Michigan AG investigating company failing to provide face masks customers paid for during COVID-19 pandemic

EM General LLC accused of violating Consumer Protection Act

MUSKEGON, Mich. – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office is investigating a company that allegedly charged people for face masks but has not provided them.

Nessel’s office issued subpoenas for records from Muskegon-based EM General LLC.

Recommended Videos



Officials said the company allegedly collected money for masks, including N-95, which have been in high demand due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. However, customers have not received the masks.

According to Nessel, one victim said they received emails from the company that said the demand for N-95 respirator masks was high. The emails also said that there were shipping delays because the company were “importing masks from Turkey.”

The subpoenas call for sales records and other financial information, customer correspondences, supply of goods and advertising records and more were approved by a judge. The subpoenas will also be used to get testimony from employees.

According to Nessel, EM General has likely violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act for price-gouging, misleading customers about its goods or services, advertising goods or services without the intent to provide those to purchasers and failing to provide consumers with refunds.

Officials said the companies website was selling “antiviral” N-95 masks for about $25 each. A 10-pack box of N-95 masks generally sells for about $15.

The company allegedly said the delays in getting the masks to customers was due to a “nationwide lockdown (COVID-19),” however this lockdown does not exist.

Nessel’s office said company emails also showed discrepancies in the CEO’s name, referring to him as “Dennis Rivera” and “Mike T.”

The Better Business Bureau provided Nessel’s office with 87 complaints about the company, officials said.

Nessel’s office provided a timeline of one customer’s reported issues:

One person who purchased multiple masks from the company on March 4 inquired whether her order was completed as she had not received any confirmation. The company never replied to that inquiry.

Around two weeks later, company emails led the consumer to believe that EM General had received inventory on March 13 and was shipping products in the order purchases were made. It also said customers would get tracking numbers once shipping began and the product was to arrive six to eight days later.

On March 29, the same consumer received yet another email from the company with similar information, but different dates. EM General said it received inventory on March 19 and was shipping on that date, rather than March 13 as previously noted.


Recommended Videos