Pa. sues a former Great Expectations franchise in King of Prussia over promises unfulfilled.
By Bonnie L. Cook
Inquirer Staff Writer
A former King of Prussia dating service lied to the lovelorn about the scope and cost of its matchmaking, then balked when the clients tried to end the relationship, according to a lawsuit filed yesterday by the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office.
In a civil action called "heartbreaking" by the prosecutor handling the case, Great Expectations, once based at 150 S. Warner Rd., was accused of raising false hopes for the lonely.
The 23-page complaint says the service, former owner Harold K. Cohen of Philadelphia, and former manager John Jack Ellis Jr. of Sewell told clients they had 175,000 potential matches available, hosted singles parties, and would arrange for professional photos and videos.
"Our success rate is 70 percent," the franchise advertised, according to court filings. "We had 300 marriages of members from our center last year alone!"
In fact, those promises were not met, says the suit filed in Montgomery County Court.
Contacted at home yesterday, Cohen said: "This is the first news I had about a lawsuit."
He said he had closed the King of Prussia office in July 2004. He would not say why.
Asked if he had inflated the number of dates available or misled clients about the success rate of the service, he said: "I didn't present anything. I had nothing to do with the members."
Ellis could not be reached for comment.
According to the suit, the pool of eligible singles was about 4,000 local members. There were no parties, and photos and videos were "grainy," prosecutors say.
Clients who paid $1,000 typically were fixed up with "zero to six dates" during the course of a one-year contract, said Barbara Petito, a spokeswoman for the Attorney General's Office.
Other services that clients thought were included in the membership package, such as access to other regional franchises of Great Expectations, were not included, the suit says, and the clients had to pay extra.
"Given the amount they were paying, this was oversold," Petito said.
When clients complained or tried to cancel their contracts, phone calls went unanswered, court papers said. Most clients came from Southeastern Pennsylvania, though a few were from South Jersey and Delaware. They paid $1,000 to $3,800 for memberships.
The infractions began as early as 2001, and complaints are still being received, Petito said.
One came from a 58-year-old Philadelphia high school teacher from South Jersey, who put $3,800 on her credit card and then was not allowed to cancel her two-year contract when she could not use the service, Petito said.
Severio P. Mirarchi, the deputy attorney general handling the case, said the lawsuit asks for $65,000 in restitution for 40 clients, plus civil penalties of $1,000 to $3,000 for each violation involving a client over age 60. Compounding the clients' financial losses, he said, were their feelings of disappointment about losing a chance at love.
"It's not like they bought a couch or something," he said. "This is an emotional issue."
In 2004, a Wichita, Kan., franchise of Great Expectations agreed to settle a state lawsuit for $215,000 for violating consumer protection laws.
Great Expectations could not be reached for comment.
To File a Complaint
Consumers who believe they are entitled to restitution from Great Expectations can file a complaint with the Bureau of Consumer Protection by calling 1-800-441-2555 in Pennsylvania or by visiting http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/
|