Howard v. Great Expectations

Class Claims

This is a class action lawsuit involving persons who purchased dating service contracts at any of the following California Great Expectations locations: Great Expectations Walnut Creek, Great Expectations Santa Clara, Great Expectations Sacramento, ZMM Group, in Orange County [Irvine], California and ZMM Group, II, which formerly operated in Upland, California.

The case was certified as a class action by the Alameda County Superior Court on November 27, 2007 and the class claims were tried on February 23, 2009 and September 11, 2009. The Court on February 23, 2009 held that class members were not entitled to receive back all the money they paid GE. The Court has not issued its decision yet as to the September 11, 2009 trial. At that trial we sought to give all class members the right to rescind their contracts and receive a refund of the amount paid and the reasonable value of the services provided.

The persons included in the class are those persons who purchased dating service contracts during the time period from November 14, 2002 through and including the following dates: Great Expectations Sacramento - February 6, 2006; Great Expectations Walnut Creek - February 6, 2006; ZMM Group (Orange County)- February 16, 2006; Great Expectations Sacramento - March 5, 2006; ZMM Group II, (Upland) - February 28, 2006.

All persons who entered into such contracts from November 2002 through November 15, 2005 are included in the class. Those persons who entered into such contracts after November 15, 2005 are included in the class if (1) your contract did not have an “Addendum” which stated your rights in the event you died, became disabled, or relocated more than 50 miles from the dating service center, or (2) your contract was for three years and you signed a dues authorization form or other documents obligating you to pay dues for the length of your contract. If you have any questions as to whether you are a class member, contact our office: evan@rgoldsteinlaw.com.

The lawsuit seeks to allow class members to void their contracts, if they wish to do so, and receive a refund because contracts before November 16, 2005 or contracts without the addendum which stated your rights in the event you died, became disabled, or relocated more than 50 miles from the dating service center violated Civil Code Section 1694.3 and Civil Code Section 1694.4(a) provides that dating service contracts which do not comply with the Dating Service Contract Act are void and unenforceable. Contracts within the class period which provided for the payment of dues for more than two years violated Civil Code Section 1694.2(d) and also provides a basis for voiding the contract under Civil Code Section 1694.4(a).

Separate Subclass Claims

The lawsuit also includes a separate subclass composed of those persons who entered into a contract with the Great Expectations Walnut Creek office at any time between March 1, 2003 and February 6, 2006 providing that you are also a member of the class as described above. A court-approved notice was sent to subclass members on December16, 2008.

These separate subclass claims involve: (1) representing there was a special first visit price if you purchased a membership on your first visit at Great Expectations when there was no standard price on which the first visit price was based; (2) misrepresenting the size, race, sex, age, education or occupation of the membership including that Great Expectations conducted criminal background checks when present information indicates that no such background checks were performed until the Summer of 2005; and (3) not disclosing the cost of additional photograph packages at the time the membership was sold and not disclosing that three different prices were charged for the same photographic package based upon the amount the subclass member paid for a membership.

Subclass claims also involve eavesdropping by Great Expectations on sales presentations without obtaining the consent of the prospective member for such eavesdropping. No trial date has been set for the subclass claims.

If you are a member of this proposed subclass and you have not received a subclass notice, please contact evan@rgoldsteinlaw.com.

If you have received the subclass notice, and would like to discuss your experiences with Great Expectations please e-mail evan@rgoldsteinlaw.com and we will send you an e-mail containing further information about this case.