310 Q11 214 216 Q13 :19 520 ?21 ?22 E24 326 ?28 Robert F. Math (SBN 268268) University of San Diego Legal Clinics 5998 Alcala?. Park, BA 305 San Diego, CA 92110?2492 Telephone (619) 260-7470 Facsimile (619) 260-7425 rmuth@sandiego.edu Attorneys for Plaintiff, TERRANCE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TERRANCE an individual, PLAINTIFF, LIFELONG HOLISTICS, LLC, a California limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, DEF ENDANTS. Case No.: COMPLAINT 1. Misleading and Deceptive Advertising (Violation of Cal. Bus. Prof. Code 17500 et seq.) 2. Unfair Business Practices (Violation of Cal. Bus. Prof. Code 17200 et seq.) 3. Intentional Misrepresentation 4. Negligent Misrepresentation Plaintiff Terrance O?Neil, by and through counsel, hereby ?les this Complaint against Defendants Lifelong Holistics, LLC, and Does one through ten, seeking, inter alia, to recover funds spent on substandard and inferior educational services, as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This Complaint arises out of the unlawful, deceptive, and discriminatory business practices of the Vitality College of Healing Arts (hereinafter in its dealings with Plaintiff Terrance O?Neil (hereinafter ?O?Neil?). On information and belief, VCHA is a division of Lifelong Holistics, LLC, a California limited liability company that claims to offer alternative health education, treatments, and products to the public through VCHA. 2. O?Neil is an honorably-discharged United States Marine Corps veteran who was -1- COMPLAINT l?l C) signi?cantly injured in a rocket attack during his service in Iraq. As a result of this attack, O?Neil was medically retired by the Marine Corps and rated as 100% disabled with traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder by the Veterans Administration. VCHA targeted O?Neil and deceived him into enrolling in Massage Therapy Program in or about August 2013. Touting on its website that it was ?proud to have approval from the the National Certi?cation Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork, and the Veterans Administration,? VCHA baited O?Neil with assurances that he would become a licensed massage therapist from an accredited school after completing the program. O?Neil dutifully handed over the full tuition for the program and necessary supplies from a combination of his personal savings and his hard-earned, taxpayer-funded GI Bill education bene?ts. However, after ?nishing three-quarters of the required Massage Therapy Program at and completing numerous hours of coursework, O?Neil unexpectedly received a letter from VCHA informing him that he was being dismissed from the program for purported behavioral issues. This abrupt dismissal came as a complete shock to O?Neil, who was enthusiastic about nearly completing his training and becoming a licensed massage therapist. . After receiving the letter, O?Neil was neither given any Opportunity to deny the phony allegations related. to his behavior referenced in the letter, nor was he given a refund of his tuition. Further, he was not offered any method of transferring his credits to another school. The pre-textual nature of his dismissal only became apparent much later when O?Neil learned that the school continued to claim education benefits payments from the Veterans Administration on his behalf even though he was no longer permitted to complete his program. Moreover, O?Neil discovered shortly after his dismissal that VCHA is not accredited nor even an assigned school with the National Certi?cation Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork as VCHA represented on its website at the time O?Neil enrolled and through claims made by its recruiters directly to O?Neil. -2- COMPLAINT 10. 11. 12. Without a tuition reimbursement or any means of transferring his credits to another school, O?Neil remains unable to obtain his massage therapy license. Without this license, O?Neil is unmarketable and unemployable as a massage therapist, leaving him jobless, with no prospect of any future career as a massage therapist. O?Neil appears, unfortunately, to be not unique in falling victim to deceptions and misrepresentations. VCHA has engaged and, on information and belief, continues to engage in unfair and unlawful practices in connection with advertising to and enrolling its students. It offers vulnerable young men and women fraudulent certi?cation and accreditation information in a shameless effort to enroll as many students as possible in its academic programs. These defrauded students are then denied the high-level education backed by a national certi?cation that they were promised. As a result of untrue and misleading statements, deceptive advertising, and discriminatory actions, O?Neil has suffered substantial harm. He remains without a massage therapist license, or job, while VCHA continues to lure other unsuspecting students into its programs with its deceptive advertisements, misrepresentations about program certi?cation and accreditation, and other unlawful tactics. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This Court has jurisdiction over VCHA as it is a registered California limited liability company. Venue is proper in the San Diego County Superior Court pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sections 395 and 395.5 because one or more of the violations alleged herein occurred in the County of San Diego. PARTIES Plaintiff Terrance O?Neil is, and at all relevant times herein was, an individual residing in and a citizen of the County of San Diego, State of California. O?Neil is a ?person? under California Business and Professions Code sections 17201 and 17535. On information and belief, Defendant Lifelong Holistics, LLC (hereinafter or collectively with the Doe defendants ?Defendants?) is, and at all times mentioned herein -3- COMPLATNT Lo.) 000%}13. 14. 15. was, a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of California. At all times relevant herein, LH has transacted and continues to transact business in San Diego County, California, with its principal place of business in La Jolla, California. LH is a ?person? under California Business and Professions Code section 17201. VCHA is a for-profit post-secondary educational institution providing massage therapist and alternative health career training for students at its campus in Carlsbad, California. As discussed above, O?Neil is informed and believes and thereon alleges that VCHA is a division of LH, but it is unclear to O?Neil whether VCHA has its own separate legal identity. The true names and capacities of Defendant Does 1 through 10, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, are unknown to O?Neil at this time, who therefore sues these Doe Defendants by such ?ctitious names. When the true names and capacities of Docs 1-10 are ascertained, O?Neil will seek leave of this Court to amend this Complaint accordingly. All of the conduct that forms the basis for this Complaint has been undertaken by Defendants by and through their agents, employees, of?cers, or others acting on their behalf and within the scope of employment, with the knowledge, permission, and consent of each of the other Defendants. O?Neil is informed and believes that each of the Doe defendants was responsible in some manner for the occurrences and injuries alleged in this Complaint. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND ALLEGATIONS O?Neil served his country in the United States Marine Corps for over ten years, from the year 2000 to the year 2011. During that time span he served admirably during deployments to both Iraq and Afghanistan. As a combat veteran, O?Neil often found himself under ?re, yet exhibited brave and sel?ess service. During one of his deployments to Iraq, O?Neil was severely injured in a rocket attack. As a direct result of this injury, O?Neil was diagnosed by the US. Department of Veterans Affairs with a service~connected disability amounting to a 100% disability rating, mostly due to his traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder Following O?Neil?s honorable discharge from the -4- COMPLAINT LOJN 16. 17. 18. Marine Corps, he resolved to make a successful transition to civilian life and sought to broaden his opportunities through obtaining training in massage therapy. Eager to become a massage therapist and continue serving others, O?Neil considered various education options that would allow him to re-enter the workforce as a pro?cient and valuable employee who could make a difference in the civilian world despite his service~connected disabilities. While browsing the internet, O?Neil found information about Massage Therapy Program on its website, "vitalitycollege.com,? and gained interest in enrolling at VCHA after reading on its website that VCHA was ?proud to have approval from the the National Certification Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork, and the Veterans Administration? in or about August 2013. During in~person meetings with a recruiter for VCHA, he was told that, in addition to Massage Therapy Program being approved by it was also ?accredited.? From information provided to him by VCHA and its representatives, O?Neil understood that, upon completion of the Massage Therapist Program, he would be eligible to become a licensed massage therapist under the laws of the State of California. Attracted by assurances of a swift program completion schedule, the necessary prerequisites to become a licensed massage therapist, accreditation, and approval by a national certifying organization, O?Neil applied to the program unaware that VCHA was not an approved school with the nor accredited as it claimed to be. VCHA, a division of an alternative health education and treatment company driven solely by pro?ts, immediately offered O?Neil a place in the upcoming class in order to secure his tuition money. Believing representations, O?Neil signed an enrollment agreement in or about August 2013 and immediately began his training at the VCHA Carlsbad campus. -5- COMPLAINT 19. 20. 21. After Dismissing O?Neil on a Pretextual Basis, VCI-IA Continued to Draw Money from the VA for O?Neil?s Tuition for Several Months after His Dismissal, Depleting O?Neil?s Hard?Earned GI Bill Bene?ts Upon enrolling in the Massage Therapy Program, O?Neil successfully progressed through the program and completed all requirements necessary to maintain his enrollment status at VCHA. On or about June 12, 2014, O?Neil attended class at the VCHA Carlsbad campus as usual. However, upon arriving at school that day, he was acutely aware that the instructor was extremely rude to him and did not provide a partner for him to complete the day?s test. O?Neil noted the oddity of the interaction, but did not give it too much thought. Upon arriving home that same evening, O?Neil unexpectedly found a letter in his mailbox from the school, dated June 9, 2014, informing him that he was dismissed from VCHA. Unbeknownst to O?Neil, despite having been coldly dismissed from the Massage Therapy Program in June 2014, VCHA continued to draw funds from the VA for O?Neil?s tuition until October 2014. O?Neil was neither given a refund of this unused tuition, nor was he offered any method of transferring his credits to another school. Hence, not only had many dedicated hours of coursework and tuition gone to waste, but O?Neil was deprived of a signi?cant additional portion of his GI Bill bene?ts that the school wrongfully claimed despite the fact that it had refused to allow O?Neil to complete its program. Thus, O?Neil was summarily dismissed from Massage Therapy Program on a pre~ textual basis with no opportunity to respond, while VCHA continued to drain his hard- earned bene?ts for months after his departure. Despite Purposefullv Using the Prestige of National Accrediting and Certifying Bodies to Lure Students into its Massage Therapist Program, VCHA Was Not in Fact an Assigned 22. School by the Nor Was it Accredited After being dismissed from VCHA and realizing that his dream of becoming a licensed massage therapist was slipping away from him, O?Neil was crushed. To compound his sad state, in or about October 2014 O?Neil discovered that VCHA was not an assigned school of the nor was it accredited. COMPLAINT NJChUi-lhb-ll?23. After discovering that VCHA was neither an accredited school, nor an approved school of the as he had been led to believe, O?Neil felt deceived and ashamed. Moreover, he felt awful for his fellow students who had likely been similarly deceived by VCHA. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION VIOLATIONS OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 17500 (False Advertising) Against All Defendants 24. O?Neil re?alleges all paragraphs set forth above and incorporates them by reference as though they were fully set forth in this cause of action. 25. From a date unknown to O?Neil and continuing to the present, Defendants engaged in and continue to engage in acts or practices that constitute violations of California Business and Professions Code section 17500 et seq, by making or causing to be made untrue or misleading statements with the intent to directly or indirectly induce members of the public, including O?Neil, to enter into an obligation relating to Defendants? educational services. These statements are disseminated to and received by the public in California. 26. Defendants? untrue or misleading statements include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Defendants? statements that VCHA had approval from the the National Certi?cation Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork, via its website and statements made to students by its recruiters; and b. Defendants? statements that VCHA was ?accredited? which were made to students by its recruiters. 27. At the time the representations set forth above were made, Defendants knew, or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that the representations were untrue or misleading because Defendants lacked approval from the and were not accredited. -7- COMPLAINT 28. 29. Defendants? statements were misleading and untruthful and the statements actually deceived and harmed O?Neil. Further, the Defendants? statements were likely to deceive the public. O?Neil has been harmed in an amount to be determined at trial as a result of the above~ alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 17500 et seq. in that he has paid, in full, tuition costs and related fees to Defendants, who then failed to provide the promised educational services. O?Neil is entitled to enjoin Defendants? wrongful practices, and to obtain restitution for the monies paid to Defendants by reason of Defendants? unlawful conduct. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION VIOLATION OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 17200 (Unfair Competition) Against All Defendants 30. O?Neil re-alleges all paragraphs set forth above and incorporates them by reference as 31. 32. 33. though they were fully set forth in this cause of action. California Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. prohibits any unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice. Defendants? above?detailed actions and practices constitute unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business practices within the meaning of California Business and Professions Code section 17200 e! seq. Defendants have engaged in ?unlawful? business practices through the conduct set forth above, including misrepresenting to potential and current students that VCHA was accredited and approved by the These practices violated numerous provisions of law, including California Education Code section 94897(e) and and California Business Professions Code section 17500. Defendants? aforementioned conduct is ?unfair? because O?Neil materially relied upon Defendants? representations that VCHA was accredited and approved by the when he chose to enroll at VCHA. In reality, was not accredited, nor approved by the Furthermore, it was unfair for VCHA to dismiss O?Neil from its program -3- COMPLAINT U34. 35. 36. 3?7. 38. and then continue to make claims to the Veterans Administration for O?Neil?s education payments for months following his separation from the school. Defendants? business practices as described in this Complaint are ?fraudulent? in that Defendants knowingly withheld material information and made untrue and misleading statements about the accreditation status of VCHA, in. an effort to ensure continued enrollments in their educational programs and a guaranteed pro?t stream. Defendants? fraudulent, untrue or misleading statements and omissions include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Defendants? statements that VCHA had approval from the the National Certi?cation Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork; and b. Defendants? statements that VCHA was ?accredited.? In making and disseminating the above-alleged statements, Defendants knew, or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that the statements were unlawful, unfair and misleading in violation of California Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. Prospective students, like O?Neil, were deceived, or likely to be deceived, by the misinformation provided to and/or withheld from them by Defendants. Accordingly, O?Neil has suffered actual harm including, but not limited to, lost tuition, costs, expenses, and foregone future earnings as a result of Defendants? unscrupulous business practices in an amount to be proven at trial. The substantial harm suffered by O?Neil outweighs any benefit gained by Defendants through those practices. Defendants continue to engage in unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business practices that pose an ongoing threat to the public. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION Against All Defendants O?Neil re-alleges all paragraphs set forth above and incorporates them by reference as though they were fully set forth in this cause of action. -9- COMPLAINT scam 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. Defendants made numerous misrepresentations to O?Neil when marketing and selling the Massage Therapist Program prior to his decision to enroll at VCHA. For example, website speci?cally stated that VCHA was ?proud to have approval from the the National Certi?cation Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork,? despite that VCHA was not an assigned school of the Further, VCHA staff, such as Laiani KuSpa, speci?cally promised O?Neil that the school was an ?accredited? institution during a meeting she had with O?Neil just prior to his enrolling with VCHA. Further, VCHA included claims on its course materials that the school was approved by the In reality, these representations were false in that VCHA did not have approval by the nor was it accredited, at the time the statements were made. At the time these representations were made on the VCHA website and by its recruiters and staff, knew them to be false or made them recklessly and without regard for their truth as described above. When O?Neil enrolled in the Massage Therapist Program, Defendants knew they lacked the accreditation they claimed to possess, yet they continued to recruit and enroll O?Neil and other Massage Therapist Program students. Defendants intended that O?Neil and other prospective students rely on these misrepresentations and enroll in their Massage Therapist Program. O?Neil, unaware of the falsity of Defendants? misrepresentations and promises, reasonably believed them and relied on the truth of those representations and promises when evaluating the Massage Therapist Program and ultimately deciding to enroll in or about August 2013. O?Neil suffered damages, in an amount to be proven at trial, as a proximate result of Defendants? misrepresentations. Such damages include, but are not limited to, tuition, fees, and other costs. associated with the program, as well as, lost income. O?Neil?s reliance on the misrepresentations made by VCHA and its agents was a substantial factor in causing his harm. Defendants conduct described above was malicious, oppressive, and fraudulent. Defendants deliberately preyed on. relatively unsophisticated consumers of educational services and knew that their misrepresentations would wrongfully induce students, -10- COMPLAINT 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. including student veterans such as O?Neil suffering from severe service connected disabilities, to enroll at VCHA based upon the promises of approval and institutional accreditation when the school had no such approval or accreditation. Further, multiple corporate of?cers, directors, and/or managing agents of Defendants had knowledge of the misrepresentations, omissions, and falsehoods being propagated by website and authorized and/or rati?ed such representations and conduct. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION Against All Defendants O?Neil re?alleges all paragraphs set forth above and incorporates them by reference as though they were fully set forth in this cause of action. Defendants made numerous representations, as described above, to O?Neil when marketing and selling the Massage Therapist Program prior to his decision to enroll at VCHA. These representations were not true. Defendants made these guarantees about the Massage Therapist Program in a careless, reckless, or negligent manner, and with no reasonable basis for believing their representations to be true. Defendants intended that O?Neil rely on their representations and expected that as a result of that reliance, O?Neil would choose to enroll in the school and incur signi?cant expense to himself as a result. in reasonable reliance on Defendants? misrepresentations, O?Neil was induced to enroll at VCHA for the Massage Therapist Program. O?Neil was harmed and suffered damages, in an amount to be proven at trial, as a proximateresult of Defendants? misrepresentations. O?Neil?s reliance on Defendants representations was a substantial factor in causing his harm. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, O?Neil respectfully requests that judgment be entered in favor of O?Neil and against Defendants as follows: -11- COMPLAINT Jaw OOH-JON Date: /:20 IS.- For compensatory, general and special damages, and restitution together with interest at the maximum legal rate, until judgment is satis?ed, according to proof; . For punitive and exemplary damages; . That Defendants, their successors, agents, representatives, employees, assigns and all persons who act in concert with Defendants be permanently enjoined from making any untrue or misleading statements in violation of California Business and Professions Code section 17500 et seq, including from misrepresenting the accreditation status of VCHA, approval or lack thereof with the and from failing to fully disclose material facts related to Defendants? educational programs to the public, under the authority of California Business and Professions Code section 17535; . That Defendants, their successors, agents, representatives, employees, assigns and all persons who act in concert with Defendants be permanently enjoined from engaging in unfair competition as defined in California Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq, including from fraudulently misrepresenting to potential and current students that VCHA is accredited and that it is approved by the . For O?Neil?s costs and attorney?s fees pursuant to California Civil Procedure Code section 1021.5; . That O?Neil recover his costs of suit; . That the Court award such other further relief that it deems just and proper. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 15?h day of April, 2015. UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO LEGAL CLINICS Robert F. Muth Attorneys for Plaintiff -12- COMPLAINT