Jean Noel Lacroix

A summary of what happened?

Jean-Noël “Sarto” Lacroix is a Quebec-based businessman whose career has been marred by a series of legal issues, regulatory sanctions, and alleged connections to criminal activities. His involvement with Armoires PMM, a company specializing in kitchen and bathroom cabinetry, has particularly drawn significant scrutiny.

Revocation of Armoires PMM’s License

In July 2022, the Régie du bâtiment du Québec (RBQ) revoked the license of Armoires PMM. The RBQ determined that the company’s official owner, Maxime Morency, was acting as a front for Lacroix, allowing him to effectively manage the company without holding the necessary legal rights. This arrangement enabled Lacroix to benefit financially while circumventing regulatory oversight. The RBQ’s investigation revealed that Lacroix was involved in hiring decisions and daily operations, often presenting himself as the company’s owner. Additionally, Armoires PMM was found to have employed unlicensed contractors for various projects, a violation of industry regulations.

Customer Complaints and Aggressive Sales Tactics

Numerous customers filed complaints with the Office de la protection du consommateur (OPC) against Armoires PMM, citing high-pressure sales tactics and, in some instances, threats from Lacroix. For example, in August 2020, Lacroix reportedly pressured a client, Nathalie Rivard, to sign a contract by threatening to increase prices if she did not immediately agree. When Rivard attempted to cancel the contract days later, Lacroix allegedly responded with insults and aggressive behavior. Similar accounts from other clients indicate a pattern of coercive sales practices under Lacroix’s direction.

Criminal Incidents and Alleged Underworld Connections

Lacroix’s associations have extended into more dangerous territories. In November 2023, his friend and employee, Michel “Doune” Guérin—a known associate of the Hells Angels—was murdered outside his residence. Approximately a week prior, Armoires PMM had been targeted by an arson attack. Following Guérin’s death, authorities informed Lacroix that his own life might be at risk, prompting him to invest in bulletproof windows and hire a bodyguard. In September 2024, Lacroix’s residence was struck by gunfire, and vehicles at Armoires PMM were set ablaze in what police classified as arson. These incidents suggest that Lacroix may be entangled in organized crime conflicts, though he has not been formally charged in connection with these events.

Tax Evasion Allegations

In May 2024, Revenu Québec pursued legal action against Lacroix, seeking to recover nearly $2.5 million in unpaid taxes. The agency alleged that Lacroix used a numbered company as a front to evade tax obligations. To prevent the sale of a luxury property valued at nearly $6 million—believed to be owned by Lacroix through his spouse, despite her modest declared income—Revenu Québec obtained a pre-judgment seizure of the residence. The agency argued that Lacroix had a history of using front companies and individuals to avoid financial liabilities.

Legal Actions Against the City of Quebec

In response to the threats against his life and the subsequent security expenses he incurred, Lacroix filed a $3.8 million lawsuit against the City of Quebec. He claimed that the police used coercive tactics by informing him of threats to his life in an attempt to extract information about criminal activities. Lacroix argued that this approach forced him to invest heavily in personal security measures, and he sought compensation for these costs.

Jean-Noël “Sarto” Lacroix’s business operations and personal associations have subjected him to extensive legal and regulatory challenges. From the revocation of Armoires PMM’s license due to deceptive business practices to allegations of tax evasion and connections to criminal activities, Lacroix’s endeavors have consistently attracted negative attention from authorities and the public. These issues underscore the complex interplay between his business interests and alleged involvement in illicit activities, painting a portrait of a businessman operating on the fringes of legality.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Jean Noel Lacroix trying to hide?

Jean Noel Lacroix‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Jean Noel Lacroix in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Jean Noel Lacroix may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: Jean-Noël Lacroix – Allegations, Legal Troubles, and Controversies

Jean-Noël “Sarto” Lacroix, a Quebec-based businessman, has been the focus of significant legal, regulatory, and criminal controversies over recent years. His association with the cabinetry company Armoires PMM, along with alleged connections to organized crime and accusations of financial impropriety, paint a picture of a figure operating in contentious and high-risk environments. This in-depth investigation explores the full extent of Lacroix’s legal challenges, customer complaints, and the implications of his business dealings.

1. Background of Jean-Noël Lacroix

A. Business Ventures

• Jean-Noël Lacroix is best known for his involvement with Armoires PMM, a Quebec-based company specializing in custom cabinetry for kitchens and bathrooms.
• Although officially not listed as the owner, evidence suggests that Lacroix operated as the de facto manager, controlling key decisions and benefiting financially from the company’s operations.

B. Public Image

• Lacroix’s public persona is marred by allegations of financial misconduct, regulatory violations, and connections to criminal elements, leading to increased scrutiny from authorities and public distrust.

2. Revocation of Armoires PMM’s License

A. The Régie du Bâtiment du Québec (RBQ) Investigation

1. Findings of Mismanagement:
   • In July 2022, the RBQ revoked the construction license of Armoires PMM, citing violations of Quebec’s building regulations.
   • The RBQ discovered that the listed owner, Maxime Morency, was a front for Lacroix, who was actively managing the company without the necessary licenses.
2. Use of Unlicensed Contractors:
   • Armoires PMM was found to have engaged unlicensed contractors for various projects, violating RBQ regulations and exposing clients to substandard work.
3. Deceptive Practices:
   • Lacroix’s involvement in hiring and daily management decisions, coupled with his attempts to conceal his control over the company, were key factors in the RBQ’s decision.

B. Implications of the License Revocation

• The loss of Armoires PMM’s license significantly damaged the company’s credibility, leading to financial losses and reputational harm.
• Customers and subcontractors were left in precarious positions, with unfinished projects and unresolved disputes.

3. Customer Complaints and High-Pressure Sales Tactics

A. Allegations of Coercion

• Numerous customers reported being subjected to aggressive sales tactics, with Lacroix personally involved in pressuring clients to sign contracts.
• One notable case involved Nathalie Rivard, who claimed Lacroix threatened to raise prices if she did not immediately agree to a contract. When she attempted to cancel days later, he allegedly resorted to verbal insults and intimidation.

B. Pattern of Complaints

1. Unethical Behavior:
   • Several clients alleged that Lacroix used intimidation and deceptive practices to secure contracts.
2. Delayed or Substandard Work:
   • Complaints filed with the Office de la Protection du Consommateur (OPC) highlighted delays, unfinished projects, and poor-quality workmanship.

4. Criminal Incidents and Connections to Organized Crime

A. Alleged Links to the Hells Angels

• Lacroix has been linked to Michel “Doune” Guérin, a known Hells Angels associate and employee at Armoires PMM.
• In November 2023, Guérin was murdered outside his residence, shortly after an arson attack targeted Armoires PMM’s offices.

B. Threats Against Lacroix

1. Police Warning:
   • Authorities informed Lacroix that his life was in danger, prompting him to install bulletproof windows and hire private security.
2. September 2024 Incidents:
   • Lacroix’s home was hit by gunfire, and vehicles belonging to Armoires PMM were set on fire in what police classified as targeted attacks.

C. Implications of Criminal Associations

• While Lacroix denies direct involvement in criminal activities, his associations with individuals linked to organized crime raise significant concerns about his business practices and safety.

5. Tax Evasion Allegations

A. Legal Actions by Revenu Québec

1. Unpaid Taxes:
   • In May 2024, Revenu Québec launched legal action against Lacroix, claiming nearly $2.5 million in unpaid taxes.
2. Use of Front Companies:
   • Authorities alleged that Lacroix used a numbered company to evade tax liabilities while continuing to benefit financially from his business activities.

B. Seizure of Luxury Property

• Revenu Québec obtained a pre-judgment seizure of a nearly $6 million luxury property believed to be owned by Lacroix through his spouse. The property’s ownership structure and the discrepancy between declared income and expenses raised red flags.

6. Retaliatory Legal Action Against the City of Quebec

A. $3.8 Million Lawsuit

• Lacroix filed a lawsuit against the City of Quebec, claiming that police warnings about threats to his life were coercive and intended to extract information about criminal activities.
• He sought compensation for the financial burden of increased security measures, including bodyguards and bulletproof installations.

B. Criticism of Police Tactics

• Lacroix accused law enforcement of overstepping boundaries and causing undue stress and financial strain through their approach.

7. Broader Implications

A. Damage to Reputation

• Lacroix’s business dealings, regulatory violations, and alleged criminal connections have significantly tarnished his reputation, both as a businessman and a public figure.

B. Financial and Legal Consequences

• The combination of tax evasion claims, license revocations, and lawsuits poses severe financial and operational challenges for Lacroix and his companies.

C. Public and Media Perception

• Media coverage of Lacroix’s controversies, including the violent incidents surrounding his business, has reinforced public skepticism about his integrity and accountability.

8. Recommendations for Oversight and Reform

A. Strengthening Regulatory Frameworks

• The RBQ and other regulatory bodies should enhance oversight mechanisms to prevent individuals from circumventing licensing requirements through proxies.

B. Protecting Consumers

• Authorities must improve consumer protection measures to address unethical business practices and ensure accountability for contractors like Lacroix.

C. Combatting Organized Crime Links

• Enhanced collaboration between law enforcement and financial regulators is essential to investigate and sever connections between businesses and organized crime.

9. Conclusion

Jean-Noël Lacroix’s business operations have been plagued by allegations of misconduct, regulatory violations, and connections to criminal activity. From his manipulation of Armoires PMM’s ownership to high-pressure sales tactics and ongoing legal battles, Lacroix’s actions have left a trail of financial and reputational damage.

Key Findings:

1. Regulatory Breaches: Lacroix’s control over Armoires PMM violated building and licensing regulations, resulting in significant consequences.
2. Consumer Exploitation: Clients faced coercion, substandard work, and financial losses due to unethical practices.
3. Criminal Associations: Lacroix’s alleged ties to organized crime add a layer of complexity and risk to his public and professional persona.
4. Financial Impropriety: Tax evasion allegations and questionable financial dealings have further eroded trust in Lacroix’s operations.

As legal and financial pressures mount, the future of Lacroix’s business ventures and personal reputation remains uncertain. This case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of regulatory enforcement, ethical business practices, and public accountability.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Jean Noel Lacroix (or actors working on behalf of Jean Noel Lacroix), we will inform Jean Noel Lacroix of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Jean Noel Lacroix may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Jean Noel Lacroix, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Jean Noel Lacroix to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Jean Noel Lacroix made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Jean Noel Lacroix is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Jean Noel Lacroix

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Jean Noel Lacroix Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Jean Noel Lacroix used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Jean Noel Lacroix could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Jean Noel Lacroix have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Jean Noel Lacroix is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Jean Noel Lacroix creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Jean Noel Lacroix either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Jean Noel Lacroix, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Jean Noel Lacroix is in great company ….

What else is Jean Noel Lacroix hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Jean Noel Lacroix] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Jean Noel Lacroix that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.