The FTC and Nevada have sued IM Mastery Academy for an alleged $1.2 billion consumer fraud scheme that targeted young people with false promises of quick wealth and luxury lifestyles.
At a Glance
- IM Mastery Academy (now IYOVIA) faces legal action from the FTC and Nevada for allegedly defrauding consumers of over $1.2 billion since 2018
- The company allegedly used false earning claims to sell financial training and a multi-level marketing business
- Marketing targeted young people through social media with promises of quick wealth and luxury lifestyles
- Company data shows 60% of customers quit within a month and 90% within six months
- Defendants include company owners Chris and Isis Terry along with several top salespeople
Massive Consumer Fraud Allegations
Federal regulators and Nevada authorities have joined forces to take down what they describe as a massive consumer fraud operation. IM Mastery Academy, which now operates as IYOVIA, stands accused of defrauding consumers of more than $1.2 billion through deceptive marketing practices that began in 2018. The complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada targets not only the company but also its owners, Chris and Isis Terry, along with top salespeople Jason Brown, Alex Morton, Matthew Rosa, and Brandon Boyd.
The allegations center on false earning claims used to market financial training programs and a multi-level marketing opportunity. According to the complaint, the company lured consumers with extravagant promises of quick wealth, luxury lifestyles, and early retirement, despite knowing these outcomes were highly improbable for the vast majority of participants.
Targeting Young and Vulnerable Consumers
The FTC and Nevada allege that IM Mastery Academy specifically targeted young people, often reaching potential victims through social media platforms and college pages. This targeting strategy focused on individuals with limited financial experience who might be more susceptible to promises of quick wealth. The marketing campaigns showcased lavish lifestyles, expensive cars, and luxury vacations as attainable results of participation in their programs, creating unrealistic expectations for new recruits.
The complaint further alleges that the company’s purported financial trainers were largely unqualified salespeople with no formal trading credentials or legitimate expertise in the financial markets they claimed to teach others to master. This misrepresentation of expertise likely contributed to the poor outcomes experienced by most participants.
Dismal Customer Retention and Financial Outcomes
Perhaps the most damning evidence against IM Mastery Academy comes from the company’s own internal data. According to information cited in the complaint, 60% of customers abandoned the program within just one month of signing up, with that figure rising to 90% by the six-month mark. These statistics strongly suggest widespread dissatisfaction with the services provided and call into question the value proposition offered to consumers.
The complaint further alleges that few consumers ever made substantial money through the program, with many actually losing money in what the FTC describes as an MLM scheme. The business model allegedly focused more on recruiting new participants than on delivering actual value through financial education, creating an unsustainable pyramid-like structure that primarily benefited those at the top of the organization.
Legal Violations and Regulatory Response
The FTC and Nevada’s lawsuit alleges multiple violations of federal and state laws, including the FTC Act, Telemarketing Sales Rule, Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, and various Nevada state laws. Throughout its operation, the company has used several names, including IM Mastery Academy, iMarketsLive, and IM Academy, before its current iteration as IYOVIA.
This case represents part of a broader effort by federal and state regulators to crack down on deceptive business practices and protect consumers from financial fraud. The joint action between the FTC and Nevada demonstrates a coordinated approach to addressing large-scale consumer protection issues that cross jurisdictional boundaries.
