The Federal Trade Commission is suing another group of companies and individuals in Las Vegas it claims scammed money from consumers.
In at least the fourth such lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for Nevada since December, the FTC claims Ivy Capital Inc. and more than two dozen co-defendants since 2007 took more than $40 million from people who paid thousands of dollars believing Ivy Capital would help them develop their own Internet businesses and earn up to $10,000 per month.
The FTC lawsuit claims Ivy Capital's telemarketers asked consumers how much credit they had on their credit cards and then talked them into using a substantial portion of their available credit to purchase a business coaching program for up to $20,000.
But the promised products and services were of little value or worthless, the complaint alleged.
The FTC said Ivy Capital and some of the other defendants operated out of Las Vegas at 3027 E. Sunset Road, Suite 201, which is near Eastern Avenue.
The February lawsuit was initially sealed, but is now a public record and a magistrate judge last week ordered the parties to prepare for a trial in the fall of 2012.
"Ivy Capital's 'expert' coaches lacked the promised knowledge and experience, its website-building software programs did not work properly and the lawyers and accountants the defendants said would provide assistance were nonexistent,'' the FTC said in a statement about the lawsuit.
The suit said Ivy Capital's telemarketers called people who responded to e-mail and advertising about work-at-home or Internet business opportunities from companies such as Jennifer Johnson's Home Job Placement Program and Brent Austin's Automated Wealth System. The ads originated from fictional companies Ivy Capital created to generate sales leads – potential customers' names and phone numbers – for its operation, the complaint alleged.
The defendants sued Feb. 22 were:
Ivy Capital Inc., Ivy Capital LLC, 3 Day MBA LLC, Business Development Division LLC, Cherrytree Holdings LLC, Corporate Credit Division LLC, Credit Repair Division LLC, Curva LLC, Dream Financial, Enrich Wealth Group LLC, Fortune Learning System LLC, Fortune Learning LLC, Global Finance Group LLC, James G. Hanchett, John H. Harrison, Melyna Harrison, Benjamin E. Hoskins, Leanne Hoskins, ICI Development Inc., Kierston Kirschbaum, Kyle G. Kirschbaum, Logic Solutions LLC, Steven E. Lyman, Tracy Lyman, Mowab Inc., Nevada Corporate Division Inc., Oxford Debt Holdings LLC, Oxford Financial LLC, Revsynergy LLC, S&T Time LLC, Sell It Vizions LLC, Steven J. Sonnenberg, Tax Planning Division LLC, The Shipper LLC, Vianet Inc., Virtual Profit LLC, Virtucon LLC, Joshua F. Wickman, Christopher M. Zelig and Zyzac Commerce Solutions Inc.
Several of the defendants have filed court papers denying the allegations and/or seeking dismissal of the FTC suit against them. They include:
• Enrich Wealth Group LLC and Joshua Wickman
• Fortune Learning LLC, James G. Hanchett, Steven J. Sonnenberg and The Shipper, LLC
• Benjamin Hoskins, Leanne Hoskins and Oxford Financial LLC
• Curva LLC, Christopher M. Zelig and Zyzac Commerce Solutions Inc.
• The two Ivy Capital companies, 3 Day MBA LLC, Cherrytree Holdings LLC, Dream Financial, Fortune Learning System LLC, Global Finance Group LLC, John H. Harrison, Melyna Harrison, ICI Development Inc., Kierston Kirschbaum, Kyle G. Kirschbaum, Logic Solutions LLC, Steven E. Lyman, Tracy Lyman, Mowab Inc., Oxford Debt Holdings LLC, Revsynergy LLC, S&T Time LLC, Sell It Vizions LLC, Vianet Inc., Virtual Profit LLC and Virtucon LLC
For instance, attorneys for the Ivy Capital group of defendants wrote in their motion to dismiss that the FTC's lawsuit was flawed.
"The complaint does not provide any specific allegations, but instead lumps the Ivy Capital corporate defendants and the other defendants into groups, including the 'Primary Defendants,' the 'Upsell Defendants' and simply 'Defendants,' and makes numerous allegations against these various groups. The allegations do not provide any details about each separate defendant's alleged role in the conduct described, nor do they provide even a single concrete example of the alleged fraudulent conduct. Instead, the FTC relies on generic terms like 'in numerous instances,' 'in some of those instances,' 'typically,' 'sales representatives,' and 'some consumers.' This generic pleading deprives the defendants of the ability to respond and defend themselves against the FTC's very damaging allegations of fraud,'' the attorneys wrote.
This latest FTC case follows its lawsuits in Nevada since December against Utah businessman Jeremy Johnson and his companies; against defendants in an alleged immigration scam -- and against companies accused of scamming people seeking payday loans.