Spa cus­tomer’s suit: $50G treat­ment gad­get a

New York Daily News - - NEWS - BY VIC­TO­RIA BEKIEM­PIS

SHE’S GOT TOO much skin in the game.

A woman says em­ploy­ees of a now-de­funct Chelsea spa co­erced her into buy­ing a Swarovski crys­tal-stud­ded skin-treat­ment ma­chine for $50,000, and she wants her money back, ac­cord­ing to court pa­pers.

Emma Felix al­leges the cos­metic con be­gan in March 2017, when she was “lured” into Epi­der­mis, a spa on Sixth Ave. near W. 25th St. in Man­hat­tan.

Em­ploy­ees “in­duced” the Roo­sevelt Is­land woman to plunk down $9,802 for a skin care pack­age, she says in court pa­pers.

While get­ting one of her monthly fa­cials, spa staff pitched Felix, 69, a new Swarovski Per­fec­tio skin­care ma­chine, and then fol­lowed up with a phone call later that week, “invit­ing her to come in for a spe­cial Mother’s Day fa­cial.”

De­cid­ing to get the “spe­cial” treat­ment, Felix went in on May 18, 2017 — and that’s when Epi­der­mis be­gan an in­creas­ingly ag­gres­sive hard sell, ac­cord­ing to her lawyer, Dolly Caraballo.

Staff told Felix the new Per­fec­tio ma­chine nor­mally would cost $100,000, “but for her, a loyal and loved cus­tomer, they of­fered it for $50,000. They con­vinced her that it was only one of a to­tal of 10 such prod­ucts in the United States, and she must pur­chase it im­me­di­ately or lose the op­por­tu­nity,” the suit con­tends.

The nor­mal Per­fec­tio ma­chine with­out any bling sells for be­tween $1,500 and $9,400.

Felix de­murred, but two staffers “be­came in­creas­ingly ag­gres­sive and abu­sive” and kept her from leav­ing, her suit al­leges.

Felix be­came afraid, so she agreed to the pur­chase, her court fil­ing says.

The two em­ploy­ees then drove Felix to the Ap­ple Bank on Lex­ing­ton Ave. near 80th St., where she took out a $50,444 money or­der. The money was “a sub­stan­tial por­tion of her sav­ings,” the suit charges.

“It is ter­ri­fy­ing,” she said. “It has been a dif­fi­cult year.”

When Felix tried to re­turn the ma­chine sev­eral days later, the spa wouldn’t give her a re­fund, the suit claims. She did not re­port the prob­lem to po­lice.

The Spa’s co-owner de­nied the claim.

“(She)has no grounds to sue; no­body forced her to buy any­thing,” said the self-de­scribed spa part­ner, who only gave his name as Udi.

“She paid most of the money with a cashier’s check, so no­body forced her, no­body did any­thing wrong,” he said.

The re­turn pol­icy — that al­lowed only ex­changes and not re­funds — was “very clear(ly) posted in the store” and on the re­ceipt that Felix signed, Udi said.

An Epi­der­mis spa in the same Chelsea lo­ca­tion is un­der new man­age­ment — and not af­fil­i­ated with the spa own­ers named in the law­suit, a for­mer owner said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.