June 22
Mentoring of America, LLC
406 West 5050 North
Provo UT 84604
Re: JoAnn and Roderic C, v. Mentoring of America LLC
Dear Mentoring of America:
This office represents Joann and Roderic C. Concerning their September purchase of the Amazing Profits Real Estate Program. Your company is currently trying to collect $7246.31 from the Countys by making debt collection calls (through your related entity EPN) and by threatening to report this amount on the Countys' credit reports. As explained below, they do not owe any amount, and you are not entitled to make any credit reporting as to them.
I have reviewed the history of this transaction, and find your company's conduct to be shockingly fraudulent. The following is a non-exhaustive list of the fraud:
The CD's and books from the Amazing Profits program were useless. The manuals were incomplete, the vast majority of the websites referenced were dead links, and the CD's were merely infomercials.
Mentoring of America promised them that (1) they could not fail because they would be your next infomercial success story, (2) that if they invested 5-10 hours per week they would make their money back in 60-90 days, and (3) that they would make hundreds of thousands of dollars in the foreclosure market. These were false representations designed to induce the Countys to buy more useless products.
Mentoring of America solicited them to use other people's money for a new real estate program by allowing Mentoring of America to charge their credit card $13,960.00. Your company told them that this amount included (1) lifetime tax preparation or advice, anytime of day or night; (2) free creation of an LLC in Nevada with someone there to answer the phones anytime; and (3) a free trip to Las Vegas to see a John Beck seminar, with travel expenses paid. All of these statements were false. Mentoring of America later tried to charge them additional money for every one of the above items.
Mentoring of America quoted a price to my clients of $13,960 and charged that amount on their credit card. Not coincidentally, this was the County's current credit limit at that time. I understand from my investigation that your company has been defrauding many other consumers by charging them different amounts for the same alleged services, depending on their credit limits.
My clients requested a refund, and Mentoring of America ignored their calls and letters. However, once my clients did a chargeback on their credit card, your company sent my clients email confirmation that the entire $13,960 would be refunded. Kindell Graham of your company told them not to worry, that this was a total refund and that they would not be the subject of any debt collection efforts. These representations were also apparently false. As soon as it had promised a refund, in writing, your company refused return of the books and CD's, and assigned the account to your sister company debt collection agency EPN. Ms. Graham started avoiding their calls, and once when she mistakenly answered one of those calls, falsely told them that she would fix the mistake. She did not.
EPN is now trying to collect $7246.31 from them, allegedly for the materials they tried to return and four mentoring calls. EPN now maintains that Mentoring of America didn't actually intend to refund anything, and always intended to collect the money from them later.
This is outrageous — Mentoring of America's own email states otherwise. I am also shocked that your company would try to collect the unconscionable amount of $7246.31 for a total of four phone calls lasting 20 minutes each, which constituted little more than walking my clients through a website and having them write down their goals. EPN has also informed my clients that their credit reports are about to be damaged, and that Mentoring of America has instructed it to collect the debt.
In addition to the obvious fraud chronicled above, your company violated California's Home Solicitation Sales Act in wholesale fashion. The Legislature passed the Home Solicitation Sales Act in 1971 in order to protect consumers from the unfair pressures of sales which are consummated in the home. See Civil Code 1689.5 et. Seq.; Weatherall Aluminum Products, Co. V. Scott, 71 Cal. App. 3d 245,249 (1977).
The Act grants consumers a 3-day right to cancel such transactions. Civil Code 1689.6. The seller must disclose the 3-day right to cancel in writing, directly above the space for the consumer's signature on the contract (Civil Code 1689.7 (a) (1), and must orally disclose the 3-day right to cancel as well. Civil Code 1689.7 (f). The seller must also provide a special tear-off cancellation form in duplicate that the buyer may then use to cancel the transaction. Civil Code 1689.7 (b).
Your company did none of these things. Therefore, my clients have the right to cancel the transaction at any time. Civil Code 1689.7 (g). Upon cancellation, your company had 10 days to refund all payments made under the contract, and had 20 days to pick up its goods. Your company did not refund all the payments, and it failed to accept the returned goods. Accordingly, my clients may keep the goods without any obligation to pay.
Civil Code 1689.7 (c) and 1689.11.
It makes no difference that your sales force used the telephone to induce the Countys to enter into the agreements, and never came to their home. The Act applies to telephonic transactions where the offer is accepted at home, regardless of who initiates the telephone call. People v. Toomey, (1985) 157 Cal. App. 3d 1; Weatherall Aluminum Products v. Scott, (1977) 71 Cal. App. 3d 245; Janzen v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd, (1997) 68 Cal. Rptr. 2d 260,263; Luskin & Sons, Inc. V. Samovitz, (1985) 166 Cal. App. 3d 533,536 (Although the home solicitation statute is commonly thought of as protecting consumers from the high pressures sales tactics of door-to-door solicitors, the clear, unambiguous language of the statute gives it a much broader application.).
Pursuant to the Home Soliciation Sales Act, and because of the underlying fraud described above, any transactions between your company and they are entirely void and unenforceable. You are also hereby put on notice that your company violated many provisions of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act at Civil Code 1770 (a). The CLRA provides the prevailing consumer with injunctive relief, and attorneys fees. Moreover, you are hereby advised that if you fail to cure your violations of the CLRA within 30 days, they will also be entitled to damages and punitive damages against you.
You have the opportunity to cure your violations by doing the following within 30 days:
1. Agreeing in writing to waive any alleged debt you contend they owe, and recalling your debt collection agency EPN.
2. Agreeing in writing on behalf of Mentoring of America and EPN not to report any tradeline on their credit reports at any time.
3. Ceasing all contact with them, including by EPN.
If you do not comply with this demand, they will file a lawsuit against your company and EPN for fraud, violations of the Home Solicitation Sales Act, violations of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and for damages and punitive damages under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act. They will also consider bringing a class action to set aside all of your transactions in California during the last four years as voidable home solicitation sales, and to force you to return all monies you have obtained in those transactions.
Thank you for your consideration of the above. I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely
0 comments