Flindt Andersen, founder and executive director of the nonprofit Parents and Addicts in Need (PAIN) and CEO of New Perceptions North, is commenting on a lawsuit where he is a defendant in a financial dispute over a loan. Photo via flindtandersen.com

Flindt Andersen, founder and executive director of the nonprofit Parents and Addicts in Need (PAIN) and CEO of New Perceptions North, is commenting on a lawsuit where he is a defendant in a financial dispute over a loan.

The lawsuit, which includes Andersen and members of his family, raises questions about the operations of nonprofit recovery organization PAIN and its connection to for-profit New Perceptions.

Andersen and his attorney, Charles Manock of Manock Law, believe that PAIN’s mention in the lawsuit is irrelevant to the loan dispute, which involved plans to open a recovery home in Hanford.

Pamela Smith filed the lawsuit in an attempt to settle the past-due loan.

The original loan amount was $120,000 in 2019. Smith claims to have been paid $54,000 and is owed $126,000 in damages, including $60,000 in interest added.

“This is a dispute over the amount of a loan, more particularly what amount is owing,” Manock said. “Recently, Pam Smith had resigned from her work – she had worked previously at PAIN. Shortly thereafter and during that time period, there was discussion about how to get this loan paid back.”

The lawsuit includes non-relevant claims about PAIN’s business practices, specifically the referral of clients to New Perceptions, he said.

“When I read the lawsuit, what struck me immediately was a reference to a non-party – PAIN – and an implication that there was something wrong with the way that PAIN was doing business with New Perceptions,” Manock said.

Manock clarified that such referrals are standard practice in the addiction treatment industry and are neither illegal nor unethical.

“The way that it was written in the complaint seemed to draw a conclusion that there was something untoward happening here – that this was wrong,” Manock said. “Not only is that allowing the reader to not understand the law – you just throw it out there in the public square – but it also has no relevance to a dispute concerning a loan.”

Smith’s lawsuit alleges that Andersen said he would not take a salary from New Perceptions until the loan was repaid.

Manock argues the salary falls within industry standards and is similarly unrelated to the financial dispute.

Manock said the defense plans to request that these irrelevant claims be removed from the complaint to focus solely on the financial issue at hand.

“It is imperative that the public be given a full and fair-sided picture of what this dispute is really about rather than a gratuitous reference to a perfectly legal act which implies wrongdoing,” he said.