U.S. Attorney Charges Head Of Hair Testing Company In $5.9 Million Fraud Scheme

 

Customers Submitted Hair Samples for Allergy Testing to Kyle Tsui’s Company, but Hair Was Tossed and Test Results Fabricated

Damian Williams, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and Daniel B. Brubaker, the Inspector in Charge of the New York Office of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (“USPIS”), announced the unsealing of an Indictment charging KYLE TSUI with wire fraud and mail fraud in connection with a scheme that resulted in sales of approximately $5.9 million worth of fabricated allergy and sensitivity tests to customers.  TSUI was extradited from Spain to the U. S. based on the Indictment and will be presented today before U. S. Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy. 

 

U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said: “As alleged, Kyle Tsui defrauded customers of millions of dollars by claiming he would perform allergy and sensitivity testing on customers’ hair samples.  However, Tsui performed no such testing and provided fabricated test results.  Tsui now stands charged with defrauding thousands of innocent victims whose health was put at risk with false results.”   

USPIS Inspector in Charge Daniel B. Brubaker said: “It’s unconscionable to think anyone would put the health of their clients at risk for money, but allegedly in this case, greed won out over the lives of innocent, trusting victims.  Mr. Tsui’s alleged fabricated test results and lies were relied upon by many to make health-altering decisions, which we now know were worthless.  Postal Inspectors remind consumers to thoroughly read the fine print of any offer providing medical breakthroughs to avoid falling victim to a scam, especially one that could cause physical harm.”

According to the allegations contained in the Indictment:[1]

From September 2018 through April 2019, TSUI orchestrated a scheme to defraud customers of his company, the “Allergy Testing Company,” by purporting to sell food and environmental sensitivity testing services that TSUI knew were not, in fact, being performed.  In total, customers paid approximately $5.9 million through an online marketplace for tests that TSUI claimed would be done on their hair samples. 

TSUI’s company promoted its “[h]ighly-rated, top selling sensitivity and intolerance test” that “determines how your body responds to 800 different food and environmental items” with just “a small hair sample.”  But rather than test the hair samples as customers were promised, TSUI directed that the hair samples be discarded in the trash without any laboratory analysis.  Customers then received fabricated test results purporting to identify certain foods and environmental factors that were “safe” for them and others that the customers were supposedly “sensitive” to and should avoid.       

KYLE TSUI, 41, of Ontario, Canada is charged with wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, and mail fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.  

The maximum potential sentences in this case are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant will be determined by a judge.

Mr. Williams praised the outstanding investigative work of the USPIS.  Mr. Williams also thanked the Hyde Park Police Department, the New York State Troopers, the Toronto Police Service, the Department of Justice Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs, the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre, and the Government of Spain for their assistance in the investigation.

The case is being prosecuted by the Office’s White Plains Division.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys Qais Ghafary and Benjamin Levander are in charge of the prosecution, which was previously handled by former Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Loss.

The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the text of the Indictment, and the description of the Indictment set forth herein, constitutes only allegations, and every fact described therein should be treated as an allegation.