Doug Phillips & Vision Forum, Lourdes Torres vs Doug Phillips lawsuit, Sexual Abuse/Assault and Churches, Vision Forum

Insurance Company Files Legal Complaint against Doug Phillips, Vision Forum, and Lourdes Torres-Manteufel


Assurance Company of America files legal complaint against Doug Phillips, Vision Forum, Inc., Vision Forum Ministries, and Lourdes Torres-Manteufel


On August 26, 2014, Assurance Company of America filed a legal complaint for “Declaratory Judgment” against The Vision Forum, Inc., Vision Forum Ministries, Doug Phillips, and Lourdes Torres-Manteufel.

I have no legal background except for experiencing a defamation lawsuit, but will attempt to summarize the 19-page filing in non-legalese language and provide some screen shots that explain the bulk of the case.

Front page of the complaint:


Doug Phillips lawsuit Screen Shot 2014-09-02 at 12.47.28 PM

Screen Shot 2014-09-02 at 12.47.17 PM


The complaint begins by identifying the parties involved:


Assurance Company of America  – an insurance company based in New York, New York

  • The Vision Forum Inc – a Texas corporation
  • Vision Forum Ministries, Inc., a Texas corporation
  • Defendant Douglas Phillips
  • Defendant Lourdes Torres-Manteufel

This section of the complaint summarizes the “underlying suit” filed by Lourdes Torres-Manteufel against Phillips, and both Vision Forum Ministries and Vision Forum Inc., alleging grooming, manipulating, sexual abuse, etc, by Doug Phillips while he served as her boss, pastor, etc, and damages requested. (See my article here for background on the lawsuit: Lourdes Torres, Alleged Victim in the Doug Phillips (Vision Forum) Sex Abuse Scandals Files Lawsuit).

My summary of the complaint

Assurance Company of America alleges that during the application process, Vision Forum, Inc., misrepresented the entities, Vision Forum, Inc. and Vision Forum Ministries. Because of this misrepresentation, they (Assurance Company) don’t want to defend or be financially liable for any fallout from the Torres-Manteufel vs Doug Phillips lawsuit. Go figure.  Here is some of the more pertinent legalese:


Screen Shot 2014-09-04 at 9.17.09 AM


Doug Phillips, Vision Forum, Lourdes Torres-Manteufel lawsuit Screen Shot 2014-09-04 at 9.15.39 AM


On the final page we see that Assurance Company of America is asking the court to “enter a judgment” based on the information provided in the complaint, the misrepresentation by Vision Forum(s), and to be freed from having to compensate anyone related to the Torres-Manteufel vs Phillips lawsuit.

Assurance Company also asks for reimbursement for attorney fees necessary for the filing of this lawsuit.


Doug  Phillips, Lourdes Torres-Manteufel lawsuit Screen Shot 2014-09-04 at 9.18.47 AM




Response from David C. Gibbs III

I reached out to Attorney David C. Gibbs III who is representing Lourdes Torres-Manteufel, and asked him how this lawsuit may affect his client. I received the following response by e-mail late last night:

The insurance company for the defendants are asking the court to release them from having to defend and indemnify the lawsuit brought by my client because the carrier alleges that the defendants did not fully and honestly disclose pertinent information on their application for insurance.

We intend to fully investigate this issue as the litigation unfolds and will vigorously defend our client’s right to full and fair compensation for her injuries as a result of the abuse she endured.  We hope that the defendants do have sufficient insurance coverage or significant assets as the jury awards in these cases can be substantial. ~David C. Gibbs III, September 3, 2014


Related link:  The following article is a compilation of informational links to the Torres-Manteufel vs Phillips lawsuit and background info on Doug Phillips and Vision Forum: Lourdes Torres-Manteufel vs Doug Phillips Lawsuit Informational Resource Page

32 thoughts on “Insurance Company Files Legal Complaint against Doug Phillips, Vision Forum, and Lourdes Torres-Manteufel”

  1. If what the insurance company is claiming is true, then the board of Vision Forum committed insurance fraud as well as criminal tax evasion. These amateurs must not have known that one false statement to an insurance company, voids coverage and is a FEDERAL crime ( yep Esquires Hart & Phillips the same kind of offense you were threatening other people with. The truth has come down on you two idiots like a eagle swooping down to crap on your head).

    If the plaintiff prevails, Doug Phillips and the entire board of Vision Forum could end up personally bankrupt. Those with law licenses could loose them if their respective State Bars are appraised of this ( hey Doug the Virginia Bar will know, guaranteed. Don Hart , Texas bar is on line 3, LOL). If the Criminal enforcement division of IRS or insurance commissioner starts investigating they could all end up in Federal prison leading jail house Bible studies. Think of the possibilities : A captive audience of convicted rapists being taught patriarchal “wisdom” by Doug Phillips, Scott Brown, Jim Zess and Don Hart. Hey you boobs will still be “leaders”. Scott Brown you always wanted to be nationally known. Now your sons won’t have to worry about “spreading your Glory” as you called it. Have you looked into an asset protection plan lately ? Real estate, be it a farm or office building is really easy to levy once a judgment is in hand.

    This could very well be the Lords way of ending the curse of The integrated church movement. Horrible news for the defendants, not so horrible for the plaintiff. Lots of assets to seize.

    Doug Phillips is probably sewing gold coins into his wife’s bloomers right now.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. I don’t understand why Lourdes would be named as a defendant. How would she be involved at all in any misrepresentation by Vision Forum? It’s not as though she was on the board or anything.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. It looks like Torres is being named only in a technical sense, that she’s not entitled to have her damages paid by the insurance company, including her legal fees. As Scott says, these guys may easily be personally liable, and there should be a lot of grabbable stuff out there. Torres can hardly oppose Assurance on this, since they don’t want to argue that Vision Forum did nothing wrong to the insurance company.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Looks like the Insurance Company used discernment on the situation, figured VF was going to lo$e big-time, and are bailing out to protect their own a$$et$.


    Liked by 1 person

  5. Can we really be surprised at this “misrepresentation?” Let’s think back on his first and second confessions when he stepped down (or was forced to step down). I mean, really, he was never completely forthright with his responsibility. He was still lashing out at how social media was portraying him. If he was fully repentant, he would have fully submitted to BCA authority and remained there and dealt with the consequences from his church elders.

    But no . . . . he flounced and moved to a mega church, became members, and gets to wipe his hands clean and start afresh.

    Has he been truthful about anything? Me thinks it’s always been about him and an act.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. It seems like most of these men are in it for the money, power, and self-hating, male-bottom-kissing, female-slaves. None of them remind me of Jesus Christ.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. It seems like most of these men are in it for the money, power, and self-hating, male-bottom-kissing, female-slaves.

    Just like the recruiting pitch for ISIS/ISIL. (i.e. the promise of pillage and “p***y parade” to losers who can’t get either.)


  8. Has he been truthful about anything? Me thinks it’s always been about him and an act.

    And the Insurance company doesn’t want to be the suckers holding the bag for seven-plus figures.


  9. Insurance is designed to compensate people for “negligent” acts. If an employee of Phillips’s had been the alleged perpetrator of the harassment, then it is not likely that the insurance company would be asking to be released from the action. But when the head of the organization is the one who committed the alleged acts (which are intentional actions), then it falls outside the scope of insurance coverage. If the court rules in the insurance company’s favor, then Doug will have to come up with his own legal defense, which should break him financially. And Lourdes, if she wins the case, can pursue his personal assets. She may end up without any financial compensation, but Doug will be flat broke.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Bystander: In this case I think the insurance company is claiming the entities were described and insured as one, when in fact they were separate. That’s insurance fraud, pure and simple. Regardless of the reasons for the claim against insurance, if the insurance was obtained fraudulently there is NO coverage.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I am surprised they are not invoking other possible coverage problems. As a rule, sex abuse liability coverage must be specifically purchased, in addition to employment practices liability. I’ve been an insurance agent for almost forty years, since I was a babe out of high school. It is hard to prove intentional misrepresentation; then again, when people form organizations they have to understand what they are doing. I can’t tell you how many people I run into who do not understand that each separate entity is, in its own right, a legal “person”, and each entity must be named on the policy to be covered. I predict that Phillips will next sue the insurance agent who sold him the policy for failing to properly list the entities. This could go on and on and on. There are a lot of dumb insurance agents out there too. Maybe his agent was one of his congregants. If the agent filled out the application for him, then this agent will be in hot water too.


  12. Torres-Manteufel played a game as old as the Medici women and she lost, plain and simple. It’s going to be very hard to show a jury (if it even gets that far) just how and under what particulars she was ‘damaged’ and deserves monetary compensation. There are some who will howl for my testicles on a pike just about now, but oh well as they say, I just call it like I see it.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Maybe his agent was one of his congregants. If the agent filled out the application for him, then this agent will be in hot water too.

    Sounds like not only a clear Conflict of Interest, but normal behavior for a lot of these churches. After all, if Pastor/Dictators use cops who are part of their congregation as personal bodyguards and Enforcers, why not use an insurance agent who’s a congregant to swing a sweetheart deal? (Note the word USE in both cases. Because Lourdes Ofdoug wasn’t the only one getting used.)

    And the agent is Lowborn while Douggie ESQUIRE is Highborn, and Lowborn are always expendable to advance or protect the Highborn.

    P.S. Is Douggie ESQUIRE short enough to hide behind his wife’s skirts? Because putting a$$et$ in the name of a wife or relative is a common dodge. So common it’s the first thing they look for.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Insurance agents have to be licensed by their states and contracted with brokerages or companies that provide the insurance, so there is limited potential for conflicts of interest or special deals on the insurance in the typical agent/client relationship. A lot of people do business with people they go to church with; there is nothing wrong with that per se. I’m just betting that the agent will be the next person dragged in. If Assurance is successful in getting out of this, then all eyes will be on that agent’s errors and omissions insurance. And the agent certainly has it, because insurance companies will not do business with agents who don’t carry it.


  15. Oh, and Muff Potter is probably correct. Winning a lawsuit is really a difficult process. Not saying that I like it in this particular case, but the plaintiff does have to prove that she was damaged in some way that can be compensated with money.


  16. I am not howling to put anything of yours on a pike, Muff, but I see Lourdes very, very differently than the way you see her. Being in a cult from the age of fifteen skews your thinking, especially when you are taught to be submissive to your pastor who makes all the extra-Biblical rules for your church.

    I don’t see her as a calculating person out to marry Phillips for money and I can assure you that no woman I know would have gotten any joy out of the encounters she had with that man. It was all about him.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. The other night my hubby and I watched “What about Bob?” And I was cracking up at the similarities of the character (Dr. Leo Marvin) played by Richard Dreyfuss. Right down to the clothing, short beard and false smile.

    It reminded me SO much of D. Phillips; a well tailored, my-life-is-perfect, ego-centric,”highly educated” condescending, “family man” control freak, being slowly driven into madness as his little world falls apart around him….

    Just take those *Baby Steps* to a new church, Baby Steps into the courthouse, Baby Steps into bankruptcy….


  18. @ Muff:

    Patriocentricity has been discredited by this incident, whether Torres was calculating or not (though from what I’ve read, I don’t think she was for the reasons Marsha outlined above) and whether certain people want to admit it. If Torres was manipulated / abused, then fathers and leadership cannot be trusted and thus the umbrella of authority / stay-at-home daughterhood cannot protect people like they claim. If Torres was purely out for money and is now crying foul, then fathers / leadership still cannot be trusted (since Doug was sucked in), and all the education / indoctrination they pour into their children is not a fail-safe (as promised) because Torres turned out to be a calculating golddigger. So in the end, it actually discredits patriocentricity more if Torres is vindictively trying to take Doug down for an affair gone wrong. Thus the patriocentrists should really be rooting for her innocence, not Doug’s.

    But yes, the question of whether the case will go anywhere is a different matter that will involve a lot of complicated legal wrangling. The legalities of cases are, unfortunately, often separate from their morality or lack thereof.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Thus the patriocentrists should really be rooting for her innocence, not Doug’s.

    I’m thinking they’re rooting for ISIS/ISIL and wishing we already had strict Shari’a.


  20. Just my take which is not legal or anything like that. Let them sue Doug and FV right into the ground, maybe they should not sue Lourdes Torres-Manteufel.


  21. They named Lourdes in the filing because procedures require it. They are seeking a declarative judgment that the insurance policy was voided by Vision Forum’s fraud. I personally think this may be God’s way of really slapping down the patriarchal movement and the integrated church scam. The entire board of Vision Forum including Scott Brown, could end up paying damages themselves.


  22. I’m working on getting an answer. Gibbs acknowledged my message, now we need to find a time when we’re both available to talk. I’ll keep everyone posted once I hear from him.


Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s