AG Yost Slams the Door Shut on ‘Car Warranty’ Robocallers

(COLUMBUS, Ohio) – Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost continues his fight against robocallers, this time suing six individuals and six companies that relied on illegal robocalls to identify sales leads so they could then pitch purported car warranties to Ohio residents.

“Interestingly, after our initial subpoena, they stopped calling people who have Ohio area codes but continued to call Ohioans with area codes from other states,” Yost said. “There is still work to be done, but robocallers are starting to get the message: Don’t call Ohioans!”

The complaint, filed in Franklin County Common Pleas Court, alleges that Delawarebased Pelican Investment Holdings was paying for leads to initiate outbound prerecorded calls to consumers to market and sell “vehicle service contracts.” The contracts were then “administered” by Dimension Service, Autoguard Advantage and National Administrative Service, all based in Dublin, Ohio.

The prerecorded messages misrepresented the essence of the call, which violates Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act. The calls failed to properly identify the calling party and falsely claimed that the call was about extending the consumer’s auto warranty and was affiliated with the auto manufacturer.

For the phone calls that resulted in a contract sale, the defendants did not secure a signed written confirmation of a verbal agreement – a violation of Ohio’s Telephone Solicitation Sales Act. They also violated this law by acting as telephone solicitors without having registered as such with the Ohio Attorney General’s Office and without having obtained and filed the required surety bond.

Yost’s lawsuit stemmed from the investigative work of his Robocall Enforcement Unit, formed in 2020 within the attorney general’s Consumer Protection Section.

Those named as defendants are:

• Pelican Investment Holdings, a company formed in the state of Delaware in November 2020 with its principal place of business in West Palm Beach, Florida.

• Dimension Service Corp., an Ohio company formed in June 1994 with its principal place of business in Dublin, Ohio.

• Autoguard Advantage Corp, an Ohio company formed in July 1996 with its principal place of business in Dublin, Ohio.

• National Administrative Service Co., an Ohio company formed in October 2001 with its principal place of business in Dublin, Ohio.

• Falcon Endeavors Inc., a Wyoming company owned by defendant Gustave Renny that was formed in March 2018 with its principal place of business in Sheridan, Wyoming.

• MB Holdings Group, a Nevada company owned by defendant Vajira Samararatne that was formed in April 2020 with its principal place of business in Las Vegas, Nevada.

• Gustave C. Renny, an actual or de facto owner, officer or member of Pelican who controlled and directed the business activities and sales conduct of Pelican and Falcon Endeavors.

• Vajira Samararatne, an actual or de facto owner, officer or member of Pelican and MB Holdings.

• Stacey E. Yim, an actual or de facto owner, officer or member of Pelican.

• Ronald D. Eddington Jr., an actual or de facto owner, officer or member of Pelican.

• Joseph E. Hill Jr., an actual or de facto owner, officer or member of Pelican.

• Haytham H. Elzayn, an officer and director of Dimension Service, Autoguard Advantage and National Administrative Service.

Notably, defendant Stacey Yim was named in a federal lawsuit filed in July by Yost’s office also regarding fraudulent auto-warranty plans.

Consumers who receive unwanted calls can complete an Unwanted Call Notification Form at www.ohioprotects.org. That information will be shared with the Robocall Enforcement Unit, which uses the reports to identify trends and protect other Ohioans. place for students to use the restrooms that coincide with their “biology.”

However, bullying may still persist because of students dressing a different way or acting a different way than what other students consider “normal.” One pastor had a different idea that included rearranging the bathrooms at Shelby City Schools to make them all private. Other schools in the area have done this and have had success cutting down on the bullying in bathrooms.

There was much more discourse about religion, the LGBTQIA+ community and their rights, and what authority churches and religious officials should have over our schools and the government in general. In a way, discussing those issues were unhelpful because they deviated from the main topic of bullying and harassment in the schools. Two members of the Shelby City School Board, Scott Rose and Kim Nadolsky, attended in order to answer questions from the community members but what they could or would say, only went so far.

On Page 19 of the Shelby High School student handbook (2022-2023), clearly stated is the anti-bullying and harassment policy. It clearly defines what bullying and harassment is and gives examples of different kinds. It also says, “No administrator, teacher or other employee of the District shall encourage, permit, condone or tolerate any hazing and/or bullying activities. No students, including leaders of student organizations, are permitted to plan, encourage or engage in any hazing and/ or bullying.”

“Administrators, teachers and all other District employees are particularly alert to possible conditions, circumstances or events that might include hazing, bullying and/or dating violence. If any of the prohibited behaviors are planned or discovered, involved students are informed by the discovering District employee of the prohibition contained in this policy and are required to end all such activities immediately. All hazing, bullying and/ or dating violence incidents are reported immediately to the Superintendent/designee and appropriate discipline is administered.”

Even though this policy is clearly stated in the handbook, is it being followed and carried out appropriately? Many community members are concerned that Shelby City Schools is not following their own policies and letting the bullying and harassment take place. From the stories shared at the public forum on Tuesday night, it is evident that bullying is still a big issue in the schools and not being dealt with. Solving the bathroom issue is just one way that instances of bullying will be decreased but what happens after that?

No student should be afraid in their learning environment. They need to be as comfortable and nurtured as possible in order to absorb the most information. Among all the bickering and other issues that came up during the public forum, the issue of bullying still remained. What are Shelby City Schools going to do about cutting down on the bullying in their buildings without further ostracizing the students who are seeing it the worst, like the transgender student? In what way can the community help in reaching this goal?