Neal Lyons L&W Investigations,Westboroough, Massachusetts Scam Lyons And Wolivar
Complaint
Fred
Country: United States
L&W Investigations is a private investigation franchise and business scam.
http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/LW-Investigations/Westboroough-Massachusetts-01581/LW-Investigations-LWI-Lyons-Wolivar-LW-Investigations-found-guilty-of-fraud-Neal-Ly-959136
http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Lyons-And-Wolivar-Investigation-L-W-Investigations/Westborough-Massachusetts-01581/L-W-Investigations-Lyons-Wolivar-Investigations-Neal-Lyons-This-company-is-franchi-440119
http://www.everyjoe.com/2008/07/03/work/franc ... investigations/
http://lyons-amp-wolivar-reviews.measuredup.c ... mer-Complaint-2
In certified public documents obtained from the Orange County Superior Court on Civil Case No. 06CC00692, Neal Lyons was sued by eleven (11) plaintiffs for fraud. The company settled this suit for fraud by paying $500,000.
We discovered public, certified court documents from this case showing that his prior business partner, Michael Wolivar gave his sworn Declaration on March 6, 2006, and stated "...it appeared to me that Lyons and others associated with the franchising operations of L&W (Stuart Larimer and Scott Crowell), were targeting individuals who lacked knowledge of the investigative services industry for potential franchisees. I think it was Lyons who quoted Barnum and Bailey, 'there's a sucker born every minute' in referring to the franchisees. Lyons and others were basically telling potential franchisees misleading information in order to sell a franchise. Lyon's sales tactics ranged from gross exaggeration to outright deception...I and others at the office became increasingly uncomfortable with the actions of Lyons, Larimer and Crowell."
He went on to say "Employees at Wolivar and Associates began to express concerns that L&W may becoming a 'Ponzi scheme'...Lyons threatened me with litigation if I disclosed certain information about L&W. One of Lyon's expressions was 'intimidate and litigate,' which I understood to refer to his course of action regarding franchisees."
Multiple pages from this Declaration spell out how Neal Lyons, Scott Crowell, and Stuart Larimer lied to potential franchise owners simply to get them to pay them their $100,000 or more to own a "turnkey" franchise.
In another lawsuit filed with the Orange County Superior Court Civil Department, documents showed in Case No. 30-2009-00120252-CU-BU-CJC, for Breach of Contract, the three plaintiffs' in this law suit alleged multiple counts of business and contract fraud associated with the sale and operation of franchises sold under the names Lyons & Wolivar and L&W Investigations.
This suit was filed against Neal Lyons, his wife, Anne [Kathy] Lyons, R. Scott Crowell, Mark Green, and Stuart Larimer. Multiple public documents were discovered showing that the company lost this case too.
In the Final Award found online, the arbitrator, Superior Court Judge, Hon. Haley J. Fromholz (Ret.) wrote "Neal Lyons, L&W's Chief Executive Officer and principal witness, conceded under oath that he had misstated his work and educational background on numerous occasions, including in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. As a result, his credibility was seriously compromised."
The judge went on to write and identify the multiple fraudulent statements and lies told to entice the plaintiff to purchase a franchise. The specifics pretty much mirror the sworn Declaration made by Mr. Lyon's prior business partner, Mike Wolivar in the prior case noted above where Mr. Wolivar swore under oath that pretty much everything that Neal Lyons and Scott Crowell told potential franchise buyers was false, misleading, and grossly exaggerated.
The judge went on to say "Mr. Lyons, L&W's CEO, was especially able to lead the Enterprise because he had graduated from the University of Nebraska and earned an MBA at Harvard, and that he had been the president of Van's, a shoe manufacturer. All of the representations were false."
The judge also pointed out "Michael Wolivar, a well known and successful private investigator, was involved with the daily operations of L&W and would participate in training. In fact, Mr. Wolivar had disassociated himself from L&W in 2003, and had done so, at least in part, because of what he believed to be unethical behavior on the part of L&W."
The judge also wrote "L&W had 150 national clients...In fact, L&W had a small fraction of 150 national clients..." He also said "L&W employed over 100 people who would support franchisees in marketing and business development efforts. In fact, L&W had 15 employees in 2005, and soon reduced that number."
In the judge's Final Award, the judge found "L&W's misstatements and omissions, detailed above, amount to fraud."
The final judgment was Certified in the Orange County Superior Court against this company by the Hon. James J. Di Cesare in the amount of $564,928.67.
In our research, we found multiple law suits filed by franchise owners, all claiming fraud and deception by Neal Lyons and Scott Crowell.
We could not find any evidence that these people or company is even licensed in the State of MA to operate as a private investigation firm. According the State, they must hold a valid license to operate and conduct business as investigators. It appears that the principals in this company have never been licensed as private investigators in the State of MA. In our research, we found that Neal Lyons may have fraudulently used another MA franchise owner's license, claiming that it was his, or the company's license whenever challenged or asked to provide a copy of their license. If this is true, this company has operated illegally for years, thus making any evidence presented to the courts inadmissable and also fraudulent.
Beware.
This company is bad news.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 10/23/2012 09:58 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/LW-Investigations/Westboroough-Massachusetts-01581/LW-Investigations-LWI-Lyons-Wolivar-LW-Investigations-found-guilty-of-fraud-Neal-Ly-959136. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/LW-Investigations/Westboroough-Massachusetts-01581/LW-Investigations-LWI-Lyons-Wolivar-LW-Investigations-found-guilty-of-fraud-Neal-Ly-959136
http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Lyons-And-Wolivar-Investigation-L-W-Investigations/Westborough-Massachusetts-01581/L-W-Investigations-Lyons-Wolivar-Investigations-Neal-Lyons-This-company-is-franchi-440119
http://www.everyjoe.com/2008/07/03/work/franc ... investigations/
http://lyons-amp-wolivar-reviews.measuredup.c ... mer-Complaint-2
In certified public documents obtained from the Orange County Superior Court on Civil Case No. 06CC00692, Neal Lyons was sued by eleven (11) plaintiffs for fraud. The company settled this suit for fraud by paying $500,000.
We discovered public, certified court documents from this case showing that his prior business partner, Michael Wolivar gave his sworn Declaration on March 6, 2006, and stated "...it appeared to me that Lyons and others associated with the franchising operations of L&W (Stuart Larimer and Scott Crowell), were targeting individuals who lacked knowledge of the investigative services industry for potential franchisees. I think it was Lyons who quoted Barnum and Bailey, 'there's a sucker born every minute' in referring to the franchisees. Lyons and others were basically telling potential franchisees misleading information in order to sell a franchise. Lyon's sales tactics ranged from gross exaggeration to outright deception...I and others at the office became increasingly uncomfortable with the actions of Lyons, Larimer and Crowell."
He went on to say "Employees at Wolivar and Associates began to express concerns that L&W may becoming a 'Ponzi scheme'...Lyons threatened me with litigation if I disclosed certain information about L&W. One of Lyon's expressions was 'intimidate and litigate,' which I understood to refer to his course of action regarding franchisees."
Multiple pages from this Declaration spell out how Neal Lyons, Scott Crowell, and Stuart Larimer lied to potential franchise owners simply to get them to pay them their $100,000 or more to own a "turnkey" franchise.
In another lawsuit filed with the Orange County Superior Court Civil Department, documents showed in Case No. 30-2009-00120252-CU-BU-CJC, for Breach of Contract, the three plaintiffs' in this law suit alleged multiple counts of business and contract fraud associated with the sale and operation of franchises sold under the names Lyons & Wolivar and L&W Investigations.
This suit was filed against Neal Lyons, his wife, Anne [Kathy] Lyons, R. Scott Crowell, Mark Green, and Stuart Larimer. Multiple public documents were discovered showing that the company lost this case too.
In the Final Award found online, the arbitrator, Superior Court Judge, Hon. Haley J. Fromholz (Ret.) wrote "Neal Lyons, L&W's Chief Executive Officer and principal witness, conceded under oath that he had misstated his work and educational background on numerous occasions, including in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. As a result, his credibility was seriously compromised."
The judge went on to write and identify the multiple fraudulent statements and lies told to entice the plaintiff to purchase a franchise. The specifics pretty much mirror the sworn Declaration made by Mr. Lyon's prior business partner, Mike Wolivar in the prior case noted above where Mr. Wolivar swore under oath that pretty much everything that Neal Lyons and Scott Crowell told potential franchise buyers was false, misleading, and grossly exaggerated.
The judge went on to say "Mr. Lyons, L&W's CEO, was especially able to lead the Enterprise because he had graduated from the University of Nebraska and earned an MBA at Harvard, and that he had been the president of Van's, a shoe manufacturer. All of the representations were false."
The judge also pointed out "Michael Wolivar, a well known and successful private investigator, was involved with the daily operations of L&W and would participate in training. In fact, Mr. Wolivar had disassociated himself from L&W in 2003, and had done so, at least in part, because of what he believed to be unethical behavior on the part of L&W."
The judge also wrote "L&W had 150 national clients...In fact, L&W had a small fraction of 150 national clients..." He also said "L&W employed over 100 people who would support franchisees in marketing and business development efforts. In fact, L&W had 15 employees in 2005, and soon reduced that number."
In the judge's Final Award, the judge found "L&W's misstatements and omissions, detailed above, amount to fraud."
The final judgment was Certified in the Orange County Superior Court against this company by the Hon. James J. Di Cesare in the amount of $564,928.67.
In our research, we found multiple law suits filed by franchise owners, all claiming fraud and deception by Neal Lyons and Scott Crowell.
We could not find any evidence that these people or company is even licensed in the State of MA to operate as a private investigation firm. According the State, they must hold a valid license to operate and conduct business as investigators. It appears that the principals in this company have never been licensed as private investigators in the State of MA. In our research, we found that Neal Lyons may have fraudulently used another MA franchise owner's license, claiming that it was his, or the company's license whenever challenged or asked to provide a copy of their license. If this is true, this company has operated illegally for years, thus making any evidence presented to the courts inadmissable and also fraudulent.
Beware.
This company is bad news.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 10/23/2012 09:58 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/LW-Investigations/Westboroough-Massachusetts-01581/LW-Investigations-LWI-Lyons-Wolivar-LW-Investigations-found-guilty-of-fraud-Neal-Ly-959136. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Comments
NEAL LYONS ELECTED TO MDSC (Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress) BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Westborough, MA. – (March 18, 2006) – L & W Investigations, Inc., a Lyons & Wolivar Company, a leading private investigations firm, today announced that Neal Lyons CEO/Chairman of Lyons & Wolivar, Inc. was elected to the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress on Saturday the 18th of March at the annual meeting of its members held at the DCU convention center in Worcester, MA.
Mr. Lyons was nominated by Brian Skotko of the Harvard Medical School and the Harvard John F Kennedy School of Government. “I am very honored to be part of such a great organization. I look forward to helping MDSC achieve their goals.” (Neal Lyons)
The mission of the MDSC is to enhance, on a continuous basis, the lives of individuals with Down syndrome through the education and support of people with Down syndrome, their families, their friends, their teachers and the community as a whole. To ensure individuals are valued, included and live fulfilling lives in the community.
About L & W Investigations, Inc.
L & W, a Lyons & Wolivar Company, is a private investigations firm specializing in insurance investigations and surveillance. L & W has developed a national network of offices with a reputation for investigating the tough cases. L & W has achieved success by constantly striving for excellence in their specialty and not being distracted by other types of investigations and services.
For more information about L & W, visit www.lwinvestigations.com.
• 3 years ago
−
Neal Lyons and his lackey Scott Crowell are still lying about the margins of the business, the status of lawsuits brought by multiple franchisees (many times in the same state), and selling franchises fraudulently. If you have any information, please join the class action suit that is currently in development against L&W Investigations, Neal Lyons and Scott Crowell.
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
MassDAInvestigator
• 3 years ago
−
By putting potatoes on a car, one is committing a crime known as entrapment and any useful video derived from the investigation would not be considered by a reasonable judge.
If you have ever done investigative work, you will recall that there is a significant amount of conversation between client and investigator. In addition, there is a policy agreement which defines action/reaction based on different scenarios (e.g., been out 4 hours and not seen claimant - should I break off and come back the next day, keep watching, guess where they may be, etc.), so, unless the investigator is unethical, extra time would not be billed despite the apparent ease of doing so.
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Bruce
• 3 years ago
−
Rod,
I have also been considering a franchise with L&W. Any honest insight you can provide is appreciated. Thanks and God Bless.
Bruce
dbloh8@gmail.com
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Larry
• 4 years ago
−
Please provide information related to L&W as I have been considering a franchise with L&W.
Your attorneys advised you to stop postin on the internet but not from providing reliable information to potential franchisees.
Thank you,
Larry Tippner
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
nosgas
• 4 years ago
−
Wow, Dodged a bullet there, Thanks
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
LWI Litigation
• 4 years ago
−
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Neal Lyons, LWI, Inc. (508) 616-9370, neall@lwinvestigations.com
L&W INVESTIGATIONS, LYONS & WOLIVAR, LWI, INC. SUED IN FEDERAL COURT BY IT’S OWN INSURANCE COMPANY FOR MISREPRESENTATION!
DATELINE: WESTBOROUGH, MA...Neal R. Lyons, CEO of LWI, Inc. aka Lyons & Wolivar and L & W Investigations was SUED in UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS by its own Errors & Emissions Insurance Company, NAVIGATORS SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY on June 5, 2009.
For more information, please contact the attorneys for the plaintiff directly:
Katherine L. Kenny, Esquire
BBO#637304
PEABODY & ARNOLD LLP
Federal Reserve Plaza
600 Atlantic Avenue
Boston, MA 02210
(617) 951-2100
(617) 951-2125 (facsimile)
Richard A. Simpson
WILEY REIN LLP
1776 k Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 719-7000
(202) 719-7049 (facsimile)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
__________________________________
NAVIGATORS SPECIALTY INSURANCE )
COMPANY, )
Plaintiff, )
v. ) Case No. 1:09-cv-10958
LYONS & WOLIVAR, INC., LWI, INC., )
NEAL LYONS, R. SCOTT CROWELL, )
STUART LARIMER, ANNE LYONS, )
MARK W. GREEN, STEVEN S. BUTLER, )
STEPHEN D. HALE, RICHARDSON )
BRADSHAW UNZ, NORTHERN )
CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIVE )
SERVICES, LLC, WN HOLDINGS, LLC, )
MICHAEL GIERE, MCG ENTERPRISES, )
INC., and BRETT SAMPSON, )
Defendants. )
______________________________________ )
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND
TO RESCIND CERTAIN INSURANCE POLICY
Navigators Specialty Insurance Company (“Navigators”), for its Complaint for
Declaratory Judgment and to Rescind Certain Insurance Policy, alleges on knowledge, information and belief as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. Navigators files this action to obtain a judicial determination and declaration as to the parties’ rights and obligations under Miscellaneous Professional Liability Insurance Policy No. NY08MPL464728NC originally issued by Navigators to Lyons & Wolivar, Inc. (“Lyons & Wolivar” or the “Firm”) for the policy period April 1, 2008 to April 1, 2009 with the policy period later extended by endorsement to May 15, 2009 (the “Policy”). A true and correct copy of the Policy is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. An actual and justiciable controversy has arisen and now exists relating to the parties’ respective rights, duties and obligations under the Policy.
3. In particular, Navigators seeks a declaratory judgment (i) that Navigators is entitled to rescind the Policy because of material misrepresentations in the application for the Policy submitted by Lyons & Wolivar; (ii) that there is neither coverage for nor a duty to defend any insured against any claims tendered under the Policy, and in particular for claims asserted in connection with the Butler claim, the WN Holdings claim, the Giere claim and the Sampson matter noticed under the Policy as Claim Nos. MPL176456, MPL176740, MPL176965 and MPL177024, respectively; and (iii) that Navigators is entitled to recover amounts paid in settlement and defense costs in connection with claims tendered for coverage under the Policy.
PARTIES
4. Plaintiff Navigators is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York and its principal place of business in New York, New York. Navigators legally transacts insurance business in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and within the geographical jurisdiction of this Court.
5. Defendant Lyons & Wolivar is a corporation organized under the laws of the
State of California, with its principal place of business at 112 Turnpike Road, Suite 301, Westborough, Massachusetts 01581. Lyons & Woliver merged into LWI, Inc. (“LWI”) on or about January 21, 2009.
6. Defendant LWI is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business at 112 Turnpike Road, Suite 301, Westborough, Massachusetts 01581. (Cont)
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Carol Cross
• 4 years ago
−
Apparently, this June 1st Press Release by NRL (Neil Lyons) is a legal means of protecting the franchisor and permitting him to continue to legally sell franchises in the other States and localities where the sale of this franchise has NOT been barred by the action of the State regulators?
Hopefully, all prospective buyers of this franchise find the negative comments and Press Releases among the thousands of positive Press Releases and Comments about L&W Franchise.
If I remember correctly, this particular franchise opportunity was conceived around a dinner table and two retired FBI officers were original members of its Board of Directors but jumped ship when they "smelled" fraud in the air.
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
NRL
• 4 years ago
−
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Neal Lyons, LWI, Inc. (508) 616-9370, neall@lwinvestigations.com
L&W INVESTIGATIONS, LYONS & WOLIVAR, LWI, INC.
DENIED ABILITY TO SELL FRANCHISES IN CALIFORNIA!
DATELINE: WESTBOROUGH, MA...Neal R. Lyons, CEO of LWI, Inc. aka Lyons & Wolivar and L & W Investigations was DENIED the legal authorization to market any franchise offering within the State Of California. California Department of Corporations has DENIED Lyons renewal application indefinitely due to their extremely poor financial condition.
For more information, please contact the California Department of Corporations directly at 866-275-2677.
Lyons is also facing catastrophic lawsuits from victim Franchisee’s across North America. Neal Lyons continues his attempt to Market Franchises to the Trusting and Ill-informed Consumer.
On April 10, 2009, Utah Plaintiff B. Sampson filed a lawsuit in the
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT, WASHINGTON COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH.
Citing the following;
1. BREACH OF CONTRACT;
2. UNJUST ENRICHMENT;
3. BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING;
4. FRAUD.
On April 8, 2009, Virginia Plaintiff M. Giere and MCG Enterprises, Inc. filed a lawsuit in the CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF FAIRFAX VIRGINIA.
Case number 2009-05161 citing the following;
1. VIOLATION OF VIRGINIA RETAIL FRANCHISING ACT;
2. FRAUD;
3. FRAUDULENT SUPPRESSION OF FACT;
4. UNLAWFUL OFFERS;
5. FALSE PROMISE;
6. PROHIBITED PRACTICES;
7. BREACH OF CONTRACT;
9. UNJUST ENRICHMENT.
On March 19, 2009, California Plaintiff’s S. Butler, S. Hale, R. Unz and Northern California Investigative Services, LLC.
Filed a Breach of Contract lawsuit alleging the following;
1. VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE INVESTMENT LAW;
2. VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE INVESTMENT LAW;
3. INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION;
4. NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION;
5. FALSE PROMISE;
6. FRAUDULENT SUPPRESSION OF FACT;
7. UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES;
8. BREACH OF CONTRACT;
9. BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
10. UNJUST ENRICHMENT
On March 26, 2009, Nevada Plaintiff’s D. Walker and WN Holdings, LLC. Filed similar charges in the DISTRICT COURT OF CLARK COUNTY NEVADA.
Case number 09-A-583714. Original filings may be viewed at:
http://courtgate.coca.co.clark...
Neal Lyons, President / Treasurer, Anne Lyons, Secretary / Director,
Scott Crowell, Director, Mark Green, Director and Stuart Larimer are named in these suits.
For the most up to date comprehensive information, contact each independent franchise owner directly. BUYER BEWARE! “DUE YOUR DUE DILIGENCE”
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Carol Cross
• 4 years ago
−
We can see that Mr. Lyons is very comfortable in his legal position and it was nice of him to make sure that the lawsuits against him appear on the Franchise Pick Site. He is, of course, innocent until found guilty.
Apparently, because there are 24,000 Search Results under L&W Franchise, and only one or two of them are negative, Mr. Lyons is very comfortable in reporting the lawsuits against him and his recent move to Nevada on Franchise Pick. The law of averages provides that only a few of the investigating prospective franchisees will find the negative comments in their due diligence searches among 23,998 POSITIVE press releases and articles about L&W that are now on the Internet and that are permitted and protected under the FTC Rule.
It can never be said that Mr. Lyons is trying to hide his track record as far as lawsuits are concerned, and I'm sure he intends to use his "transparency" to his advantage in these lawsuits.
People like Mr. Lyons have been what has made franchising so successful these past thirty years!
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
NRL
• 4 years ago
−
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Neal Lyons, LWI, Inc. (508) 616-9370, neall@lwinvestigations.com
L&W Investigations, Lyons & Wolivar, LWI, Inc. SUED by Virginia Franchisee!
Neal Lyons is now facing numerous lawsuits from across the nation!
DATELINE: WESTBOROUGH, MA...Neal R. Lyons, CEO of LWI, Inc. aka Lyons & Wolivar and L&W Investigations is facing another lawsuit from an unhappy Franchisee out of Virginia.
On April 8, 2009, Virginia Plaintiff M. Giere and MCG Enterprises, Inc. filed a lawsuit in the CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF FAIRFAX VIRGINIA.
Case number 2009-05161 citing the following;
1. VIOLATION OF VIRGINIA RETAIL FRANCHISING ACT;
2. FRAUD;
3. FRAUDULENT SUPPRESSION OF FACT;
4. UNLAWFUL OFFERS;
5. FALSE PROMISE;
6. PROHIBITED PRACTICES;
7. BREACH OF CONTRACT;
9. UNJUST ENRICHMENT.
L&W Investigations, Lyons & Wolivar, LWI, Inc. are also facing three plaintiff’s in California, Two plaintiffs in Nevada, One Plaintiff in Utah and several more in the works from across the nation according to sources close to the struggling franchise. Neal Lyons, Anne Lyons, Scott Crowell, Mark Green and Stuart Larimer are named in these suits.
BUYER BEWARE!
"DUE YOUR DUE DILIGENCE"
www.lwinvestigations.wordpress...
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
(Not) N. Lyons
• 4 years ago
−
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Neal Lyons, LWI, Inc. (508) 616-9370, neall@lwinvestigations.com
Lyons & Wolivar, Inc. DISSOLVED! LWI, Inc. emerges as Neal Lyons seeks refuge under the Nevada Corporations Code as it is now facing numerous lawsuits from across the nation!
DATELINE: WESTBOROUGH, MA...Neal R. Lyons, CEO of LWI, Inc. aka Lyons & Wolivar and L & W Investigations has dissolved its 2002 parent California Corporation.
On January 21, 2009, Lyons & Wolivar, Inc. was “merged out” as a California Corporation and is now identified as LWI, Inc. a Nevada Corporation.
It is currently reported that there are three plaintiffs in California, Two plaintiffs in Nevada and several more in the works to be filed next week from across the nation according to sources close to the franchise. Neal Lyons, Anne Lyons, Scott Crowell, Mark Green and Stuart Larimer are named in these suits.
On March 19, 2009, California Plaintiff’s S. Butler, S. Hale, R. Unz and Northern California Investigative Services, LLC.
Filed a Breach of Contract lawsuit alleging the following;
1. VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE INVESTMENT LAW;
2. VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE INVESTMENT LAW;
3. INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION;
4. NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION;
5. FALSE PROMISE;
6. FRAUDULENT SUPPRESSION OF FACT;
7. UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES;
8. BREACH OF CONTRACT;
9. BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
10. UNJUST ENRICHMENT
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE. Case number 30-2009-00120252-CU-BC-CJC.
Original filings may be viewed at https://ocapps.occourts.org/Ci...
And searched by case number or parties by name.
On March 26, 2009, Nevada Plaintiff’s D. Walker and WN Holdings, LLC. Filed similar charges in the DISTRICT COURT OF CLARK COUNTY NEVADA.
Case number 09-A-583714. Original filings may be viewed at:
http://courtgate.coca.co.clark...
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Neal Lyons
• 4 years ago
−
DATELINE: WESTBOROUGH, MA...Neal Lyons, CEO of LWI, Inc. aka Lyons & Wolivar and L & W Investigations, Inc. is facing numerous lawsuits filed in multiple states. Neal Lyons, Anne Lyons, Scott Crowell, Mark Green and Stuart Larimer are named in these suits.
It is currently reported that there are at least three plaintiff’s in California, Two plaintiffs in Nevada and several more in the works across the nation according to sources close to the struggling franchise.
On March 19, 2009, California Plaintiff’s S. Butler, S. Hale, R. Unz and Northern California Investigative Services, LLC.
Filed a Breach of Contract lawsuit.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE. Case number 30-2009-00120252-CU-BC-CJC.
Original filings may be viewed at https://ocapps.occourts.org/Ci...
And searched by case number or parties by name.
On March 26, 2009, Nevada Plaintiff’s D. Walker and WN Holdings, LLC. Filed similar charges in the DISTRICT COURT OF CLARK COUNTY NEVADA.
Case number 09-A-583714. Original filings may be viewed at:
http://courtgate.coca.co.clark...
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Sean Kelly
• 5 years ago
−
I have faith that you would not market a bad franchisor with high failure rates of first generation franchisees and low profitability or no profitability for a large percentage of the system.
I would not and have not. That's the good news, Carol. I've been able to work in this industry for 20 years and have not had trouble finding plenty of franchisors who were honestly seeking to succeed via win-win relationships.
I've written 100+ franchise brochures and have never included illegal earnings claims or promises of success.
That's why I object to the broad brush with which you paint all franchisors. The rules are definitely one-sided, but many don't abuse it. The ones who do should be outed and held accountable.
I believe, however, that the L&W franchisee had the courage of his convictions and was angry because the “law” had already been used against him to try to silence him...
I think there's a difference between "rage" and "courage." The franchisee violated the trust that others put in him by posting private correspondence without permission. He disregarded his wife's and attorney's pleas. In the end, I believe his approach will prove ineffective as well as selfish.
...this is a declaration of war and the only gun he had with which to fight back was the gun of “free speech.”
I sure hope that's true.
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
Sometimes the loose cannons fire right on target --- a bullseye.
And, of course we are always afraid of law suits because we are told that they are "crap shoots" and that your case is only as good as your lawyer ---- and that those with the greater financial resources will defeat you through the use of law and process and procedure. I don't fault DH for trying to duck a lawsuit.
I believe, however, that the L&W franchisee had the courage of his convictions and was angry because the "law" had already been used against him to try to silence him, and because he was a servant of the law for so many years, this was especially repugnant to him. Any time a court puts a lien on your house to get his legal services paid for, this is a declaration of war and the only gun he had with which to fight back was the gun of "free speech."
You know, I'm sure that the ABA had a special session in their Franchise Law Seminar to discuss the use of SLAPP suits to silence franchisees on the Internet who may be warning off prospective buyers of franchises. They are looking for a way to silence franchisees and not run afoul of the anti-SLAPP legislation passed in states like California.
I know it is necessary for you to retain your neutrality and to allow discussion from both sides of the dispute but of course the franchisors want no discussions at all on the Internet, and prefer to let the Arbitrators settle these matters. These matters, then, more often than not are settled by arbitrators who are perfectly aware of the intent and purpose of the FTC Rule and who probably never find that the franchisor is guilty of fraud. It would be interesting to know whether a franchisor has ever been found guilty of fraudulent inducement/fraudulent cealment by an arbitrator in the almost 30 years since the FTC was promulgated under the guise of protecting the purchasers of franchises and disclosing the risk to them.
The Supreme Court has rulled that the Federal Arbitration Act is supreme and that it is the arbitrators who have the responsibility under the law to determe whether or not there is a fraudulent inducement to contract when arbitration is a mandated term of the binding non-negotiable contract, and the arbitration agreement is constitutional (whatever this means!)
The malicious trap of the franchise agreement is tightened even more in support of federal regulatory policy but the courts can't keep the class actions and the mass actions from coming into the courts for final disposition because there has to be an appearance that franchisees have an access to justice under the current status quo of regulation and the law surrounding franchising.
Thnk you Sean Kelly from not barring my computer from your site and allowing me to tell my truth to the franchisees who post and read on Franchise Pick.
I'm happy, Sean, that you aren't an attorney and that I don't offend you or interfer with your goal which appears to be to try to save prospects from bad franchises and direct them to franchises where there do have an opportunity, perhaps, to get a good job and profits as well. I have faith that you would not market a bad franchisor with high failure rates of first generation franchisees and low profitability or no profitability for a large percentage of the system.
Thank you!
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Sean Kelly
• 5 years ago
−
Carol:
I'm inclined to cut DH some slack on this one. The wording "I would like to make this formal apology..." smacks of an apology made under duress and threat of legal action. I read lots of them on the Cuppy's complaints on rip-off report and it has a familiar ring. Odds are the wording was supplied to DH. My guess is that he's a former employee who would like nothing more than to ring in the new year with L&W being a distant memory. Let's hope he's off the hook with this apology.
The line This post was created and maintained by a former franchise owner, who... set out to defame L&W Investigations, Inc for his own personal gain... is indeed unfortunate as this failed franchisee, IMHO, is far from being in the vicinity of "personal gain." I don't think personal gain is in the cards for said franchisee.
As much as it appeared that this franchisee had some valid complaints, and as unfortunate as his situation was, he brought some of this on himself. He posted private emails sent in confidence by DH in public. He did the same to me, except that he changed wording and mischaracterized assertions and opinions with little regard for accuracy. His wife, attorney and blog-host (me) tried to reason with him but he was hellbent on making things easy for his adversaries.
Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor... Hopefully the franchisee has learned that.
And hopefully the franchisor will realize that addressing franchisee concerns early on, honestly and fairly, is more advantageous and cheaper than damage control and $400 an hour attorneys. The next guy might not be such a loose cannon.
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
And just who are you, DH? And whose fish are you frying? Are you a current and very successful franchisee of L&W or what?
The former franchise owner you are talking about did post comments and offiocial statements on Fanchise Pick to substantiate his free speech rights to complain that he was defrauded and that no official law enforcement agency would take, let alone investigate, his complaint.
This is "especially" a matter of public interest because the former complaining franchisee was an honorable member of law enforcement for over 23 years, until he was forced into retirement by MS. He and former FBI law enforcement officers, who gave statements, believed that there had been incidents that indicated that fraudulent misrepresentations may have been made to by L&W Their sworn statements appeared on this site and then were removed.
L&W had ample opportunity to disprove and to counter the complaints and statements on this free speech site but instead they chose to file a SLAPP suit against this former franchisee to frighten him and silence him and to gain an unfair advantage.
The owner of this site, Sean Kelly, was then in the position of feeling that he had to remove the comments from this site "Franchise Pick" because he couldn't afford to be involved in a SLAPP lawsuit.
I would suggest that Sean remove your apology that appears to be a sincere effort to smear the franchisee who posted on this site, but I recognize that you have a right to free speech and to apologize to whomever you like on this "free speech" site.
The franchisors are upset that the Internet sites like Franchise Pick, Blue Mau Mau, Franchise Chat, and others are being used to bring a voice to franchisees who feel that they are being defrauded under the status quo of law and the regulation of the industry of franchising and who want to warn others as a public service.
Regards!
Carol
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
DH
• 5 years ago
−
I would like to make this formal apology to L&W Investigations, Inc. Recently there had been a rather large post regarding this company, its practices, and possible fraudulent acts upon franchisees both past and present. This post was created and maintained by a former franchise owner, who, by use of his own one sided methods and opinions, set out to defame L&W Investigations, Inc for his own personal gain. Within this post were a few damaging and unfair statements which were directed towards L&W Investigations, Inc – the company, its staff, and CEO. Statements which were meant to remain between myself and the above mentioned former franchise owner, but were then modified to fit the needs of the poster and his attack on the company. L&W Investigations, Inc is a growing, reputable company providing superior service and practices to the Insurance Fraud industry. They build and cultivate professional relationships with their clients, and stand by their work in the field of fraud investigations.
My sincerest apologies to Neal Lyons, Scott Crowell, Vincent Famador, and Edward Fidler of L&W Investigations, Inc Corporate Office for any damages or decrease in productivity that this post and slanderous, unfair statements contained within, may have caused.
Regards,
DH
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Hayne Dwowser DH
• 3 years ago
−
You tell them, Hayne!
I wonder who this person could be?
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
Ron --You were so convinced because of your police training that you were looking at common law felony fraud ---and wanted to get your money back for yourself and the other two franchisees. You just couldn't believe that they could get away with selling "territories" that had no value through the mispresentation of the value in the sales process, and by using retired FBI agents as shills, and faking investigations through the use of family members.
You couldn't have known that the Federal Government, the FTC, used its power under the Commerce Act to take the franchisors out from under the jurisdiction of State laws governing common law fraud for the purpose of protecting them from claims of fraudulent inducement to contract from failed franchisees - who would not get true disclosure of the risks involved in the sales process or in the mandated government disclosure document, the UFOC/FDD.
You played "tough cop" in an effort to negotiate a settlement with them, but they knew that they had your signature on the contract, and that they were protected by their airtight contract under federal regulatory policy. They believe that they will win in any arbitration because the arbitrators uphold federal regulatory policy. (Look at the Coffee Beanery Case)
Franchisors have immediate access to the courts to "terminaste" franchisees and are sure of their power in the courts to legally appropriate the assets of their failed franchisees, whenever they are inclined to do so. The franchisors are encouraged by the state of the law to experiment with the money and the cheap labor provided by franchisees to grow their systems and maximize their profits.
Obviously, the two retired FBI agents knew it looked like fraud and wanted to get out from under, but it is hard to understand why the FBI didn't ask the FTC Investigators to take a look at your case, and the sworn statements of the retired FBI agents. Apparently, when franchisors get "small" amounts like $100,000 from franchisees, this is not big time theft, and rationalized as "serving the public good" if the franchisor can stand up some units in the economy, as has L&W. 50 x $100,000 and royalties as well aint bad! Who says "crime doesn't pay?"
So much for the rule of law. Hang in there and know that your warning will help others. At least the franchisors can't appropriate our First Amendment Rights and silence us on the Internet.
Carol
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
Yes! when some franchisors know they have a license to lie, cheat, and steal with apparent immunity under our laws, this is what they do.
There are always members of the BAR standing by to help them at $350.00 an hour, and up. How obscene!
When the Federal Government decided to redefine the crime of fraud as a special favor to the franchisors, did they know that they would be creating monsters and Sgt. Stainbutts, and encouraging fraud in the industry.
It just galls me that the SBA backs this kind
thievery and that the banks and lenders were not doing any due diligence on the franchisors and making "business" loans on home equities with no investigation of the risk ---because the collateral was so good. Sharon's good credit rating got her into trouble.
Because "the powers that be" determined that franchising couldn't stand if the truth of the risk was disclosed by the franchisor to a new buyer, and because the "powers that be" determined that franchisees who failed could not be allowed to take down the franchisor and the franchisees who succeeded, the law was perverted, in my opinion, to attain the goal of stimulating the economy and providing "new" job numbers. This was done at the expense of tricking prospective buyers of franchises into signing away their due process rights and sending them into arbitration where federal regulatory policy would be upheld by the arbitrators.
Your story, Rod, demonstrates the process by which franchisors, who are so inclined, do lie, cheat, and steal, knowing that mandated arbitration and blocked franchisee access to the courts and their boilerplate contracts wrapped in multiple pages of government disclosure will protect them.
Happy that Sharon worked through her losses and I'm sure that she told the truth to any franchisee prospects who contacted her.
Did you know, Rod, that in the FTC Guide Book Franchisees, they warned that franchisors sometimes buy good references from franchisees to hook the new buyers but this apparently is not fraud or against the law.
Carol
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
In your search for justice, you found out that most attorneys have very little respect for the "spirit of the law." Attorneys use the "law" as product to sell to the highest bidders and are always working for themselves, and their clients, probably in that order, while protecting themselves under the letter of the law.
The lawyer doesn't commit purjury if he uses sworn statements, affidavits, or depositions that he, of course, doesn't have to know are purjured when he addresses the court. I'm afraid they do this much of the time knowing that their clients are never going to admit that they purjured themselves.
In my opinion, this was malicious use of process to silence you! He was paid to silence you and he used law and process to achieve his ends. The judge found his request for a restraining order and the sworn statements to be in order and granted the restraining order. The Judge probably never looked at YOUR statement that should be part of the PUBLIC record in his court.
It was so easy to put a lien on your house; and they knew that this would frighten your wife and they knew that you had MS and that this would push you to the wall.
Uncle Sam protects franchisors and has redefined common law fraud on their behalf in the effort to encourage franchisors to start businesses and stimulate the economy. They had to redefine common law fraud in terms of the FTC Rule to do this. You are trying to take on public policy and an ugly status quo.
Most of this bad stuff is hidden because of mandated arbitration in which the franchisor maintains his superior position because of the contract the franchisee has signed. Bob Baber, of Quiznos, who shot himself two years ago, come Nov. 27th, was driven to the wall.
At least, Rod, you are trying to shine some light on this sad state of affairs, and I imagine L&W, even now, are trying to figure out how to silence you. Their ususal tactics haven't worked. You are still like Rooster ----you have fight left. You have the Internet.
Rod! You are not just fighting L&W. You are fighting the BIG Industry of Franchising that depends on tricking good faith Mom and Pop franchisees into parting with their hard earned savings to finance the franchisor's venture into the econmy.
I admire you and I hope that your story will save others and perhaps even make law enforcement look at this ugly regulatory policy that permits and/or encourages common law fraud and much pain and suffering in the ranks of the people.
Carol
.
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
Apparently, Ron! the checks and balances intended to protect the people are not working for franchisee prospects, who are just "meat to eat" under the current status quo of the law and the FTC Rule.
The Judiciary Committees in the House and the Senate know what is going on!
Until we, as destroyed franchisees, understand and recognize the "constructive fraud" of a deceiving and ineffective government disclosure document and a binding and adhesory franchise agreement that are packaged together in the sales process, we keep looking for relief in the law. Our sense of justice is outraged when we realize you have been "tricked" by the system.
When the three branches of government cooperate to protect public policy as promulgated by our elected officials, the rule of law is the servant of the public policy that is influenced by the special interests, who gain from the "public policy."
I think attorneys have tried to use RICO against franchisors but haven't been successful becasuse apparently the FTC Rule together with the definition of "legal fraud" protects franchisors against RICO charges as well.
I read where the franchisors sometimes tried to use the RICO statutes against franchisees who would organize against them --as a warning and a threat. The franchisors have all of the power and the resources and immediate access to the courts when they want to destroy franchisees. This is by design.
We have thirty years of case law built up that protects the franchisors, and with every year that goes by, they feel more enabled and powerful because they are free to commit common law fraud with immunity under the law. The definition of "legal fraud" is expanded in case law and even our Supreme Court comes down on the side of the franchisors.
The FBI and local law enforcement apparently have no authority under the law to interfer with federal regulatory policy. This policy has been a demonstrated in the thirty years of case law concerning franchising that has been developed since the FTC used its power to take franchisors out from under the common law fraud statutes of the states.
The FTC Rule, in effect, implies that there is no fraudulent inducement to contract or material concealment unless the FTC Rule is violated.
When the FTC Rule is violated, there is no private right of action under a State Statute.
If you use the State Statute, you cannot use the violations of the FTC Rule/State FDD in the prosecution of your claims. You cannot recover your losses, as a franchisee, unless you can prove fraudulent inducement or concealment is proximate to your loss, etc...
Catch 22!
Apparently, franchisors can indulge in malicious use of process and be protected by the FTC Rule and their signed contracts -- and the FBI and local law enforcement ignore it because this is the intent of the FTC Rule and public policy.
How disgusting that they could defraud you out of $70,000 and then freely misuse process to get another $11,000 and threaten you with the law that they so freely break in pursuit of their profits.
We have only the Internet and our voices to try to expose this to the public and to our elected officials who so often don't understand the effect of the regulatory rules that are passed by the Executive.
Remember! Slavery was legal and strike breaking was legal and child labor was legal and employee exploitation was legal under our laws until the consciousness of the people was raised in protest and the laws were changed.
Carol
see more
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
sean
• 5 years ago
−
Rod:
Does your wife know you're posting here?
;)
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
I understand how frustrating this must have been for you --especially since you spent the productive part of your life in the service of the law and order in Las Vegas, Nevada.
As a police officer with 23 years of honorable service, you were horrified that "process" was used against you and that no law enforcement agency would take your complaint. You believe in due process of law and couldn't believe that this process was perverted to protect the bad guys and that you, the good guy, couldn't even get anyone to take your complaint.
This attorney no doubt knew that the courts are aware that once a franchise agreement is signed, the franchisor has almost absolute protection against any complaint of common law fraud from citizens of the State. Attorneys are trained in the artful use of law and process to serve their clients ---who pay them very well to use law and process to do ugly things.
Thank you so much for trying to expose this to the public, who would not abide the use of our laws to perpetuate the fraud in franchising that is demonstrated in your case, in my opinion, and in much of franchising as it exists today.
This attorney misjudged you! He thought the letter, the restraining order, the threat to sue you and the $10,000.00 would scare the hell out of you, and silence you!
The Internet and free speech will make it harder for franchisors to silence and intimidate their franchisees in the future ---thanks to people like you, Rod! We too, who came out of the Regular Army and government service were shocked and appalled that the law could be so perverted in defense of immoral public policy that the IFA and the other special interests have convinced the Congress is necessary to serve the public good.
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
carol cross
• 5 years ago
−
What a wonderful inside look at "protected fraud" in the franchise industry ---You are one courageous man to share this with us out on the Internet on Franchise Pick. I hope the "powers that be" behind the scene don't try to put Sean Kelly out of business. Thank you, Rod! for guts and courage and perseverance!
Do I have your permission to use your experience with L&W and your inability to get the attention of any law enforcement people when you tried to make your compaint, when I write my Posts on the Internet.
I can't believe that law enforcement, especially the FBI, wouldn't have some obligation to investigate this matter -- especially when they were provided with these sworn statements. You would think they, at least, would pick up the telephone and call the FTC or the State Attorney General or the US District Attorneys.
Have you provided your statement to the Congress?
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Carol Cross
• 5 years ago
−
I understand, Rod. Let's hope that silence is golden for your attorneys and you, although I was really looking forward to reading those sworn statements from Wolivar, Hahn and Norman.
I admire your guts and fighting spirit that is truly in order from what I have read.
I see where L&W are in the British and American Virgin Islands and the UK Virgin Islands, and Vietnam?? can this be true? L&W advertises that their franchise is "lucrative" on the Internet.
I guess you know what that means! Don't take any collect calls from any of those prospective franchisees doing their due diligence!
Good Luck to your attorneys and to you!
Carol
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Rod
• 5 years ago
−
I was advised by our attorneys to stop posting my Victim/Witness Statement on the internet. Therefore, I won't include the sworn statements from Wolivar, Hahn and Norman after all.
However, any potential franchisee, performing their due diligence, should feel free to contact me.
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Jay Rod
• 2 years ago
−
I am just about buying one of these.. could you please contact me by email at jlhot69@yahoo.com
•
Reply
•
Share ›
Avatar
Carol Cross
• 5 years ago
−
L&W worked to get an article in The Franchise Times, to appear respectable to the Industry. The IFA and those who surround the IFA defend franchisors who are selling questionable franchises with high failure rates to the public because they feel safe in the arms of the FTC Rule and the State FDD's.
I recently read a report on the Bad Bureau Rip Off Site about L&W, as well.
Hopefully, prospective franchisees of L&W will find these negative comments before they put their signature to that malicious legal trap, the standard franchise agreement.
I wonder if the FTC knew how they would be enabling what sure looks like common law fraud when they promulgated The FTC Rule in the late 70's to protect franchisors from common law fraud charges in the state courts.