Roxy Jacenko admits no one has been refunded after botched $10million dream home lottery row – but the PR queen insists the cash is coming

Sydney PR mogul Roxy Jacenko says she is still committed to personally refunding all 7,489 people who signed up for her highly publicized brand bootcamp following a bitter dispute with her former business partners.

Jacenko teamed up with businessmen Youssef Tleis and Kassim Alaouie to launch a promotion that offered new customers to her Brand Bootcamp online business course the chance to win three epic prizes.

However, the partnership came to a sudden halt last month when Ms Jacenko took to social media to claim she was leaving after discovering a “shortage” in the prize money pool and insisted she would offer customers refunds out of her own pocket.

“I stand by my offer to refund clients and as a result $684,000 of my own personal money remains in my lawyer’s trust account,” she told Daily Mail Australia on Friday.

The promotion, which touted prizes including a $10 million waterfront home, a Birkin bag and a Rolex timepiece, was to be raffled off today, with the announcement now scheduled for Saturday.

Roxy Jacenko teamed up with Sydney businessmen Youssef Tleis (right) and Kassim Alaouie (left) to launch a promotion that entered people into a draw that would give one of them the chance to buy a luxury home in Cronulla to win

Roxy Jacenko says she personally has run out of money and would be returning refunds to customers

“There was not enough money in the company’s account to pay the first prize winner, so I personally loaned the company money so that it could pay substantial creditors and so that there was enough money in the company’s accounts to pay the $ 250,000 to be paid out,” she says. said.

“I loaned the company more than $100,000 to ensure adequate resources were available for the company.”

Jacenko resigned as director last month and Mr Tleis is the sole director of Roxy’s Bootcamp Pty Ltd.

“I was unable to make refunds through Shopify as Mr Tleis is the only one who has access to the NAB account that has funds in it. He revoked my access to the company bank account.” she said.

The admission comes after Jacenko commenced legal proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales in relation to competition and to enable an orderly manner of reimbursing customers.’

The court heard that Ms Jacenko had applied for the appointment of provisional liquidators, partly over allegations that Mr Tleis and Mr Alaouie had engaged in “misleading conduct” in their handling of the promotion due to a sub-clause stating that the prizes would only be would be awarded if the competition generates more than $11.5 million in revenue.

The luxury waterfront home is one of the prizes up for grabs for people who signed up for Jacenko’s online business course, Brand Bootcamp

Gamblers who pay for the course, which starts at $29, will be entered into a giveaway to win the house and other luxury prizes

However, the terms were never made public by Ms Jacenko in a whirlwind publicity and the clause was also missing from the formal terms of the competition on the Roxy’s Bootcamp website.

“The court was taken to documents that showed that as soon as I understood the situation, I wanted the promotion to stop and ultimately put money into my attorney’s trust account,” she explained.

‘I also initiated the proceedings because Mr Alaouie and Mr Tleis intended to proceed with the promotion – this was unrealistic given the terms which stated that the house would ONLY be made available if the proceeds were at least $11.5 million plus costs would reach. to happen.’

Judge McGrath agreed to appoint interim receiver Cathro & Partners to the company, lamenting the dire state of affairs that brought the case to court.

‘The competing motions for summary judgment arise in the extraordinary circumstances of the rapid establishment and almost equally rapid deterioration of relations between Ms. Jacenko, Mr. Tleis and Mr. Alaouie over a business venture involving the training offered by Ms. Jacenko to the are being promoted to the public using a highly questionable promotional program,” he said.

‘In any event, the promotion has generated significant negative publicity… this has led to online comments that were extremely derogatory about the promotion itself and those involved in it.’

The case will return to court later this month.