the RCCA)
2. $150,000 in Compensatory Damages (In accord to 3. Misleading Conduct in Trade or Commerce’s Remedy in the RCCA)
2. $100,000 in Punitive Damages.
3. 30% In Legal Fees

Witnesses and Evidence

Spoiler: P-01

Spoiler: P-02

Spoiler: P-03

Spoiler: P-04

Spoiler: P-05

Spoiler: P-06

Spoiler: P-07

Spoiler: P-08

Spoiler: P-09

Spoiler: P-10

Spoiler: P-11

Spoiler: P-12

Spoiler: P-13

Spoiler: P-14

Spoiler: P-15

Spoiler: P-16

Spoiler: P-17

Spoiler: P-18

Spoiler: P-19

Spoiler: P-20

Spoiler: P-21

Spoiler: P-22

Spoiler: P-23

Spoiler: P-24

Spoiler: P-25

Spoiler: P-26

Spoiler: P-27

Spoiler: P-28

1. TheFlameEmperor1
2. ItsEgo
3. RavenReap
4. Olisaurus123
5. beleave17
6. Pikaftalysa
7. Plankeeee (@dracula8920)







By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 25 day of July 2026

 

[DETECTIVHOLMES]

Motion

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
Your Honour,

Plaintiff requests a freeze on the defendant's bank accounts, seeing how his behaviour is repeating and the defendant intends to use the funds he unlawfully obtained from Plaintiffs, Court is requsted to allow this motion to prevent further damage and involvment.

 

[KyrahM]

Motion

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO INTERVENE

Your Honour,

I represent poop12345678, who paid the Defendant $100,000 for plot S046 on 26 July. That is the same plot this case is about. I move for my client to be joined to this case as a Co-Plaintiff.

WHAT MY CLIENT'S INTEREST IS

1. On 26 July at 21:01 my client paid PowerCreaper $100,000. The payment shows in the PoyEnterprises transaction log as owner-manual-payout-poop12345678-powercreaper-20260726-100000.

2. Before paying, my client asked the Defendant for his IGN and was told PowerCreaper. My client then pointed out that Olisaurus123 was listed as the owner of S046. The Defendant said Olisaurus123 was only holding the plot so the Defendant would not have to pay levy while bidding, and told my client "Send me SS when you've paid, I'll have him transfer."

3. My client paid and sent the screenshot. He asked for the plot to be transferred. The Defendant said "I can" and then did not.

4. When my client said he would sue, the Defendant said "I have nothing I own nothing, you can't sue a poor man."

WHY MY CLIENT SHOULD BE JOINED

5. Section 6(1)(b) of Part IV of the Redmont Civil Code Act lets the Court order joinder where a party claims an interest in the subject matter such that disposing of the case without them may impair their ability to protect that interest. My client meets that for two reasons.

6. First, this case is about S046. The Plaintiffs are asking for rescission and damages over the sale of that plot. My client paid for the same plot, from the same person, after being told the same thing about Olisaurus123 holding it. If this Court decides who S046 belongs to, or orders it transferred, that decides my client's claim to it as well. He has no way to be heard on that unless he is in the case.

7. Second, the Defendant says he has no assets. The Plaintiffs are asking for $150,000 rescission, $150,000 compensatory, $100,000 punitive, and 30% legal fees. If judgment is entered for anything close to that against someone with nothing, there will be nothing left for my client to collect on afterwards. Being left out of this case is what causes that, not any later case my client might bring.

8. There is also no reason to run two cases over this. Same Defendant, same plot, same conduct, and mostly the same witnesses the Plaintiffs have already listed.

9. This case is still Pending. Discovery has not started and nobody has been summoned. Joining my client now does not delay anything or force any part of the case to be redone.

WHAT MY CLIENT CLAIMS

10. Against the Defendant, for the 26 July transaction:

a. Breach of Contract. There was an offer, acceptance, consideration, intent, and capacity. The Defendant did not perform.

b. Misrepresentation. The Defendant said S046 was his to sell and that Olisaurus123 was holding it for him. My client relied on that and paid $100,000.

c. Misleading Conduct in Trade or Commerce. This is the same pattern the Plaintiffs plead at Facts 7 to 11.

d. Failure to Deliver Goods or Services. The Defendant took the money, said he could transfer the plot, and did not.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

1. That the Court join poop12345678 to this case as Co-Plaintiff under RCCA Part IV, Section 6(1)(b).

2. That the Court grant leave for this filing, if leave was required.

3. That my client then be allowed to file a full claim seeking rescission of the $100,000, plus whatever further damages the Court thinks appropriate.

4. Any other relief the Court sees fit.

EVIDENCE

The PoyEnterprises transaction log and the Discord exchange between my client and the Defendant are attached.

Proof of representation attached.

By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

Respectfully submitted,
KyrineM_, representing poop12345678

DATED: This 27 day of July 2026

Spoiler: K01

Spoiler: K02

Spoiler: K03

Spoiler: K04

 

[DETECTIVHOLMES]

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


TheFlameEmperor1
Plaintiff

ItsEgo
Co- Plaintiff

v.

PowerCreaper
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
Defendant defrauded the plaintiff by claiming ownership of a plot he does not own, leading to damages of $150,000, The plaintiff lacked ownership of the plot and was unable to deliver it, and refused to return plaintiff’s money, loss of the $150,000 was a significant financial burden on the plaintiff.

I. PARTIES
1. TheFlameEmperor1 (Plaintiff)

2. PowerCreaper (Defendant)


II. FACTS
1. On 20 July, defendant contacted plaintiff on discord, offering S-plot, S046 for sale.
2. Plaintiff shows temptation to purchase the plot.
3. Payment of $150,000 is sent.
4. Defendant acknowledges the received payment and is aware of the transfer of funds.
5. Plaintiff contacts defendant asking for the plot to be transferred and defendant acts clueless and denies any sale.
6. Plaintiff promises legal action.
7. 21 July, Defendant attempts same scam on another person (RavenReap), and again offers S046 for sale, Agreed upon $100,000.
8. RavenReap asks for pretransfer of the plot and defendant refuses.
9. Defendant initiates an explicit, legal contract, and RavenReap writes a confirming statement.
10. RavenReap discovers the Plaintiff’s lack of ownership on the plot, and defendant claims he owes the owner $80,000.
11. Olisaurus123 (plot owner) publicly claims that the defendant’s statement is false.
12. PowerCreaper used the funds to buy a plot (c525) from Plankeeee and resold it to ItsEgo for an $63,000, Promising Co. Plaintiff that they will sell them S046 for $90,000.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff believes defendant violated multiple sections of the RCCA:
1. Breach of Contract
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
An informal, implied contract was created by the plaintiff,
(2) A valid contract is formed when the following legal test is met:
(a) Offer. An offer is a clear and unequivocal communication expressing a party's willingness to enter into a contract, either explicitly stated or reasonably inferred from the circumstances.
(b) Acceptance. Acceptance is the positive and unambiguous response to an offer communicated to the offeror, mirroring the terms of the offer and conveyed through various means.
(c) Consideration. Consideration, an essential element, involves the exchange of something of value between parties, with sufficiency though not necessarily adequacy. Consideration can be tangible or intanglbie.
(d) Intent. Parties must demonstrate a clear intention to create legal obligations for the contract to be valid.
(e) Capacity. Parties entering into a contract must possess the legal capacity to do so. Players with low playtime may lack the capacity to fairly enter a contract.

Defendant and Plaintiff’s contracts met all the legal requirements, thus making it a valid legal contract, and defendant failed to fulfil his legal obligations with Plaintiffs, making defendant liable for the damages.


2. Misrepresentation
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
Defendant lied to the plaintiffs, made false statements about ownership of the plot, Both plaintiffs depended on that information to follow through with their transactions, Plaintiff suffered damages when defendant failed to deliver promised plot. Co-Plaintiff suffered damages since purchase of S046 was promised at a discounted price, if Co-Plaintiff were to purchase c525. Plot was purchased but 2nd end of the deal was not made.

3. Misleading Conduct in Trade or Commerce
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
The defendant’s conduct was unacceptable, Plaintiffs allege, attempts to defraud multiple people with the same scam. A plot is a good, the defendant’s misleading statements caused Co-Plaintiff to believe that he could take ownership of plot S046 if he bought c525, which he did, but S046 was never the defendants to sell. Defendant’s multiple attempts showed guilt and intent.


4. Failure to Deliver Goods or Services
(Redmont Civil Code Act)
Plaintiff was promised S046, even though the defendant never owned a plot, a plot was still promised. Co-Plaintiff was also promised S046, but it was not delivered. Plaintiff alleges damages for not receiving the plot, while defendant had no legal excuse to provide, or to reverse the contract and return the money paid out.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Rescission of $150,000 (In accord to 2. Misrepresentation’s Remedy in the RCCA)
2. $150,000 in Compensatory Damages (In accord to 3. Misleading Conduct in Trade or Commerce’s Remedy in the RCCA)
2. $100,000 in Punitive Damages.
3. 30% In Legal Fees

Witnesses and Evidence

Spoiler: P-01

View attachment 92060

Spoiler: P-02

View attachment 92061

Spoiler: P-03

View attachment 92062

Spoiler: P-04

View attachment 92063

Spoiler: P-05

View attachment 92064

Spoiler: P-06

View attachment 92065

Spoiler: P-07

View attachment 92066

Spoiler: P-08

View attachment 92067

Spoiler: P-09

View attachment 92068

Spoiler: P-10

View attachment 92069

Spoiler: P-11

View attachment 92070

Spoiler: P-12

View attachment 92071

Spoiler: P-13

View attachment 92072

Spoiler: P-14

View attachment 92073

Spoiler: P-15

View attachment 92074

Spoiler: P-16

View attachment 92075

Spoiler: P-17

View attachment 92076

Spoiler: P-18

View attachment 92077

Spoiler: P-19

View attachment 92078

Spoiler: P-20

View attachment 92079

Spoiler: P-21

View attachment 92080

Spoiler: P-22

View attachment 92081

Spoiler: P-23

View attachment 92082

Spoiler: P-24

View attachment 92083

Spoiler: P-25

View attachment 92084

Spoiler: P-26

View attachment 92085

Spoiler: P-27

View attachment 92086

Spoiler: P-28

View attachment 92087

1. TheFlameEmperor1
2. ItsEgo
3. RavenReap
4. Olisaurus123
5. beleave17
6. Pikaftalysa
7. Plankeeee (@dracula8920)







By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 25 day of July 2026

Plaintiff is quite forgetful and has committed the heinous mistake of not attatching their proof of representation, please overlook this.

Spoiler: Proof of Representation