You don't need a crystal ball to predict that an Ohio woman will not succeed in a $1 million lawsuit which alleges a psychic conned her out of nearly $23,000 by falsely promising to resolve a personal problem.

U.S. law recognizes no claim for psychic malpractice, but Natalya Yakubovsky of Bainbridge Township, Ohio, says the false representations made to her by the owner of Elaine's Astrology support claims for breach of contract and fraud.

“Defendants knew or should have known that the services they offered to plaintiff were of no value while they fraudulently represented that they could and would assist plaintiff with her personal problem,” she alleges in a complaint filed last week.

Yakubovsky names Elaine's owner Dorothy Miller and a Jane Doe employee as defendants. She also claims they took advantage of her “emotional state” so she would keep making payments to them, telling her that “other clients had killed themselves after stopping defendants' services” and “if plaintiff stopped using defendants' services the 'spirit' of her loved one would die.”

After initially paying $5,000, the suit says, “plaintiff continued to use defendants' services, eventually paying them $22,834.00.” Yakubovsky is seeking at least $25,000 in compensatory damages and another $1 million in punitive damages.

Some states have sued psychics for deceptive trade practices such as misrepresenting the cost of services and billing for services that were never purchased. But Yakubovsky is not suing under Ohio's consumer protection law, which would only allow her to recover three times the amount of her actual damages.

According to an Internet ad, Dorothy Miller opened Elaine's Astrology in a Cleveland suburb in 1977 and “specializes in reuniting lovers, advising business directives, and healing the sick with the help of God and Spiritual Guides. Her philosophy is to nurture your mind, heal your body, and fill your soul with peace and harmony.”

Elaine's assured Yakubovsky, the suit says, that “their assistance 'works every time,'” but “Defendants did not assist successfully assist plaintiff with her personal problem.”

In Britain, psychics can now be convicted of unfair trade practices if they mislead, coerce or take advantage of a “vulnerable” consumer. The British Office of Fair Trading has estimated that 170,000 consumers a year fall victim to mail-order clairvoyancy scams.

Yakubovsky, however, must show that she “reasonably relied” on Elaine's alleged misrepresentations and there is nothing in her complaint to suggest her reliance was reasonable under the circumstances of a transaction between a customer and a psychic.

After all, if the principle of “Buyer Beware” doesn't apply to the services of a psychic, whose services would it apply to?

By Matthew Heller
6/3/08