Does #1 and #2 v. Best Drug Rehabilitation, Inc. and Tranquility Detox

Plaintiffs names are confidential due to Doe #2 having been a minor child while attending the program. Doe #1, the parent, was fraudulently assured that Best Drug Rehabilitation was the only Michigan ' juveniles only' drug rehab program, after being told there were none in Indiana. The claims in this case against Best Drug Rehabilitation, Inc (BDR) and Tranquility Detox are for Fraud, Credit Card/Application Fraud, Unjust Enrichment, Breach of Contract, and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. There are 115 statements supporting the above claims, one more disturbing than the next, about the minor child attending Tranquility Detox and Best Drug Rehab, falsehoods told to the parent, and fraudulent actions taken by the defendants in order to make the sale. No one should have to go through what happened, much less a minor child and a caring and vulnerable parent. 2 names mentioned in the complaint are Darwin Dixon, the salesman, and Brian Basil, the interventionist Dixon referred the parent to. Read what they said and did to get the child to arrive. Also, read what happened at Tranquility Detox, then on the long drive from there to the Best Drug Rehab in program in Manistee, MI 2 days later; what was going on there, what the minor was made to deal with before he secretly called home, before BDR director Amber Howe assured the parent that the minor was not telling the truth and they have an 85% success rate. The next day, the minor finally walked away, found a phone, called his family to come get him and waited while they drove 7 hours to rescue him from the traumatic nightmare. This case was settled.

Read more »

Best Drug Rehabilitation v. Does 1, 2 & 3

This case demonstrates why one should never take the word of a rehab program representative that your insurance will cover the program claims. Especially the word of a Narconon or unbranded Narconon program representative, such as the one mentioned in the counter-claim against this lawsuit. Here, Plaintiff Best Drug Rehabilitation, Inc, an unbranded Narconon program, owned and operated by high level public scientologist Per Wickstrom, filed a collection type lawsuit in Virginia against 3 family members for 'Breach of Contract' and Unjust Enrichment. The defendants filed their response pro se, meaning without professionallegal representation, and included a counter-claim with accusations that we at Narconon Reviews have all come to see so often. Best Drug Rehabilitation, Inc. (BDR, as we tend to call it ) then attempted to squash the defendants' counterclaim by asserting they lacked jurisdiction in VA. Why? Because the contract they had signed stated that all disputes would be heard in the state of Michigan. We had to chuckle at the defendants' response. You will, too, I'm sure. In the end, Best Drug Rehabilitation, Inc. came to see they would get nowhere with this claim, and would be subject to an out-of-state-lawsuit that would expose their deceptive trade and program practices, causing a marketing nightmare should it go any further. Both parties agreed to end their cases by mutual dismissal of both lawsuits before the court. The order includes that the claims of both cases are permanently barred from being reheard by any court again. The documents are easy to read, explosive and damaging to BDR. They reflect sales and program practices and problems encountered, as mentioned in numerous Narconon and unbranded program lawsuits we have documented here at Narconon Reviews. The defendants' names, court location and complaint case number were already redacted when we received documents, but we are familiar with the case from the beginning, and want to thank those who assisted these victims address this lawsuit, particularly the diligent consumers in this case, the volunteer legal advisors who came to their aid and the referrers to them from Virginia and elsewhere. Please take a few minutes to read about professional concerns sent to us regarding what occurred in this case, others like it, and how to avoid being sued: Alert: Insurance Coverage & Collections Issues http://narcononreviews.net/narconon/insurance-covera…ollection-issues/

Read more »

Oberhansly v. ABLE; Narconon International; Narconon East US; Narconon Freedom Center; et. al.

Instead of a nice rehabilitation center, professional health care staff and counselors, and round-the-clock medical staffing, as promised by "Joe" the intake counselor at Narconon Freedom Center, when the Plaintiff arrived, she found dilapidated facilities which were cited by the Calhoun County Health Department for violations, a single nurse, and staff who had, for the most part, been recruited from former patients who had recently completed the Narconon program and were frequently "quarantined off" because of their continued use of alcohol and illegal drugs. You must read the entire complaint to get a full picture of life at Narconon Freedom Center.

Read more »

Currey v. Narconon Freedom Center; ABLE; Narconon EUS; Narconon Int.; et. al.

The plaintiff in this case alleges breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and consumer fraud. Despite promises to the contrary, Narconon Freedom Center failed to acquire preauthorization for the client's stay or to provide a physical exam. Other complaints include deceptive advertising and false representations about the program's success rates.

Read more »

McHenry v. Narconon Louisiana New Life Retreat; ABLE; Narconon EUS; Narconon Int.; et.al

The plaintiff in this case alleges that she found Narconon New Life Retreat (Narconon NLR) through an internet search that turned up www.non12-steprehabs.org. There she found a 1-800# and got connected to Lance at a fake referral service. Lance described himself as an 'independent' volunteer drug counselor and referred the plaintiff to Jeff Gordon at Narconon NLR.The usual bait and switch ensued. Plaintiff alleges she was promised a 76% success rate and extensive addiction counseling for her son. Instead, she claims, her son received Scientology doctrine and practices for which she paid $27,000. Note: NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Jeannette McHenry (Pendley, Patrick) (Entered: 03/11/2015)

Read more »

Nardella v. Narconon Fresh Start d/b/a Rainbow Canyon Retreat; ABLE; Narconon Int.; Narconon WUS; et. al.

The plaintiffs allege multiple material misrepresentations, civil conspiracy, consumer fraud, breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith/fair dealing, and more. Dianna Nardella specifically claims she was promised grief counseling for her son who was the lone survivor of a car accident in which three of his friends were killed. Narconon Fresh Start has admitted in previous lawsuits that the Narconon program does not include counseling.

Read more »

Prevec v. Narconon Freedom Center; ABLE; Narconon EUS; Narconon Int; et. al.

In this case, the plaintiff's allege, breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, consumer fraud, deceptive trade practices, among other claims. According to the Prevec family, Narconon Freedom Center's intake counselor, Donald Michalski, assured them of the program's 70% success rate. Janette Prevec was urged to make payment of $25,000 to NFC for her daughter's treatment by taking out two credit cards. Michalski assured Mrs. Prevec that she could pay off the cards when her health insurance reimbursed her for the entire cost of the program. After arriving at the center, plaintiffs met with Michalski and noticed some L. Ron Hubbard literature. When asked if the Narconon program was affiliated with Scientology, Michalski denied the connection. Additionally, the plaintiffs claim that Lauren Prevec was placed in detox without a medical assessment where her antidepressant was completely discontinued.

Read more »

Guidotti v. Narconon Gulf Coast, Inc.; Blu by the Sea, LLC; ABLE; Narconon Int.; Narconon EUS; et. al

The plaintiff in this case (Lucy Guidotti) found the website www.gulfcoastdrugrehab.com while conducting an internet search for an alcohol and drug rehab. She alleges this website was for Defendant Narconon Gulf Coast Rehab, although the website advertised the facility only as “Gulf Coast Addiction Treatment” and made no mention of Narconon. The website advertised a 90% success rate, a sauna program that reduced or eliminated drug cravings, individualized treatment, and cognitive behavioral therapy. Lucy called the number listed on the website and spoke to Deborah Ross who reiterated what was advertised on the website, but added that the facility had highly trained psychiatric specialists, a cure for panic attacks, and medical supervision at all times. Lucy paid $40,000 and entered treatment at Narconon Gulf Coast. After starting the program, Lucy claims she saw no highly trained psychiatric specialists, received no continuous medical supervision or cognitive behavioral therapy, and her panic attacks worsened. In fact, she left the program due to medical problems experienced during the sauna portion of the program. The plaintiff makes claims for relief under Civil RICO for Mail and Wire Fraud, Breach of Oral Contract, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Florida Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Misleading Advertising, Negligence, and Unjust Enrichment.

Read more »

Vairo v. Narconon Fresh Start d/b/a A Life Worth Saving, Inc; ABLE; Narconon Int. Narconon WUS

Through a 1-800 referral number, plaintiff Ken E. Vairo was recommended Narconon as a drug treatment program with the highest success rate for his son, Ken, Jr. Ken, Sr. was put in contact with Dan Carmichael who made several false representations about the success rate, benefits of the sauna and extensive addiction counseling provided by certified and licensed professionals, including medical personnel, he claims. Mr. Vairo paid $31,000 for the Narconon program, but alleges his son received no counseling for his addiction. Instead, he claims, his son was given scientology training routines and no medical oversight. The plaintiffs make claims for damages under federal wiretap violations, breach of contract, fraud, fraudulent concealment, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent misrepresentation, claims under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, unjust enrichment and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

Read more »

Henning and Tetreau v. Narconon Fresh Start, Sunshine Summit Lodge, ABLE, Narconon Int., Narconon WUS, et. al.

In January 2014, while searching for a rehabilitation facility for her daughter, Deanna Tetreau of Michigan came across a website that purported to be an independent referral service which was not independent from Narconon at all. From there, she was referred to a Narconon Fresh Start representative named Josh Penn, infamous now for making representations that the Narconon program provided drug counseling under the supervision of medical professionals, and that it was a scientifically proven method resulting in a success rate of over 70%. Plaintiffs signed the contract, paid for their Warner Springs location program called Sunshine Summit Lodge where Deanna's daughter Jennifer Henning began 'treatment' only to find that there was no counseling, only Scientology training. She was unable to complete the sauna component due to high doses Niacin triggering pancreatitis which the facility neglected to provide appropriate can and supervision of. The causes of action in this case are: Breach of Contract; Negligence; Fraud; Negligent Misrepresentation; Violations of non-competition law , violation of federal wiretapping, law among others.

Read more »