SSM Group, Hydra Financial Limited Fund, CMG Group, LLC, DJR Group, LLC, BCD Group, LLC, et al.
Documents in this case
- Complaint · · 25 p.
- Stipulation · · 19 p.
- Stipulation · · 27 p.
Case summary
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) took action in federal district court to halt the operations of an online payday lender, the Hydra Group. Defendants included Richard Moseley, Sr., Richard Moseley, Jr., and 20 interrelated corporate entities controlled by Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. The Bureau alleged that the defendants obtained consumers’ sensitive personal and financial information from third-party data brokers, and used that information to access consumers’ bank accounts without authorization. According to the Bureau’s complaint, the Hydra Group deposited loans in consumers’ bank accounts, then debited biweekly "finance charges” indefinitely. In many cases, the Bureau alleged, consumers never saw loan agreements and were not aware of the account activity until after the loan was deposited and finance charges were withdrawn. Additionally, the Bureau alleged that, even when consumers did receive loan documents, the written disclosures misrepresented the price terms and repayment obligations of the purported loan. The Bureau alleged violations of the Consumer Financial Protection Act and other federal consumer financial laws.
A federal district court in the Western District of Missouri entered two orders effectuating settlements between the Bureau and the defendants. Under the terms of the settlements, the defendants are banned from the industry and forfeit approximately $14 million in assets. One of the orders also imposes a judgment for $69 million for purposes of paying consumer redress, but, in light of the defendants’ limited ability to pay, the judgment is suspended upon compliance with other requirements.
Complaint ()
PDF of this document (25 pages)
Page 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU,
Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD F. MOSELEY, SR.; RICHARD F. MOSELEY, JR.; CHRISTOPHER J. RANDAZZO; SSM GROUP, LLC; CMG GROUP, LLC; DJR GROUP, LLC; BCD GROUP, LLC; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND I; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND II; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND III; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND IV; PCMO SERVICES, LLC; PCKS SERVICES, LLC; PIGGYCASH ONLINE HOLDINGS, LLC; CLS SERVICES, INC.; FSR SERVICES, INC.; SJ PARTNERS, LLC; RIVER ELK SERVICES, LLC; OSL MARKETING, INC., a/k/a OSL GROUP, INC.; ROCKY OAK SERVICES, LLC; RM PARTNERS, LLC; PDC VENTURES, LLC; and CORVUS COMPANY, LLC,
Defendants.
CASE NO. ____________
COMPLAINT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND OTHER RELIEF
Plaintiff, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) alleges the following against Richard F. Moseley, Sr.; Richard F. Moseley, Jr.; Christopher J. Randazzo; SSM Group, LLC; CMG Group, LLC; DJR Group, LLC; BCD Group, LLC; Hydra Financial Limited Fund I; Hydra Financial Limited Fund II; Hydra Financial Limited Fund III; Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV; PCMO Services, LLC; PCKS Services, LLC; Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC; CLS Services, Inc.; FSR Services, Inc.; SJ Partners, LLC; River Elk Services, LLC; OSL Marketing, Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 1 of 25
Page 3
Inc., a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.; Rocky Oak Services, LLC; RM Partners, LLC; PDC Ventures, LLC; and Corvus Company, LLC (Defendants):
INTRODUCTION 1.
Defendants, operating through a maze of interrelated companies, use consumer financial information they purchase from third parties to originate online payday loans without consumers’ consent. Defendants deposit the payday loans into consumers’ bank accounts without their authorization, and then use misrepresentations and false documents to further convince these consumers that they agreed to these phony online payday loans. Defendants then use these purported loans as a basis to make repeated, unauthorized withdrawals from consumers’ bank accounts. In some cases, Defendants have bilked consumers out of thousands of dollars in “finance charges” for a $200 or $300 loan that the consumer never agreed to. 2.
The Bureau brings this action under the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (CFPA), 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531(a), 5536(a), 5564(a); the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1666j; and the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1693-1693r. This action seeks temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief; rescission or reformation of contracts; restitution, the refund of monies paid, and disgorgement of ill-gotten monies; the appointment of a receiver; other equitable relief; and civil money penalties for Defendants’ violations of the CFPA, TILA and its implementing Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. Part 1026, and EFTA and its implementing Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. Part 1005. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action because it is brought under “Federal consumer financial law,” 12 U.S.C. § 5565(a)(1); presents a federal question, 28 U.S.C. § 1331; and is brought by an agency of the United States, 28 U.S.C. § 1345. Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 2 of 25
Page 4
4.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because the causes of action arise from Defendants’ transacting business in this District or have caused injury in this District through acts or omissions occurring outside of this District. 5.
Venue is proper in this District because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred here and Defendants do business here. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2); 12 U.S.C. 5564(f).
PLAINTIFF 6.
The Bureau is an independent agency of the United States charged with regulating the offering and provision of consumer financial products or services under Federal consumer financial laws. 12 U.S.C. § 5491(a). The Bureau has independent litigating authority to enforce the CFPA. 12 U.S.C. §§ 5564(a) and (b). Unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts or practices in violation of the CFPA are prohibited. 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531(a) and 5536(a)(1). The Bureau is authorized to take appropriate enforcement action to address violations of Federal consumer financial law. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 5511(c)(4); 5512(a); 5564(a). DEFENDANTS 7.
Defendant Richard F. Moseley, Sr. is an individual who, acting alone or in concert with others, and through his interrelated companies described below, has engaged in an unlawful payday lending scheme designed to obtain unauthorized access to consumers’ bank accounts and deceive consumers concerning the true terms of their payday loans. Defendant Moseley, Sr.’s businesses include all of the corporate defendants listed below. At all times material to this complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Defendant Moseley, Sr. has directly participated in the acts and practices set forth in this complaint. At all times material to this complaint, Moseley, Sr. transacts or has transacted business in the Western District of Missouri.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 3 of 25
Page 5
8.
Defendant Richard F. Moseley, Jr. is an individual who, acting alone or in concert with others, and through his interrelated companies described below, has engaged in an unlawful payday lending scheme designed to obtain unauthorized access to consumers’ bank accounts and deceive consumers concerning the true terms of their payday loans. Defendant Moseley, Jr.’s businesses include Defendants SSM Group, CMG Group, DJR Group, BCD Group, PiggyCash Online Holdings, PCMO Services, PCKS Services, PDC Ventures, SJ Partners, River Elk Services, Rocky Oak Services, and RM Partners. At all times material to this complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Defendant Moseley, Jr. has directly participated in the acts and practices set forth in this complaint. At all times material to this complaint, Moseley, Jr. transacts or has transacted business in the Western District of Missouri.
9.
Defendant Christopher J. Randazzo an individual who, acting alone or in concert with others, and through his interrelated companies described below, has engaged in an unlawful payday lending scheme designed to obtain unauthorized access to consumers’ bank accounts and deceive consumers concerning the true terms of their payday loans. Defendant Randazzo’s businesses include Defendants Hydra Financial Limited Fund I, Hydra Financial Limited Fund II, Hydra Financial Limited Fund III, Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV, River Elk Services, and Rocky Oak Services. At all times material to this complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Defendant Randazzo has directly participated in the acts and practices set forth in this complaint. At all times material to this complaint, Randazzo transacts or has transacted business in the Western District of Missouri. 10.
Defendant SSM Group, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of St. Kitts & Nevis and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 4 of 25
Page 6
Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. SSM Group transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, SSM Group has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States.
11.
Defendant CMG Group, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of St. Kitts & Nevis and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. CMG Group transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, CMG Group has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States.
12.
Defendant DJR Group, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of St. Kitts & Nevis and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. DJR Group transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, DJR Group has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States.
13.
Defendant BCD Group, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of St. Kitts & Nevis and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. BCD Group transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 5 of 25
Page 7
alone or in concert with others, BCD Group has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States.
14.
Defendant Hydra Financial Limited Fund I (Hydra I) is organized as a limited company under the laws of the Commonwealth of New Zealand and has its principal place of business at Level 5, 22 The Terrace, Wellington, 6011, New Zealand. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Randazzo. Hydra I transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Hydra I has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States.
15.
Defendant Hydra Financial Limited Fund II (Hydra II) is organized as a limited company under the laws of the Commonwealth of New Zealand and has its principal place of business at Level 5, 22 The Terrace, Wellington, 6011, New Zealand. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Randazzo. Hydra II transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Hydra II has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States. 16.
Defendant Hydra Financial Limited Fund III (Hydra III) is organized as a limited company under the laws of the Commonwealth of New Zealand and has its principal place of business at Level 5, 22 The Terrace, Wellington, 6011, New Zealand. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Randazzo. Hydra III transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Hydra III has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States. Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 6 of 25
Page 8
17.
Defendant Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV (Hydra IV) is organized as a limited company under the laws of the Commonwealth of New Zealand and had its principal place of business at Level 5, 22 The Terrace, Wellington, 6011, New Zealand. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Randazzo. Hydra IV transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Hydra IV has originated and serviced online payday loans throughout the United States. 18.
Defendant PCMO Services, LLC is a Missouri limited liability company and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. 19.
Defendant PCKS Services, LLC is a Kansas limited liability company and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. 20.
Defendant Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC is a Kansas limited liability company and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States.
21.
Defendant CLS Services, Inc. is a Missouri corporation and has no known physical address. It maintains P.O. Box 7082 in Kansas City, MO 64113. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendant Moseley, Sr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 7 of 25
Page 9
22.
Defendant FSR Services, Inc. is incorporated in both Kansas and Missouri and has its principal place of business at 3901 W. 56th St., Fairway, KS 66205. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendant Moseley, Sr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. 23.
Defendant SJ Partners, LLC is a Missouri limited liability company and has its principal place of business at 438 W. 56th St., Kansas City, MO 64113. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. 24.
Defendant River Elk Services, LLC is a Missouri limited liability company with no known physical address. It maintains P.O. Box 7082 in Kansas City, MO 64113. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr., Moseley, Jr., and Randazzo. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States.
25.
Defendant OSL Marketing, Inc. (a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.) is a Missouri corporation and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendant Moseley, Sr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. 26.
Defendant Rocky Oak Services, LLC is a Kansas limited liability company and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr., Moseley, Jr., and Randazzo. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States.
27.
Defendant RM Partners, LLC is a Kansas limited liability company and has its principal place of business at 3901 W. 56th St., Fairway, KS 66205. The company is owned, Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 8 of 25
Page 10
directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. 28.
Defendant PDC Ventures, LLC is a Missouri limited liability company and has its principal place of business at 2 E. Gregory Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64114. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. 29.
Defendant Corvus Company, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of St. Kitts & Nevis and has no known physical address. It maintains P.O. Box 7082 in Kansas City, MO 64113. The company is owned, directed, or controlled by Defendant Moseley, Sr. The company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States.
COMMON ENTERPRISE 30.
Defendants SSM Group, LLC; CMG Group, LLC; DJR Group, LLC; BCD Group, LLC; Hydra Financial Limited Fund I; Hydra Financial Limited Fund II; Hydra Financial Limited Fund III; Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV; PCMO Services, LLC; PCKS Services, LLC; Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC; CLS Services, Inc.; FSR Services, Inc.; SJ Partners, LLC; River Elk Services, LLC; OSL Marketing, Inc. a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.; Rocky Oak Services, LLC; RM Partners, LLC; PDC Ventures, LLC; and Corvus Company, LLC (collectively, Corporate Defendants) operate as a common enterprise through an interrelated network of companies that share common control, addresses, and office space; commingle funds; and interact with consumers, payment processors, and other third parties from common locations. Because these Corporate Defendants have operated as a common enterprise, each of them is jointly and severally liable for the acts and practices alleged below. Defendants Moseley, Sr., Moseley, Jr., and Randazzo have formulated, directed, controlled, had the authority to control, Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 9 of 25
Page 11
or participated in the acts and practices of the Corporate Defendants that constitute the common enterprise.
DEFENDANTS’ BUSINESS ACTIVITIES 31.
Since at least 2011, Defendants have purported to be in the business of originating and servicing online “payday loans” across the country. “Payday loans” are highcost, short-term, unsecured loans, often made to consumers to provide funds in anticipation of an upcoming paycheck.
32.
Many consumers have not consented to or authorized Defendants’ purported payday loans.
33.
Defendants purchase consumers’ sensitive personal and financial information from online lead generators or data brokers, and use that information to deposit payday loans into consumers’ bank accounts without their consent. Defendants then make repeated unauthorized withdrawals of the purported “finance charges” for these loans from consumers’ accounts. Often, consumers must close their bank accounts to put an end to these unauthorized withdrawals.
34.
For a typical consumer, Defendants’ scheme works like this: First, they deposit $200 to $300 into the consumer’s checking accounts. Then they withdraw a $60 to $90 “finance charge” from the consumer’s account every two weeks indefinitely. Finally, when a consumer (or the consumer’s bank or credit union) contacts Defendants to inquire about the charges, Defendants use bogus documentation to justify the unauthorized transactions. Defendants Obtain Unauthorized Access to Consumers’ Bank Accounts 35.
Consumers often seek online loans through websites controlled and operated by third-party “lead generators.” Consumers must enter sensitive personal and financial information, including social security and checking account numbers, into the website to apply Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 10 of 25
Page 12
for the loan. Lead generators then auction off consumers’ sensitive personal and financial information to firms who make the loans or to intermediary data brokers, who then re-sell the leads to lenders.
36.
In numerous instances, Defendants have purchased consumer leads from lead generators or data brokers, and then deposited purported payday loans into these consumers’ bank accounts.
37.
In numerous instances, consumers did not authorize these loans or authorize these deposits.
38.
Some consumers report that after submitting their application on a leadgenerator website, they received a denial notification or obtained a loan from a different lender. Nevertheless, they received a deposit into their account from Defendants without ever having seen or consented to any loan terms.
39.
Other consumers complain that they never actually completed a loan application online or had not applied for a loan near the time of the unauthorized deposit, but still received unauthorized funds from Defendants.
40.
Then, in numerous instances, Defendants have made withdrawals from consumers’ accounts every two weeks for the purported finance charge for the loan. 41.
In numerous instances, consumers did not authorize these withdrawals. 42.
Consumers attempt to contact Defendants to complain about the unauthorized loans and have them reversed but are unable to reach Defendants. 43.
When consumers are actually able to contact Defendants to complain about the unauthorized loans and have them reversed, Defendants respond by providing them with copies of bogus loan applications, electronic transfer authorizations, or other loan documents that purport to establish earlier consent to the loan. Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 11 of 25
Page 13
44.
When consumers report to their bank that Defendants’ deposits and withdrawals are unauthorized, the bank will contact Defendants to verify the transaction. Defendants, directly or through their payment processors, often misrepresent to these institutions that consumers authorized the debits.
45.
Then, when banks demand additional proof of consumer authorization, Defendants bolster their deception by providing, or causing others to provide, the banks with copies of the same bogus applications, electronic transfer applications, or other loan documents that purport to establish earlier consent to the loan. 46.
As a result, in numerous instances, consumers’ banks deny their requests to reverse Defendants’ unauthorized deposits or withdrawals. 47.
Defendants often continue to make withdrawals until consumers can obtain a stop-payment hold or close their accounts. As a result, some consumers may end up paying hundreds or even thousands of dollars for loans they never authorized. 48.
Even when consumers successfully close their deposit accounts, in numerous instances Defendants sell or assign the bogus debt to third-party debt brokers or debt collectors.
49.
By selling or assigning these debts, Defendants represent to third-party debt brokers or debt collectors that these consumers authorized the loans. In fact, in numerous instances these consumers had not authorized the loans and there is no legitimate basis for the debt.
Defendants Misrepresent the Terms of the Loans 50.
Consumers typically receive loans from Defendants without having seen the loan terms—such as the finance charge, annual percentage rate, total of payments, and payment schedule—or without having consented to the transaction at all. For these consumers, Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 12 of 25
Page 14
Defendants do not provide required disclosures before consummating the loan transaction and depositing the principal into consumers’ bank accounts. 51.
But, in some instances, consumers may receive Defendants’ loan terms in advance and consent to the payday loan. Even where consumers did consent to Defendants’ loans, however, Defendants misrepresent their price terms and repayment obligations. 52.
In particular, Defendants represent to consumers that the total payment for satisfying the payday loan is the sum of the principal borrowed plus a one-time stated finance charge.
53.
In reality, Defendants assess and collect bi-weekly finance charges from consumers indefinitely and do not apply those payments towards reducing loan principal. 54.
Defendants’ “Loan Note and Disclosure” (Loan Disclosure) says that the consumer’s “Total of Payments” will be “[t]he amount you will have paid after you have made the scheduled payment,” and constitutes the sum of a stated “FINANCE CHARGE” and the “Amount Financed.” It also provides the purported “ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATE” (APR) for the loan. This information appears in bold and prominent text in a box set apart from the rest of the text of the Loan Disclosure. 55.
Then, in smaller and less conspicuous text, there are additional disclosures that contradict these terms. The purported disclosure provides that the disclosed payment schedule only applies when you “decline* the option of refinancing.” Then, further down in this small text, it explains that, “*To decline the option of refinancing you must sign the Account Summary page and fax it back to the office at least three business days before your loan is due.” 56.
This inadequate disclosure is demonstrated in the following excerpt from one of Defendants’ loan notes for a $300 loan with a $90 finance charge and 995.45% APR: Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 13 of 25
Page 15
57.
In some instances, Defendants also send consumers an “Account Summary” with information about the loan. Defendants represent that the “Pay Off Amount Due” is a one-time payment of the principal plus one finance charge (for example, $390) and that the consumer has authorized Defendants “to debit the payoff amount due $390.00 from your account named above on your current due date.”
58.
In fact, Defendants withdraw only a finance charge on the due date – and will continue to withdraw a finance charge indefinitely unless consumers take affirmative action to stop the automatic renewal of the loan.
59.
For example, instead of paying $390 for a $300 loan, some consumers have paid Defendants more than $1,000 in bi-weekly debits before finally managing to cut off access to their bank accounts.
60.
Defendants do not adequately disclose the terms of the loan as actually structured, i.e., that it contemplates consumers will pay bi-weekly finance charges indefinitely, without any of those payments reducing the principal balance of their loan. Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 14 of 25
Page 16
61.
As a result, in numerous instances, Defendants extract significantly higher payments from consumers than they represent in the prominent terms of their Loan Disclosures or in other written or oral communications to consumers. Defendants’ Loans Require Pre-Authorized Electronic Transfers
62.
Consumers typically receive loans from Defendants without having consented to the transaction. As a result, Defendants do not obtain these consumers’ written authorization to initiate electronic fund transfers from their depository accounts and do not provide consumers with copies of these authorizations.
63.
But, in some instances, consumers may consent to Defendants’ transactions. Even where consumers consent, however, Defendants unlawfully condition the extension of credit on pre-authorized electronic fund transfers (EFTs) from the consumers’ bank accounts. These preauthorized EFTs are for a series of recurring debits from consumers’ accounts every two weeks.
64.
For example, the ACH authorization in some of Defendants’ loan agreements provides that the consumer authorizes Defendants “to initiate one or more ACH debit entries … for the payments that come due each pay period and/or each due date concerning every refinance, with regard to the loan for which you are applying.” 65.
The ACH authorization in some of Defendants’ other loan agreements provides that the consumer authorizes Defendants “to initiate an ACH debit entry to your Bank Account: (a) for the Total of Payments plus any accrued fees on the Payment Due Date, or on any subsequent Renewal Payment Due Date, if you do not contact us and select Payment in Full . . . .”
Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 15 of 25
Page 17
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT RICHARD F. MOSELEY, SR.
66.
Defendant Richard F. Moseley, Sr. is a primary participant in the affairs of the interrelated maze of entities through which Defendants carry out the unlawful lending activities described in this complaint. Moseley, Sr. is owner, principal, managing member, and registered agent of Defendants SSM Group, CMG Group, DJR Group, BCD Group, PCMO Services, PCKS Services, Piggycash Online Holdings, CLS Services, FSR Services, PDC Ventures, RM Partners, SJ Partners, River Elk Services, OSL Marketing, Rocky Oak Services, and Corvus Company, and is involved in the operations of Hydra Financial Limited Funds I-IV. In his roles as owner, principal, managing member, and registered agent for these companies, Moseley, Sr., acting alone or in concert with others, has formulated, directed, controlled, had the authority to control, or participated in these companies’ unlawful lending operations. Moseley, Sr. has access to all of the businesses’ bank accounts, and directs the flow of monies between these bank accounts.
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT RICHARD F. MOSELEY, JR.
67.
Defendant Richard F. Moseley, Jr. is also a primary participant in the affairs of the interrelated maze of entities through which Defendants carry out the unlawful lending activities described in this complaint. He is the owner and principal of Defendants SSM Group, CMG Group, DJR Group, BCD Group, Piggy Cash Online Holdings, PDC Ventures, SJ Partners, River Elk Services, Rocky Oak Services, and RM Partners. In his roles as owner and principal for these companies, Moseley, Jr., acting alone or in concert with others, has formulated, directed, controlled, had the authority to control, or participated in these companies’ unlawful lending operations. Moseley, Jr has access to all of the businesses’ bank accounts, and directs the flow of monies between these bank accounts.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 16 of 25
Page 18
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT CHRISTOPHER J. RANDAZZO 68.
Defendant Christopher J. Randazzo is also a primary participant in the affairs of the interrelated maze of entities through which Defendants carry out the unlawful lending activities described in this complaint. He is the principal and senior manager of Defendants Hydra Financial Limited Funds I-IV. In his roles as principal and senior manager for these companies, Randazzo, acting alone or in concert with others, has formulated, directed, controlled, had the authority to control, or participated in these companies’ unlawful lending operations. Randazzo is also registered agent for Defendants River Elk Services and Rocky Oak Services.
THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION ACT 69.
Sections 1031 and 1036(a)(1)(B) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531, 5536(a)(1)(B), prohibit covered persons from engaging “in any unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice.” 70.
Section 1036(a)(1)(A) of the CFPA provides that it is “unlawful for any covered person to offer or provide to a consumer any financial product or service not in conformity with Federal consumer law, or otherwise commit any act or omission in violation of a Federal consumer financial law.” Section 1054(a) of the CFPA grants the Bureau authority to commence a civil action against any person who violates a Federal consumer financial law. The CFPA is a Federal consumer financial law. 12 U.S.C. § 5481(14). 71.
The corporate Defendants are “covered person[s]” within the meaning of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. § 5481(6).
72.
Defendants Richard F. Moseley, Sr., Richard F. Moseley, Jr., and Christopher J. Randazzo are “covered person[s]” in their capacity as “related person[s]” who are deemed covered persons as “director[s], officer[s], [or] employee[s] charged within managerial Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 17 of 25
Page 19
responsibility for, or controlling shareholder of, or agent for, such covered person.” 12 U.S.C. § 5481(25).
VIOLATIONS OF THE CFPA COUNT I Misrepresentations That Consumers Authorized the Loans and are Bound by their Terms
73.
In numerous instances, in connection with the origination and servicing of purported payday loans, Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that consumers authorized the payday loan or authorized Defendants to make withdrawals from their bank accounts, and therefore were obligated to pay the finance charges associated with the purported loan.
74.
In truth and in fact, in numerous instances in which Defendants have made the representations set forth in Paragraph 70 of this Complaint, consumers had not authorized the payday loans, had not authorized Defendants to make withdrawals from their bank accounts, and therefore were not obligated to pay the finance charges associated with the purported loans.
75.
Therefore, Defendants’ representations as set forth in Paragraph 70 of this Complaint are false and misleading and constitute a deceptive act or practice in violation of Sections 1031(a) and 1036(a) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C §§ 5531(a) and 5536(a). COUNT II Misrepresentations about Loan Terms 76.
In numerous instances, in connection with origination and servicing of purported payday loans, Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 18 of 25
Page 20
that a consumer’s total of payments will be equal to the amount financed plus a stated finance charge.
77.
In truth and in fact, in numerous instances in which Defendants have made the representations set forth in Paragraph 73 of this Complaint, the consumer’s total of payments has been greater than the amount financed plus the stated finance charge. 78.
Therefore, Defendants’ representations as set forth in Paragraph 73 of this Complaint are false and misleading and constitute a deceptive act or practice in violation of Sections 1031(a) and 1036(a) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C §§ 5531(a) and 5536(a). COUNT III Unfair Billing Practices 79.
Section 1036(a)(1)(B) of the CFPA prohibits “unfair” acts or practices. 12 U.S.C. § 5536(a)(1)(B). An act or practice is unfair if it causes or is likely to cause consumers substantial injury, which is not reasonably avoidable and is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition.
80.
In numerous instances, in connection with the origination and servicing of purported payday loans, Defendants have caused consumers’ bank accounts to be debited without the consumers’ express, informed consent. 81.
Defendants’ actions cause or are likely to cause substantial injury to consumers that consumers cannot reasonably avoid and that is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or competition.
82.
Therefore, Defendants’ acts or practices as set forth in Paragraph 77 of this Complaint are unfair and violate Section 1036(a)(1)(B) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. § 5536(a)(1)(B). Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 19 of 25
Page 21
VIOLATIONS OF TILA AND REGULATION Z 83.
Under TILA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1666j, and its implementing Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. § 1026, creditors who extend “closed-end credit,” as defined in 12 C.F.R. § 1026.2(a)(10), must comply with the applicable disclosure provisions of TILA and Regulation Z, including, but not limited to, Sections 1026.17 and 1026.18 of Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. §§ 1026.17 and 1026.18. 84.
“Creditor” means a person who regularly extends consumer credit that is subject to a finance charge or is payable by written agreement in more than four installments (not including a down payment), and to whom the obligation is initially payable, either on the face of the note or contract, or by agreement when there is no contract. 12 C.F.R. § 1026.2 (a)(17). Defendants are creditors under TILA and Regulation Z because they extend consumer credit subject to a finance charge and the obligation is initially payable to them. 85.
“Closed-end credit” means consumer credit other than open-end credit, and “[o]pen-end credit” is defined as “consumer credit extended by a creditor under a plan in which: (i) the creditor reasonably contemplates repeated transactions; (ii) the creditor may impose a finance charge from time to time on an outstanding unpaid balance; and (iii) the amount of credit that may be extended to the consumer during the term of the plan (up to any limit set by the creditor) is generally made available to the extent that any outstanding balance is repaid.” 12 C.F.R. §§ 1026.2(a)(10) and (a)(20). Defendants extend closed-end credit (as opposed to open-end credit) to consumers under TILA and Regulation Z because the loans do not meet all three criteria for open-end credit.
86.
Sections 121(a) and 128(b)(1) of TILA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1631(a) and 1638(b), and Sections 1026.17(a) and (b) and Section 1026.18 of Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. §§ 1026.17(a) and (b) and 1026.18, require creditors of closed-end consumer credit transactions to disclose, before the credit is extended, among other things, the following about the loan: finance Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 20 of 25
Page 22
charge; annual percentage rate; number, amount, and due dates or period of payments scheduled to repay the total of payments (i.e., the “scheduled payment(s)”); and total of payments. These disclosures must reflect the terms of the legal obligation between the parties. 12 C.F.R. § 1026.17(c).
COUNT IV Inaccurate Loan Term Disclosures 87.
In numerous instances Defendants have violated the requirements of TILA and Regulation Z by not disclosing in writing before extending credit the following information in a manner reflecting the terms of the legal obligation between the parties:
a.
the finance charge;
b.
the annual percentage rate;
c.
the payment schedule; and
d.
the total of payments.
88.
Therefore, Defendants’ practices as described in Paragraph 84 of this Complaint constitute violations of Sections 121 and 128 of TILA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1631, 1638, and Sections 1026.17 and 1026.18 of Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. §§ 1026.17 and 1026.18. VIOLATIONS OF EFTA AND REGULATION E 89.
Section 907(a) of EFTA, 15 U.S.C. § 1693e(a), provides that a “preauthorized electronic fund transfer from a consumer’s account may be authorized by the consumer only in writing, and a copy of such authorization shall be provided to the consumer when made.” 90.
Section 1005.10(b) of Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. § 1005.10(b), provides that “[p]reauthorized electronic fund transfers from a consumer’s account may be authorized only by a writing signed or similarly authenticated by the consumer. The person that obtains the authorization shall provide a copy to the consumer.” Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 21 of 25
Page 23
91.
The Official Interpretation of Regulation E, Section 1005.10(b), 12 C.F.R. Part 1005 Supp. I at ¶ 10(b), cmt. 5, provides that “[t]he authorization process should evidence the consumer’s identity and assent to the authorization.” 92.
Defendants are “persons” as this term is defined in Section 1005.2(j) of Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. § 1005.2(j).
93.
Section 913(1) of EFTA, 15 U.S.C. § 1693k(1), provides that no person may condition the extension of credit to a consumer on such consumer’s repayment by means of preauthorized electronic fund transfers.
94.
Section 1005.10(e)(1) of Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. § 1005.10(e)(1), provides that “[n]o financial institution or other person may condition an extension of credit to a consumer on the consumer’s repayment by preauthorized electronic fund transfers, except for credit extended under an overdraft credit plan or extended to maintain a specified minimum balance in the consumer’s account.”
95.
The Official Interpretation of Regulation E, Section 1005.10(e)(1), 12 C.F.R § 1005.10(e)(1)-1, Supp. I, provides that creditors may not require repayment of loans by electronic means on a preauthorized recurring basis. COUNT V Not Obtaining Authorization for Electronic Fund Transfers
96.
In numerous instances Defendants have debited consumers’ bank accounts on a recurring basis without:
a.
obtaining a written authorization signed or similarly authenticated from consumers for preauthorized electronic fund transfers from the accounts; or Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 22 of 25
Page 24
b.
providing to the consumers a copy of a written authorization signed or similarly authenticated by the consumers for preauthorized electronic fund transfers from the consumers’ accounts.
97.
Therefore, Defendants’ practices as set forth in Paragraph 93 of this Complaint constitute violations of Section 907(a) of EFTA, 15 U.S.C. § 1693e(a), and Section 1005.10(b) of Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. § 1005.10(b).
COUNT VI Conditioning Credit on Preauthorized Electronic Fund Transfers
98.
In numerous instances, in connection with the origination of payday loans with consumers, Defendants have conditioned the extension of credit on recurring preauthorized electronic fund transfers.
99.
Therefore, Defendants’ practices as set forth in Paragraph 95 of this Complaint constitute violations of Section 913(1) of EFTA, 15 U.S.C. § 1693k(1), and Section 1005.10(e)(1) of Regulation E, 12 C.F.R § 1005.10(e)(1).
CONSUMER INJURY 100. Consumers have suffered and will continue to suffer substantial injury as a result of Defendants’ violations of the CFPA, TILA and its implementing Regulation Z, and EFTA and its implementing Regulation E. Defendants have been unjustly enriched as a result of these unlawful acts or practices. Absent injunctive relief from this Court, Defendants are likely to continue to injure consumers, reap ill-gotten gains, and harm the public. THIS COURT’S POWER TO GRANT RELIEF 101.
The CFPA empowers this Court to grant any appropriate legal or equitable relief with respect to violations of Federal consumer financial law, including, without limitation, Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 23 of 25
Page 25
permanent or temporary injunction, rescission or reformation of contracts, the refund of moneys paid, restitution, disgorgement or compensation for unjust enrichment, and civil money penalties. 12 U.S.C. §§ 5538(a) and 5565(a).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Bureau requests that the Court:
A.
Award preliminary injunctive and ancillary relief as may be necessary to avert the likelihood of consumer injury during the pendency of this action and to preserve the possibility of effective final relief, including but not limited to, temporary and preliminary injunctions, an order freezing assets, immediate access to business premises, and appointment of a receiver;
B.
Permanently enjoin Defendants from committing future violations of the CFPA; TILA and its implementing Regulation Z; and EFTA and its implementing Regulation E;
C.
Grant additional injunctive relief as the Court may deem to be just and proper;
D.
Award such relief as the Court finds necessary to redress injury to consumers resulting from Defendants’ violations of the CFPA, TILA and its implementing Regulation Z, and EFTA and its implementing Regulation E, including but not limited to, rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, and the disgorgement of illgotten gains;
E.
Award civil money penalties against Defendants; and
F.
Award Plaintiff the costs of bringing this action, as well as such other and additional relief as the Court may determine to be just and proper.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 24 of 25
Page 26
Dated: September 8, 2014
Respectfully submitted,
Attorneys for Plaintiff Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
ANTHONY ALEXIS
Acting Enforcement Director
CARA PETERSEN Acting Deputy Enforcement Director For Litigation
/s/ John Thompson John Thompson E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 202-435-7270 Laura Schneider E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 202-435-7311 Michael Favretto E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 202-435-7785 1700 G Street NW Washington, DC 20552 Facsimile: (202) 435-7722
And
Local Counsel
TAMMY DICKINSON
United States Attorney
/s/ Thomas Larson Thomas M. Larson, Bar No. 21957
Assistant United States Attorney
Charles Evans Whittaker Courthouse
400 East Ninth Street, Room 5510
Kansas City, MO 64106
Phone: 816-426-3130
Facsimile: 816-426-3165
E-mail: [email protected]
Case 4:14-cv-00789-DW Document 3 Filed 09/08/14 Page 25 of 25
Stipulation ()
PDF of this document (19 pages)
Page 27
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU,
Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD F. MOSELEY, SR., et al.,
Defendants.
CASE NO. 4:14-cv-00789-SRB
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER AS TO DEFENDANT CHRISTOPHER J. RANDAZZO
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“Bureau”), commenced this civil action on September 8, 2014 to obtain permanent injunctive relief, rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, disgorgement of illgotten gains, civil money penalties, and other relief from Richard Moseley, Sr. (“Moseley, Sr.”), Richard Moseley, Jr. (“Moseley, Jr.”), and Christopher J. Randazzo, and from SSM Group, LLC; CMG Group, LLC; DJR Group, LLC; BCD Group, LLC; Hydra Financial Limited Fund I; Hydra Financial Limited Fund II; Hydra Financial Limited Fund III; Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV; PCMO Services, LLC; PCKS Services, LLC; Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC; CLS Services, Inc.; FSR Services, Inc.; SJ Partners, LLC; River Elk Services, LLC; OSL Marketing, Inc. a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.; Rocky Oak Services, LLC; RM Partners, LLC; PDC Ventures, LLC; and Corvus Company, LLC. The Bureau brought its Complaint under sections 1031(a), 1036(a), 1054(a) and 1055 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (“CFPA”), 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531(a), 5536(a), 5564(a), and 5565; the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1666j, Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 1 of 19
Page 28
and its implementing Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. Part 1026; and the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (“EFTA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1693-1693r, and its implementing Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. Part 1005. In the Complaint, the Bureau alleges that Defendants violated the CFPA, EFTA and TILA in connection with the offering, provision, servicing and collection of online short-term, high-interest loans across the country. The Bureau and Christopher J. Randazzo agree to entry of this Stipulated Final Judgment and Order (“Order”) by this Court.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED:
FINDINGS By stipulation of the parties and being advised of the premises, the Court finds: 1.
This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 5565(a)(1) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345. 2.
Venue in the Western District of Missouri is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 12 U.S.C. § 5564(f).
3.
The Bureau and Settling Defendant agree to entry of this Order to settle and resolve all matters in dispute arising from the conduct alleged in the Complaint related to Settling Defendant.
4.
The Complaint states claims upon which relief may be granted. 5.
The relief provided in this Order is appropriate and available pursuant to sections 1054 and 1055 of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. §§ 5564 and 5565. 6.
Settling Defendant neither admits nor denies the allegations in the Complaint, except that he admits the jurisdictional allegations in the Complaint and the facts stated in this Order.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 2 of 19
Page 29
7.
Settling Defendant waives all rights to seek judicial review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Order and any claim that he may have under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, concerning the prosecution of this action to the date of this Order. Each party agrees to bear its own costs and expenses, including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees.
8.
Entry of this Order is in the public interest.
9.
Settling Defendant was hired by Individual Defendant Richard Moseley, Sr. in June 2010.
10.
From June 2010 to April 2014, Settling Defendant was employed by one or more of the Corporate Defendants. Settling Defendant had the following titles during his employment: Comptroller of OSL Marketing, Inc.; Controller of Defendant River Elk Services, LLC; Controller of Rocky Oak Services, LLC; Senior Manager of Hydra Financial Limited Fund I-IV; and Treasurer and Manager of Finance of Corvus Company, LLC.
11.
During Settling Defendant’s employment, Settling Defendant performed in-house accounting for the Corporate Defendants and prepared periodic financial reporting for the online consumer lending operations upon request of Moseley, Sr. Settling Defendant was also responsible for monitoring accounts payable for the Corporate Defendants.
12.
During Settling Defendant’s employment, Settling Defendant was responsible for monitoring many of the Defendants’ bank accounts and recording the movement of funds between the online consumer lending operations and bank accounts associated with each of the Corporate Defendants, as well as accounts in the Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 3 of 19
Page 30
names of Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. Settling Defendant provided a daily summary of bank activity to Moseley, Sr.
13.
Settling Defendant personally observed that, on a monthly basis, Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. withdrew owner draws from one or more Corporate Defendant bank accounts that held consumer funds from the online consumer lending operations. The owner draws were of varying amounts and for the personal use of Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr.
14.
The Corporate Defendants operated as part of a common enterprise through an interrelated network of companies that: shared common control, employees, addresses, and office space; commingled funds; and interacted with consumers, lead generators, debt collectors, payment processors, and other third parties from common locations.
15.
Since 2008, the online consumer lending operations owned, managed, operated, and controlled by Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. collected hundreds of millions of dollars from consumers nationwide. 16.
Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. shared the profits from the online consumer lending operations. Settling Defendant received an annual salary of approximately $50,000-$70,000. Aside from his salary and employee benefits, Settling Defendant did not receive any other compensation for his employment with any of the Corporate Defendants.
DEFINITIONS 17.
For the purposes of this Order, the following definitions apply: a. “Assisting others” means helping, aiding, or providing support to others, including but not limited to:
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 4 of 19
Page 31
i. performing customer service functions including, but not limited to, receiving or responding to consumer complaints; ii. formulating or providing, or arranging for the formulation or provision of, any advertising or marketing material, including, but not limited to, any telephone sales script, direct mail solicitation, or the text of any Internet website, email, or other electronic communication;
iii. formulating or providing, or arranging for the formulation or provision of, any marketing support material or service, including but not limited to, web or Internet Protocol addresses or domain name registration for any Internet websites, affiliate marketing services, or media placement services;
iv. providing names of, or assisting in the generation of, potential customers, excluding referrals of those personally known to Settling Defendant;
v. participating in or providing services related to the offering, sale, or servicing of a product, or the collection of payments for a product; vi. performing marketing, billing, or payment services of any kind; and vii. acting or serving as an owner, officer, director, manager, or principal of any entity.
b. “Complaint” means the Bureau’s complaint filed in the above-captioned action on September 8, 2014 (ECF No. 3).
c. “Consumer financial product or service” is synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to the definition of the term in section 1002(5) of the CFPA, Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 5 of 19
Page 32
12 U.S.C. § 5481(5), and, subject to applicable restrictions contained in the CFPA, includes but is not limited to, the following financial products or services delivered, offered, or provided in connection with a consumer financial product or service offered or provided for use by consumers primarily for personal, family or household purposes: i. Extending credit, and servicing loans, including acquiring, purchasing, selling, brokering, or other extensions of credit (other than solely extending commercial credit to a person who originates consumer credit transactions);
ii. collecting, analyzing, maintaining, or providing consumer report information or other account information, including information relating to the credit history of consumers, used or expected to be used in connection with any decision regarding the offering or provision of a consumer financial product or service; and iii. collecting debt related to any consumer financial product or service. d. “Debt” means any obligation or alleged obligation to pay money, whether or not such obligation has been reduced to judgment. e. “Defendants” means the Individual Defendants and the Corporate Defendants, individually, collectively, or in any combination, and each of them by whatever names each might be known; i. “Corporate Defendants” means SSM Group, LLC; CMG Group, LLC; DJR Group, LLC; BCD Group, LLC; Hydra Financial Limited Fund I; Hydra Financial Limited Fund II; Hydra Financial Limited Fund III; Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV; PCMO Services, LLC; Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 6 of 19
Page 33
PCKS Services, LLC; Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC; CLS Services, Inc.; FSR Services, Inc.; SJ Partners, LLC; River Elk Services, LLC; OSL Marketing, Inc., a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.; Rocky Oak Services, LLC; RM Partners, LLC; PDC Ventures, LLC; and Corvus Company, LLC, and any successors and assigns. ii. “Individual Defendants” mean Richard F. Moseley, Sr.; Richard F. Moseley, Jr.; and Christopher J. Randazzo, collectively, or in any combination, and each of them by any other names by which they might be known;
iii. “Settling Defendant” means Christopher J. Randazzo, by any names by which he might be known.
f. “Effective Date” means the date on which this Order is entered by the Court.
g. “Enforcement Director” means the Assistant Director of the Office of Enforcement for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, or his or her delegee.
h. “Person” means an individual, partnership, company, corporation, association (incorporated or unincorporated), trust, estate, cooperative organization, or other entity.
i. “Related Consumer Action” means a private action by or on behalf of one or more consumers or an enforcement action by another governmental agency brought against Settling Defendant based on substantially the same facts as alleged in the Complaint in this action.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 7 of 19
Page 34
ORDER Conduct Provisions I.
BAN ON ORIGINATING, OFFERING, SERVICING, COLLECTING OR SELLING LOANS OR OTHER EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
18.
Settling Defendant, whether acting directly or indirectly, is restrained and enjoined from, or assisting others in, any of the following for five (5) years after the Effective Date:
a. Marketing, advertising, promoting, or offering any loan or other extension of consumer credit;
b. Originating loans or extending credit to consumers; c. Attempting to collect or collecting payments from consumers on an existing loan, whether directly or through a third-party debt collector; d. Communicating with consumers regarding any loan or other extension of credit; and e. Selling, assigning, brokering, gifting, conveying, or otherwise transferring any purported consumer debt to a third party, including any debt broker, debt buyer, or debt collector. II.
PROHIBITED CONDUCT RELATING TO CONSUMER FINANCIAL PRODUCTS OR SERVICES IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
19.
Settling Defendant, and his officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, who have actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, in connection with the marketing, advertising, promotion, offering, originating, Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 8 of 19
Page 35
servicing, sale, or performance of any consumer loan, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from, or assisting others in, misrepresenting, or assisting others in misrepresenting, expressly or by implication: a. That consumers authorized or otherwise consented to a loan; b. That consumers authorized or otherwise consented to access to their bank accounts;
c. That consumers are obligated to pay finance charges associated with a loan that they did not authorize or consent to; d. The character, amount, or legal status of a loan; e. The payment schedule of a loan;
f. The interest rate, annual percentage rate, or finance charge of a loan and whether they are fixed or adjustable;
g. Whether, and to what extent, a payment will be applied to repayment of the principal of a loan; and h. Whether a loan will be refinanced or rolled over, and whether refinancing may trigger a prepayment penalty or other fees. 20.
In addition, Settling Defendant, and his officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, who have actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, in connection with the marketing, advertising, promotion, offering, originating, servicing, sale, or performance of any consumer loan, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from causing debits to be made from any consumer’s bank or other financial account, and from billing any consumer for any charge, without the consumer’s express, informed consent. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 9 of 19
Page 36
21.
In addition, Settling Defendant, and his officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, who have actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, in connection with the marketing, advertising, promotion, offering, originating, servicing, sale, or performance of any consumer financial product or service, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from making any representation, or assisting others in making any representation, about the performance, efficacy, nature, or characteristics of any consumer financial product or service, unless, at the time such representation is made, Settling Defendant possesses and relies upon competent and reliable evidence that substantiates that the representation is true.
III.
COOPERATION WITH BUREAU COUNSEL
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
22.
Settling Defendant must cooperate fully with the Bureau in this matter and in any investigation related to or associated with the conduct described in the Complaint. Settling Defendant must provide truthful and complete information, evidence, and testimony. Settling Defendant must appear for interviews, discovery, hearings, trials, and any other proceedings that the Bureau may reasonably request upon 15 days written notice, or other reasonable notice, at such places and times as the Bureau may designate, without the service of compulsory process. 23.
Settling Defendant must cooperate fully to help the Bureau determine the identity, location and contact information of any Defendant or any of the Corporate Defendants’ former employees. Settling Defendant must provide such information in Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 10 of 19
Page 37
his or his agents’ possession or control within 14 days of receiving a written request from the Bureau.
24.
Settling Defendant must cooperate fully to help the Bureau determine the identity, location, contact information, and amount of injury sustained by each customer of Corporate Defendants. Settling Defendant must provide such information in his or his agents’ possession or control within 14 days of receiving a written request from the Bureau.
IV.
PROHIBITION ON DISCLOSING CUSTOMER INFORMATION IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
25.
Settling Defendant and his officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with him, who receive actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, may not disclose, use, or benefit from customer information, including the name, address, telephone number, email address, social security number, other identifying information, or any data that enables access to a customer’s account (including a credit card, bank account, routing number or other financial account), that Settling Defendant obtained in connection with the marketing, advertising, offering, originating, servicing, collection or sale of consumer loans or other extensions of credit to consumers before the Effective Date. Provided however, customer information may be disclosed if requested by a government agency or required by law, regulation, court rules or order.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 11 of 19
Page 38
Monetary Provisions V.
ORDER TO PAY CIVIL MONEY PENALTY IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
26.
Under Section 1055(c) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. § 5565(c), by reason of the violations of 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531(a) and 5536(a) described in the Complaint, and taking into account the factors in 12 U.S.C. § 5565(c)(3), Settling Defendant must pay a civil money penalty of one dollar ($1) to the Bureau. This penalty is based in part on Settling Defendant’s limited ability to pay as attested to in the “Financial Statement of Individual” and supporting documents that Settling Defendant submitted to the Bureau on or about June 18, 2018.
27.
Within ten (10) days of the Effective Date, Settling Defendant must pay the civil money penalty by wire transfer to the Bureau or to the Bureau’s agent in compliance with the Bureau’s wiring instructions. 28.
The civil money penalty paid under this Order will be deposited in the Civil Penalty Fund of the Bureau as required by Section 1017(d) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. § 5497(d).
29.
Settling Defendant relinquishes all dominion, control, and title to the funds paid to the fullest extent permitted by law and no part of the funds may be returned to Settling Defendant.
30.
The facts alleged in the Complaint will be taken as true and be given collateral estoppel effect, without further proof, in any proceeding based on the entry of the Order, or in any subsequent civil litigation by or on behalf of the Bureau in a Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 12 of 19
Page 39
proceeding to enforce its rights to any payment or monetary judgment under this Order, such as a non-dischargeability complaint in any bankruptcy case. 31.
The facts alleged in the Complaint establish all elements necessary to sustain an action by the Bureau pursuant to Section 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), and for such purposes this Order will have collateral estoppel effect against the Settling Defendant, even in such Settling Defendant’s capacity as debtor-in-possession.
32.
Under 31 U.S.C. § 7701, Settling Defendant, unless he has already done so, must furnish to the Bureau his taxpayer identifying numbers, which may be used for purposes of collecting and reporting on any delinquent amount arising out of this Order.
33.
Within 30 days of the entry of a final judgment, order, or settlement in a Related Consumer Action, Settling Defendant must notify the Enforcement Director of the final judgment, order, or settlement in writing. That notification must indicate the amount of redress, if any, that Settling Defendant paid or is required to pay to consumers and describe the consumers or classes of consumers to whom that redress has been or will be paid. To preserve the deterrent effect of the civil money penalty in any Related Consumer Action, Settling Defendant may not argue that he is entitled to, nor may Settling Defendant benefit by, any offset or reduction of any monetary remedies imposed in the Related Consumer Action because of the civil money penalty paid in this action or because of any payment that the Bureau makes from the Civil Penalty Fund (Penalty Offset). If the court in any Related Consumer Action grants such a Penalty Offset, Settling Defendant must, within 30 days after entry of a final order granting the Penalty Offset, pay the amount of the Penalty Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 13 of 19
Page 40
Offset to the U.S. Treasury. Such a payment will not be considered an additional civil money penalty and will not change the amount of the civil money penalty imposed in this action.
34.
Under Section 604(a)(1) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 168lb(a)(1), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report concerning the Settling Defendant to the Bureau, which may be used for purposes of collecting and reporting on any delinquent amount arising out of this Order.
Compliance Provisions VI.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
35.
Settling Defendant must notify the Bureau of any development that may affect compliance obligations arising under this Order, including but not limited to, the filing of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding by or against Settling Defendant; or a change in Settling Defendant’s name or address. Settling Defendant must provide this notice at least 30 days before the development or as soon as practicable after learning about the development, whichever is sooner. 36.
Within 7 days of the Effective Date, Settling Defendant must: a. Designate at least one telephone number and email, physical, and postal address as points of contact, which the Bureau may use to communicate with Settling Defendant;
b. Identify all businesses for which Settling Defendant is the majority owner, or that Settling Defendant directly or indirectly controls, by all Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 14 of 19
Page 41
of their names, telephone numbers, and physical, postal, email, and Internet addresses;
c. Describe the activities of each such business, including the products and services offered, and the means of advertising, marketing, and sales;
d. Identify all of Settling Defendant’s telephone numbers and email, Internet, physical, and postal addresses, including all residences; and e. Describe in detail Settling Defendant’s involvement in any business for which he performs services in any capacity or which he wholly or partially owns, including Settling Defendant’s title, role, responsibilities, participation, authority, control, and ownership, and identify its name, physical address, and Internet address, if any. 37.
Settling Defendant must report any change in the information required to be submitted in Paragraph 37 at least 30 days before the change or as soon as practicable after learning about the change, whichever is sooner. VII.
ORDER DISTRIBUTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
38.
Within 7 days of the Effective Date, the Settling Defendant must submit to the Enforcement Director an acknowledgment of receipt of this Order, sworn under penalty of perjury.
39.
Within 30 days of the Effective Date, Settling Defendant, for any business for which he is majority owner or which he directly or indirectly controls and which provides consumer financial products or services, must deliver a copy of this Order Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 15 of 19
Page 42
to each of its board members and executive officers; Settling Defendant must also deliver a copy of this Order to any managers, employees, service providers, or other agents and representatives who have responsibilities related to the subject matter of the Order.
40.
For 5 years from the Effective Date, Settling Defendant, for any business for which he is the majority owner or which he directly or indirectly controls and which provides consumer financial products or services, must deliver a copy of this Order to any business entity resulting from any change in structure referred to in Section VI [Reporting Requirements], any future board members and executive officers, as well as to any managers, employees, service providers, or other agents and representatives who will have responsibilities related to the subject matter of the Order before they assume their responsibilities.
41.
Settling Defendant must secure a signed and dated statement acknowledging receipt of a copy of this Order, ensuring that any electronic signatures comply with the requirements of the E-Sign Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7001 et seq., within 30 days of delivery, from all persons receiving a copy of this Order under this Section.
VIII.
COMPLIANCE MONITORING IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
42.
To monitor Settling Defendant’s compliance with this Order, including the attested to financial representations which were used to calculate the civil money penalty, within fourteen (14) days of receipt of a written request from the Bureau, Settling Defendant must: submit compliance reports, as defined by the Bureau, or Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 16 of 19
Page 43
other requested information, which must be sworn under penalty of perjury; provide sworn testimony; or produce documents.
43.
For matters concerning this Order, the Bureau is authorized by this Order to communicate directly with Settling Defendant, unless Settling Defendant retains counsel related to these communications.
44.
Settling Defendant must permit Bureau representatives to interview any employee or other person affiliated with Settling Defendant who has agreed to such an interview. The person interviewed may have counsel present. 45.
Nothing in this Order limits the Bureau’s lawful use of compulsory process, including pursuant to 12 C.F.R. § 1080.6. IX.
NOTICES
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
46.
Unless otherwise directed in writing by the Bureau, Settling Defendant must provide all submissions, requests, communications, or other documents relating to this Order to the Bureau in writing, with the following subject line, CFPB v. Moseley, et al., Case No. 4:14-cv-00789-SRB, and send them by overnight courier or first-class mail to the below address and contemporaneously by email to [email protected]:
a. By overnight courier or first-class mail, as follows: Assistant Director for Enforcement Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection ATTENTION: Office of Enforcement 1700 G Street NW Washington DC 20552
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 17 of 19
Page 44
X.
RETENTION OF JURISDICTION IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
47.
The Court will retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purpose of enforcing this Order.
XI.
SERVICE
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
48.
This Order may be served upon Settling Defendant by electronic mail, certified mail, or United Parcel Service, either by the United States Marshal, the Clerk of the Court, or any representative or agent of the Bureau. XII.
FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
49.
The Bureau and Settling Defendant have consented to the terms and conditions of this Order as set forth above and have consented to the entry thereof. XIII.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
50.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), there is no just reason for delay, and the Clerk of the Court will immediately enter this Order as a final order against the Settling Defendant.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 18 of 19
Page 45
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Stephen R. Bough
JUDGE STEPHEN R. BOUGH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DATED: July 23, 2018
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 212 Filed 07/23/18 Page 19 of 19
Stipulation ()
PDF of this document (27 pages)
Page 46
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU,
Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD F. MOSELEY, SR., et al,
Defendants.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case No. 4:14-cv-00789-SRB
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER AS TO DEFENDANTS RICHARD F. MOSELEY, SR.; RICHARD F. MOSELEY, JR.; SSM GROUP, LLC; CMG GROUP, LLC; DJR GROUP, LLC; BCD GROUP, LLC; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND I; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND II; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND III; HYDRA FINANCIAL LIMITED FUND IV; PCMO SERVICES, LLC; PCKS SERVICES, LLC; PIGGYCASH ONLINE HOLDINGS, LLC; CLS SERVICES, INC.; FSR SERVICES, INC.; SJ PARTNERS, LLC; RIVER ELK SERVICES, LLC; OSL MARKETING, INC. a/k/a OSL GROUP, INC.; ROCKY OAK SERVICES, LLC; RM PARTNERS, LLC; PDC VENTURES, LLC; AND CORVUS COMPANY, LLC
The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“Bureau”) commenced this civil action on September 8, 2014 to obtain permanent injunctive relief, rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, civil money penalties, and other relief from Richard F. Moseley, Sr. (“Moseley, Sr.”), Richard F. Moseley, Jr. (“Moseley, Jr.”), and Christopher J. Randazzo, and from SSM Group, LLC; CMG Group, LLC; DJR Group, LLC; BCD Group, LLC; Hydra Financial Limited Fund I; Hydra Financial Limited Fund II; Hydra Financial Limited Fund III; Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV; PCMO Services, LLC; PCKS Services, LLC; Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC; CLS Services, Inc.; FSR Services, Inc.; SJ Partners, LLC; River Elk Services, LLC; OSL Marketing, Inc. a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.; Rocky Oak Services, LLC; RM Partners, LLC; PDC Ventures, LLC; and Corvus Company, LLC. The Bureau brought its Complaint under sections 1031(a), 1036(a), 1054(a), Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 1 of 27
Page 47
and 1055 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (“CFPA”), 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531(a), 5536(a), 5564(a), and 5565; the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1666j, and its implementing Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. Part 1026; and the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (“EFTA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1693-1693r, and its implementing Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. Part 1005. In the Complaint, the Bureau alleges that Defendants violated the CFPA, EFTA, and TILA in connection with the offering, provision, servicing, and collection of online, short-term, highinterest loans across the country. The Bureau and Moseley, Sr., Moseley, Jr., and the Corporate Defendants agree to the entry of this Stipulated Final Judgment and Order (“Order”) by this Court.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED:
FINDINGS By stipulation of the parties and being advised of the premises, the Court finds: 1.
This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 5565(a)(1) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345. 2.
Venue in the Western District of Missouri is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 12 U.S.C. § 5564(f).
3.
The Bureau and Settling Defendants agree to entry of this Order to settle and resolve all matters in dispute arising from the conduct alleged in the Complaint. 4.
The Complaint states claims upon which relief may be granted. 5.
The relief provided in this Order is appropriate and available pursuant to sections 1054 and 1055 of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. §§ 5564 and 5565. 6.
Settling Defendants neither admit nor deny the allegations in the Complaint, except that they admit the jurisdictional allegations in the Complaint. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 2 of 27
Page 48
7.
Settling Defendants waive all rights to seek judicial review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Order and any claim they may have under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, concerning the prosecution of this action to the date of this Order. Each party agrees to bear its own costs and expenses, including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees.
8.
Entry of this Order is in the public interest.
9.
From January 1, 2008 until the Effective Date, Defendants extended loans to hundreds of thousands of Affected Consumers, collecting approximately $227,713,303 in consumer monies, which resulted in approximately $69,623,528 in gross profits. 10.
On February 10, 2016, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York unsealed an indictment charging Individual Defendant Moseley, Sr. with criminal conduct concerning the operation of Defendants’ online payday lending scheme at issue in this matter. See United States v. Moseley, 16-cr-79 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 2. 11.
On November 15, 2017, Individual Defendant Moseley, Sr. was found guilty following a jury trial in New York on all counts of Indictment S2, Index No. 16-cr-79 (ER), which charged him with (1) conspiracy to collect unlawful debts; (2) collection of unlawful debts; (3) conspiracy to commit wire fraud; (4) wire fraud; (5) aggravated identity theft; and (6) making false disclosures under TILA.
12.
On June 12, 2018, the Honorable Edgardo Ramos sentenced Individual Defendant Moseley, Sr. to 120 months in prison and entered a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture as to Specific Property/Money Judgment in the amount of $49 million. See Moseley, Sr. Criminal Case, ECF No. 181 & CFPB v. Moseley, et al., 14-cv-789, ECF No. 199-1. DEFINITIONS Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 3 of 27
Page 49
13.
For the purposes of this Order, the following definitions apply: a. “Affected Consumers” means any consumer affected by the violations alleged in Counts I-IV of the Complaint during the Relevant Time Period. b. “Assets” means any legal or equitable interest in, right to or claim to any real, personal, or intellectual property, wherever located, including, but not limited to, chattel, goods, instruments, equipment, fixtures, general intangibles, effects, leaseholds, contracts, mail or other deliveries, shares of stock, commodities, futures, inventory, checks, notes, accounts, credits, receivables (as those terms are defined in the Uniform Commercial Code), funds, trusts, and all cash, wherever located, whether in the United States or abroad. c. “Assisting others” means helping, aiding, or providing support to others, including but not limited to:
i. performing customer service functions including, but not limited to, receiving or responding to consumer complaints; ii. formulating or providing, or arranging for the formulation or provision of, any advertising or marketing material, including, but not limited to, any telephone sales script, direct mail solicitation, or the text of any Internet website, email, or other electronic communication; iii. formulating or providing, or arranging for the formulation or provision of, any marketing support material or service, including but not limited to, web or Internet Protocol addresses or domain name registration for any Internet websites, affiliate marketing services, or media placement services;
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 4 of 27
Page 50
iv. providing names of, or assisting in the generation of, potential customers, excluding referrals of those personally known to Settling Defendants; v. participating in or providing services related to the offering, sale, or servicing of a product, or the collection of payments for a product; vi. performing marketing, billing, or payment services of any kind; and vii. acting or serving as an owner, officer, director, manager, or principal of any entity.
d. “Complaint” means the Bureau’s complaint filed in the above-captioned action on September 8, 2014 (ECF No. 3).
e. “Consumer financial product or service” is synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to the definition of the term in section 1002(5) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. § 5481(5), and, subject to applicable restrictions contained in the CFPA, includes but is not limited to, the following financial products or services delivered, offered, or provided in connection with a consumer financial product or service offered or provided for use by consumers primarily for personal, family or household purposes:
i. Extending credit, and servicing loans, including acquiring, purchasing, selling, brokering, or other extensions of credit (other than solely extending commercial credit to a person who originates consumer credit transactions);
ii. collecting, analyzing, maintaining, or providing consumer report information or other account information, including information relating to the credit history of consumers, used or expected to be used in Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 5 of 27
Page 51
connection with any decision regarding the offering or provision of a consumer financial product or service; and iii. collecting debt related to any consumer financial product or service. f. “Debt” means any obligation or alleged obligation to pay money, whether or not such obligation has been reduced to judgment. g. “Defendants” means the Individual Defendants and the Corporate Defendants, individually, collectively, or in any combination, and each of them by whatever names each might be known;
i. “Corporate Defendants” means SSM Group, LLC; CMG Group, LLC; DJR Group, LLC; BCD Group, LLC; Hydra Financial Limited Fund I; Hydra Financial Limited Fund II; Hydra Financial Limited Fund III; Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV; PCMO Services, LLC; PCKS Services, LLC; Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC; CLS Services, Inc.; FSR Services, Inc.; SJ Partners, LLC; River Elk Services, LLC; OSL Marketing, Inc., a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.; Rocky Oak Services, LLC; RM Partners, LLC; PDC Ventures, LLC; and Corvus Company, LLC, and any successors and assigns.
ii. “Individual Defendants” mean Richard F. Moseley, Sr.; Richard F. Moseley, Jr.; and Christopher J. Randazzo, collectively, or in any combination, and each of them by any other names by which they might be known;
iii. “Settling Defendants” mean Richard F. Moseley, Sr.; Richard F. Moseley, Jr.; SSM Group, LLC; CMG Group, LLC; DJR Group, LLC; BCD Group, Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 6 of 27
Page 52
LLC; Hydra Financial Limited Fund I; Hydra Financial Limited Fund II; Hydra Financial Limited Fund III; Hydra Financial Limited Fund IV; PCMO Services, LLC; PCKS Services, LLC; Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC; CLS Services, Inc.; FSR Services, Inc.; SJ Partners, LLC; River Elk Services, LLC; OSL Marketing, Inc. a/k/a OSL Group, Inc.; Rocky Oak Services, LLC; RM Partners, LLC; PDC Ventures, LLC; and Corvus Company, LLC.
h. “Effective Date” means the date on which this Order is entered by the Court. i. “Enforcement Director” means the Assistant Director of the Office of Enforcement for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, or his or her delegee.
j. “Moseley, Sr. Criminal Case” means the legal proceedings in United States v. Moseley, 16-cr-79 (S.D.N.Y.) (filed on 2/4/16). k. “Person” means an individual, partnership, company, corporation, association (incorporated or unincorporated), trust, estate, cooperative organization, or other entity.
l. “Related Consumer Action” means a private action by or on behalf of one or more consumers or an enforcement action by another governmental agency brought against any Settling Defendant based on substantially the same facts as alleged in the Complaint in this action.
m. “Relevant Time Period” means from January 1, 2008 until the Effective Date for purposes of Count IV of the Complaint, and July 21, 2011 until the Effective Date for purposes of Counts I-III of the Complaint. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 7 of 27
Page 53
ORDER CONDUCT PROVISIONS I.
PERMANENT BAN ON ORIGINATING, OFFERING, SERVICING, COLLECTING OR SELLING LOANS OR OTHER EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
14.
Settling Defendants, whether acting directly or indirectly, are permanently restrained and enjoined from, or assisting others in, any of the following: a. Marketing, advertising, promoting, or offering any loan or other extension of consumer credit;
b. Originating loans or extending credit to consumers; c. Attempting to collect or collecting payments from consumers on an existing loan, whether directly or through a third-party debt collector; d. Communicating with consumers regarding any loan or other extension of credit; and e. Selling, assigning, brokering, gifting, conveying, or otherwise transferring any purported consumer debt to a third party, including any debt broker, debt buyer, or debt collector.
II.
PROHIBITED CONDUCT RELATING TO CONSUMER FINANCIAL PRODUCTS OR SERVICES IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
15.
Settling Defendants, and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, who have actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, in connection with the marketing, advertising, promotion, offering, originating, servicing, sale, or Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 8 of 27
Page 54
performance of any consumer loan, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from, or assisting others in, misrepresenting, or assisting others in misrepresenting, expressly or by implication:
a. That consumers authorized or otherwise consented to a loan; b. That consumers authorized or otherwise consented to access to their bank accounts;
c. That consumers are obligated to pay finance charges associated with a loan that they did not authorize or consent to;
d. The character, amount, or legal status of a loan; e. The payment schedule of a loan;
f. The interest rate, annual percentage rate, or finance charge of a loan and whether they are fixed or adjustable;
g. Whether, and to what extent, a payment will be applied to repayment of the principal of a loan; and h. Whether a loan will be refinanced or rolled over, and whether refinancing may trigger a prepayment penalty or other fees.
16.
In addition, Settling Defendants, and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, who have actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, in connection with the marketing, advertising, promotion, offering, originating, servicing, sale, or performance of any consumer loan, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from causing debits to be made from any consumer’s bank or other financial account, and from billing any consumer for any charge, without the consumer’s express, informed consent. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 9 of 27
Page 55
17.
In addition, Settling Defendants, and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, who have actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, in connection with the marketing, advertising, promotion, offering, originating, servicing, sale, or performance of any consumer financial product or service, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from making any representation, or assisting others in making any representation, about the performance, efficacy, nature, or characteristics of any consumer financial product or service, unless, at the time such representation is made, Settling Defendants possess and rely upon competent and reliable evidence that substantiates that the representation is true.
III.
CERTAIN CONSUMER DEBTS EXTINGUISHED
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
18.
All consumer debt related to loans originated by the Corporate Defendants during the Relevant Time Period is hereby extinguished.
IV.
COOPERATION WITH BUREAU COUNSEL
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
19.
Settling Defendants must cooperate fully with the Bureau in this matter and in any investigation related to or associated with the conduct described in the Complaint. Settling Defendants must provide truthful and complete information, evidence, and testimony. Individual Defendants Moseley, Sr. and Moseley, Jr. must appear, and Corporate Defendants must cause Corporate Defendants’ officers, employees, representatives, or agents to appear, Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 10 of 27
Page 56
for interviews, discovery, hearings, trials, and any other proceedings that the Bureau may reasonably request upon 10 days written notice, or other reasonable notice, at such places and times as the Bureau may designate, without the service of compulsory process. Provided however, that nothing in this Paragraph shall be interpreted as a waiver of Individual Defendant Moseley, Sr.’s 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. 20.
Settling Defendants must cooperate fully to help the Bureau determine the identity, location and contact information of any Defendant or any of the Corporate Defendants’ former employees. Settling Defendants must provide such information in his or his agents’ possession or control within 14 days of receiving a written request from the Bureau.
21.
Settling Defendants must cooperate fully to help the Bureau determine the identity, location, contact information, and amount of injury sustained by each Affected Consumer. Settling Defendants must provide such information in his or his agents’ possession or control within 14 days of receiving a written request from the Bureau. V.
PROHIBITION ON DISCLOSING CUSTOMER INFORMATION IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
22.
Settling Defendants and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with them, who receive actual notice of this Order, whether acting directly or indirectly, may not disclose, use, or benefit from customer information, including the name, address, telephone number, email address, social security number, other identifying information, or any data that enables access to a customer’s account (including a credit card, bank account, routing number or other financial account), that Settling Defendants obtained in connection with the marketing, advertising, Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 11 of 27
Page 57
offering, originating, servicing, collection, or sale of consumer loans or other extensions of credit to consumers before the Effective Date. Provided however, customer information may be disclosed if requested by a government agency or required by law, regulation, court rules or order.
MONETARY PROVISIONS VI.
ORDER TO PAY REDRESS IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
23.
A judgment for monetary relief is entered in favor of the Bureau and against Settling Defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $69,623,528, and for the purpose of providing redress to Affected Consumers; however, full payment of this judgment will be suspended upon satisfaction of the obligations in Paragraphs 24-26, 34-35 and subject to Section VII of this Order.
24.
Settling Defendants hereby forfeit all legal and equitable right, title, interest and claims to assets frozen pursuant to Section VIII of the Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 8), dated September 9, 2014, and Section VIII of the Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 40), dated October 3, 2014, entered in this action, which are listed in Attachment A. Provided however, that: (a) personal, non-financial items in the safe deposit box in the name of Richard F. Moseley Family Trust at US Bank, Box No. 1559, shall be released to Individual Defendant Moseley, Sr.; (b) personal, non-financial items in the safe deposit box in the name of Individual Defendant Moseley, Jr. at Missouri Bank, account ending xxx8053, shall be released to Individual Defendant Moseley, Jr.; and (c) the Learning Quest 529 Education Savings Program Accounts in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Jr. and Kama R. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 12 of 27
Page 58
Moseley, Account Nos. 693588443-01 and 693588443-02, shall be released to Individual Defendant Moseley, Jr.
25.
Settling Defendants agree that, upon entry of the Final Order of Forfeiture in the Moseley, Sr. Criminal Case, Settling Defendants will not object to the Bureau’s coordination with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York to transfer the assets described in Paragraph 24 and Attachment A into a fund or funds administered by the Bureau, or the Bureau’s agent according to applicable statutes and regulations, to be used for redress for Affected Consumers, including, but not limited to, refund of moneys, restitution, damages or other monetary relief, and for any attendant expenses for the administration of any such redress.
26.
Settling Defendants hereby grant to the Bureau all right, title, interest and claims they have to the frozen assets currently in the possession, custody, or control of the Receiver, and shall forfeit any rights to the funds in the Receivership Estate. 27.
If the Bureau determines, in its sole discretion, that providing redress to consumers is wholly or partially impracticable or if funds remain after the administration of redress is completed, the Bureau will deposit any remaining funds in the U.S. Treasury as disgorgement. Settling Defendants will have no right to challenge the Bureau’s choice of remedies under this Section, and will have no right to contest the manner of distribution chosen by the Bureau.
28.
Payment of redress to any Affected Consumer under this Order may not be conditioned on that Affected Consumer waiving any right. 29.
With regard to any amounts that Settling Defendants pay under this Section [Order to Pay Redress], if any Settling Defendant receives, directly or indirectly, any Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 13 of 27
Page 59
reimbursement or indemnification from any source, including but not limited to payment made under any insurance policy, or if any Settling Defendant secures a tax deduction, tax refund, or tax credit with regard to any federal, state, or local tax, the Settling Defendant must: (a) immediately notify the Enforcement Director in writing, and (b) within ten (10) days of receiving the funds or monetary benefit, Settling Defendant must transfer to the Bureau the full amount of such funds or monetary benefit (“Additional Payment”) to the Bureau or the Bureau’s agent according to the Bureau’s wiring instructions. After the Bureau receives the Additional Payment, the amount of the suspended judgment referenced in Paragraph 23 will be reduced by the amount of the Additional Payment and the Additional Payment will be applied toward satisfaction of the monetary judgment entered in Paragraph 23.
VII.
EFFECT OF MISREPRESENTATION OR OMISSION REGARDING FINANCIAL CONDITION IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
30.
The suspension of the monetary judgment entered in Section VI of this Order is expressly premised on the truthfulness, accuracy, and completeness of Settling Defendants’ financial statements and supporting documents submitted to the Bureau, which Settling Defendants assert are truthful, accurate, and complete. 31.
If upon motion by the Bureau, the Court determines that Settling Defendants have failed to disclose any material asset or that any of their financial statements or oral testimony contain any material misrepresentation or omission, including materially misstating the value Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 14 of 27
Page 60
of any asset, the Court shall terminate the suspension of the monetary judgment entered in Section VI and, without further adjudication, shall reinstate the judgment entered in Section VI of this Order and the full judgment of $69,623,528 shall be immediately due and payable, less any amounts paid to the Bureau under Section VI of this Order. 32.
If the Court terminates the suspension of the monetary judgment under this Section, the Bureau will be entitled to interest on the judgment, computed from the date of entry of this Order, at the rate prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961, as amended, on any outstanding amounts not paid.
33.
Provided, however, that in all other respects this Order shall remain in full force and effect unless otherwise ordered by the Court; and, provided further, that proceedings instituted under this provision would be in addition to, and not in lieu of any other civil or criminal remedies as may be provided by law, including any other proceedings that the Bureau may initiate to enforce this Order.
VIII.
ORDER TO PAY CIVIL MONEY PENALTY IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
34.
Under Section 1055(c) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. § 5565(c), by reason of the violations of law described in Counts I-IV of the Complaint taking place during the Relevant Time Period, and taking into account the factors in 12 U.S.C. § 5565(c)(3), Settling Defendants must pay a civil money penalty of one dollar ($1) to the Bureau. This penalty is based in part on Settling Defendants’ limited ability to pay as attested to in the financial statements and supporting documents Settling Defendants submitted to the Bureau. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 15 of 27
Page 61
35.
Within ten (10) days of the Effective Date, Settling Defendants must pay the civil money penalty by wire transfer to the Bureau or to the Bureau’s agent in compliance with the Bureau’s wiring instructions.
36.
The civil money penalty paid under this Order will be deposited in the Civil Penalty Fund of the Bureau as required by Section 1017(d) of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. § 5497(d).
IX.
ADDITIONAL MONETARY PROVISIONS
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
37.
In the event of any default on the Settling Defendants’ obligation to make payment under this Order, interest, computed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961, as amended, will accrue on any outstanding amounts not paid from the date of default to the date of payment, and will immediately become due and payable.
38.
Settling Defendants relinquish all dominion, control, and title to the funds paid to the fullest extent permitted by law and no part of the funds may be returned to Settling Defendants.
39.
The facts alleged in the Complaint will be taken as true and be given collateral estoppel effect, without further proof, in any proceeding based on the entry of the Order, or in any subsequent civil litigation by or on behalf of the Bureau in a proceeding to enforce its rights to any payment or monetary judgment under this Order, such as a non-dischargeability complaint in any bankruptcy case.
40.
The facts alleged in the Complaint establish all elements necessary to sustain an action by the Bureau pursuant to Section 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 16 of 27
Page 62
523(a)(2)(A), and for such purposes this Order will have collateral estoppel effect against each Settling Defendant, even in such Settling Defendant’s capacity as debtor-in-possession. 41.
Under 31 U.S.C. § 7701, Settling Defendants, unless they have already done so, must furnish to the Bureau their taxpayer identifying numbers, which may be used for purposes of collecting and reporting on any delinquent amount arising out of this Order. 42.
Within 30 days of the entry of a final judgment, order, or settlement in a Related Consumer Action, Settling Defendants must notify the Enforcement Director of the final judgment, order, or settlement in writing. That notification must indicate the amount of redress, if any, that any Settling Defendant paid or is required to pay to consumers and describe the consumers or classes of consumers to whom that redress has been or will be paid. To preserve the deterrent effect of the civil money penalty in any Related Consumer Action, Settling Defendants may not argue that they are entitled to, nor may Settling Defendants benefit by, any offset or reduction of any monetary remedies imposed in the Related Consumer Action because of the civil money penalty paid in this action or because of any payment that the Bureau makes from the Civil Penalty Fund (“Penalty Offset”). If the court in any Related Consumer Action grants such a Penalty Offset, Settling Defendants must, within 30 days after entry of a final order granting the Penalty Offset, pay the amount of the Penalty Offset to the U.S. Treasury. Such a payment will not be considered an additional civil money penalty and will not change the amount of the civil money penalty imposed in this action.
43.
Under Section 604(a)(1) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 168lb(a)(1), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report concerning any Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 17 of 27
Page 63
Settling Defendant to the Bureau, which may be used for purposes of collecting and reporting on any delinquent amount arising out of this Order.
COMPLIANCE PROVISIONS X.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
44.
Settling Defendants must notify the Bureau of any development that may affect compliance obligations arising under this Order, including but not limited to, a dissolution, assignment, sale, merger, or other action that would result in the emergence of a successor company; the creation or dissolution of a subsidiary, parent, or affiliate that engages in any acts or practices subject to this Order; the filing of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding by or against any Settling Defendant; or a change in any Settling Defendant’s name or address. Settling Defendants must provide this notice at least 30 days before the development or as soon as practicable after the learning about the development, whichever is sooner. 45.
Within 30 days of the Effective Date, each Settling Defendant must: a. Designate at least one telephone number and email, physical, and postal address as points of contact, which the Bureau may use to communicate with Settling Defendant;
b. Identify all businesses for which Settling Defendant is the majority owner, or that Settling Defendant directly or indirectly controls, by all of their names, telephone numbers, and physical, postal, email, and Internet addresses; c. Describe the activities of each such business, including the products and services offered, and the means of advertising, marketing, and sales; Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 18 of 27
Page 64
d. Identify Settling Defendant’s telephone numbers and all email, Internet, physical, and postal addresses, including all residences; and e. Describe in detail Settling Defendant’s involvement in any business for which he performs services in any capacity or which he wholly or partially owns, including Settling Defendant’s title, role, responsibilities, participation, authority, control, and ownership, and identify its name, physical address, and Internet address, if any.
46.
Settling Defendants must report any change in the information required to be submitted under Paragraph 45 at least 30 days before the change or as soon as practicable after learning about the change, whichever is sooner. XI.
ORDER DISTRIBUTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
47.
Within 30 days of the Effective Date, Settling Defendants must submit to the Enforcement Director an acknowledgment of receipt of this Order, sworn under penalty of perjury.
48.
Within 45 days of the Effective Date, Settling Defendants, for any business for which they are majority owner or which they directly or indirectly control and which provides consumer financial products or services, must deliver a copy of this Order to each of its board members and executive officers; Settling Defendants must also deliver a copy of this Order to any managers, employees, service providers, or other agents and representatives who have responsibilities related to the subject matter of the Order. 49.
For 5 years from the Effective Date, Settling Defendants, for any business for which they are the majority owner or which they directly or indirectly control and which Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 19 of 27
Page 65
provides consumer financial products or services, must deliver a copy of this Order to any business entity resulting from any change in structure referred to in Section X [Reporting Requirements], any future board members and executive officers, as well as to any managers, employees, service providers, or other agents and representatives who will have responsibilities related to the subject matter of the Order before they assume their responsibilities.
50.
Settling Defendants must secure a signed and dated statement acknowledging receipt of a copy of this Order, ensuring that any electronic signatures comply with the requirements of the E-Sign Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7001 et seq., within 30 days of delivery, from all persons receiving a copy of this Order under this Section. XII.
COMPLIANCE MONITORING IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
51.
To monitor Settling Defendants’ compliance with this Order, including the attested to financial representations upon which part of the judgment was suspended, within thirty (30) days of receipt of a written request from the Bureau, Settling Defendants must: submit compliance reports, as defined by the Bureau, or other requested information, which must be sworn under penalty of perjury; provide sworn testimony; or produce documents. 52.
For matters concerning this Order, the Bureau is authorized by this Order to communicate directly with Settling Defendants, unless Settling Defendants retain counsel related to these communications.
53.
Settling Defendants must permit Bureau representatives to interview any employee or other person affiliated with Settling Defendants who has agreed to such an interview. The person interviewed may have counsel present. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 20 of 27
Page 66
54.
Nothing in this Order limits the Bureau’s lawful use of compulsory process, including pursuant to 12 C.F.R. § 1080.6.
XIII.
NOTICES
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
55.
Unless otherwise directed in writing by the Bureau, Settling Defendants must provide all submissions, requests, communications, or other documents relating to this Order to the Bureau in writing, with the following subject line, CFPB v. Moseley, et al., Case No. 4:14-cv-00789-SRB, and send them by overnight courier or first-class mail to the below address and contemporaneously by email to [email protected]: a. By overnight courier or first-class mail, as follows: Assistant Director for Enforcement Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection ATTENTION: Office of Enforcement 1700 G Street NW Washington DC 20552
XIV.
RETENTION OF JURISDICTION IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
56.
The Court will retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purpose of enforcing this Order.
XV.
SERVICE
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 21 of 27
Page 67
57.
This Order may be served upon Settling Defendants by electronic mail, certified mail, or United Parcel Service, either by the United States Marshal, the Clerk of the Court, or any representative or agent of the Bureau.
XVI.
FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
58.
The Bureau and Settling Defendants have consented to the terms and conditions of this Order as set forth above and have consented to the entry thereof. XVII.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
59.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), there is no just reason for delay, and the Clerk of the Court will immediately enter this Order as a final order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Stephen R. Bough
STEPHEN R. BOUGH United States District Judge
Dated: August 10, 2018
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 22 of 27
Page 68
ATTACHMENT A
List of Assets Referenced in Paragraph 24 of the Order
Any and all assets in the following accounts: Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 23 of 27
Page 69
a.
Account Number 1001048071 in the name of Hydra Financial Receivership (business checking) at Pacific Western Bank;
b.
Account Number 1001048089 in the name of Hydra Financial Receivership (money market) at Pacific Western Bank;
c.
Account Number 172995 in the name of BCD Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
d.
Account Number 173002 in the name of BCD Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
e.
Account Number 173010 in the name of BCD Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
f.
Account Number 145570211030 in the name of CLS Services, Inc. at US Bank;
g.
Account Number 3106853 in the name of CMG Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
h.
Account Number 3106861 in the name of CMG Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
i.
Account Number 3106888 in the name of CMG Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
j.
Account Number 180025 in the name of Corvus Company, LLC at Missouri Bank;
k.
Account Number 3107817 in the name of DJR Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
l.
Account Number 3107825 in the name of DJR Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
m.
Account Number 3107833 in the name of DJR Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
n.
Account Number 145570950603 in the name of FSR Services, Inc. at US Bank;
o.
Account in the name of Hydra Financial Limited at Global Transatlantic Solutions;
p.
Account Number 226060 in the name of PCKS Services, LLC at Payment Data Systems;
q.
Account Number 226061 in the name of PCKS Services, LLC at Payment Data Systems;
r.
Account Number 145572825522 in the name of PCKS Services, LLC at US Bank;
s.
Account Number 226062 in the name of PCMO Services, LLC at Payment Data Systems;
t.
Account Number 226063 in the name of PCMO Services, LLC at Payment Data Systems;
u.
Account Number 145572825530 in the name of PCMO Services, LLC at US Bank;
v.
Account Number 171662 in the name of PDC Ventures, LLC at Missouri Bank; Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 24 of 27
Page 70
w.
Account Number 145572825548 in the name of Piggycash Online Holdings, LLC at US Bank;
x.
Account Number 172928 in the name of River Elk Services, LLC at Missouri Bank;
y.
Account Number 1000102780 in the name of RM Partners, LLC at Lead Bank;
z.
Account Number 186120 in the name of RM Partners, LLC at Missouri Bank;
aa.
Account Number 145572825159 in the name of RM Partners, LLC at US Bank;
bb.
Account Number 145572825555 in the name of Rocky Oak Services, LLC at US Bank;
cc.
Account Number 173029 in the name of SJ Partners, LLC at Missouri Bank;
dd.
Account Number 245581381473 in the name of SJ Partners, LLC at US Bank;
ee.
Account Number 145572825324 in the name of SJ Partners, LLC at US Bank;
ff.
Account Number 145591468080 in the name of SJ Partners, LLC at US Bank;
gg.
Account Number 3106896 in the name of SSM Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
hh.
Account Number 3106918 in the name of SSM Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
ii.
Account Number 3106926 in the name of SSM Group, LLC at Missouri Bank;
jj.
Account Number 400467 in the name of Richard F. Moseley and Marsha F. Moseley JT TEN WROS at Aberdeen Funds;
kk.
Account Number 031-XXXXXXX3006 in the name of SSB&T Custodian for the IRA of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. at American Century Investments;
ll.
Account Number 0600007544 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. at Midwest Bank;
mm.
Account Number 0607008686 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. at Bank Midwest;
nn.
Account Number 8334-4277 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. Family Trust at Charles Schwab;
oo.
Account Number XXXX-0054 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. at Charles Schwab;
pp.
Account Number XXXX-2180 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. and Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at Charles Schwab;
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 25 of 27
Page 71
qq.
Account Number XXXX-6611 in the name of Kamar R. Moseley Revocable Trust at Charles Schwab;
rr.
Account Number 000034762 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. Family Trust at Commerce Bank;
ss.
Account Number XXXX-5036 in the name of Moseley GST Trust for Richard F. Moseley, Sr. u/t/a dtd. 12/12/95 at Commerce Bank;
tt.
Account Number 0043057751 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. and Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at BMO Harris Bank;
uu.
Account Number 0048821047 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. Family Trust at BMO Harris Bank;
vv.
Account Number 5MW-384737 in the name of Moseley GST Trust at BMO Harris Financial Advisors;
ww.
Account Number 725-21178-4 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. and Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at HSBC Bank;
xx.
Account Number 202305275 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. at State Street Bank Custodial IRA, Janus Global Research Fund;
yy.
Account Number 3215393 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Jr. Household Account at Missouri Bank;
zz.
Account Number 3223493 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at Missouri Bank;
aaa.
Account Number 7101244 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at Missouri Bank;
bbb.
Account Number 741949 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. Family Trust at Missouri Bank;
ccc.
Account Number 3008053 in the name of Richard F. Moseley at Missouri Bank;
ddd.
Account Number 001-901691548 in the name of First Florida Bank NA CF Richard F. Moseley, Sr. IRA u/d/t 9/2/75 at Pioneer Investments; eee.
Account Number 433635 in the name of Richard F. Moseley JT WROS Marsha F. Moseley at RS Investments;
fff.
Account Number 1901339761 in the name of Richard F. Moseley at Tanaka Capital Management;
ggg.
Account Number 0005409367 in the name of Richard F. Moseley JT WROS Marsha F. Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 26 of 27
Page 72
Moseley at Touchstone Investments;
hhh.
Account Number 5050040715 in the name of Richard Moseley, Sr. at US Bank;
iii.
Account Number 233684000 in the name of Richard F. Moseley JT WROS Marsha F. Moseley at US Bancorp Fund Services/U.S. Global Investors;
jjj.
Account Number 314382 in the name of Marsha F. Moseley at Missouri Bank;
kkk.
Account Number XXXX-4931 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at Charles Schwab;
lll.
Account Number XXXX-6116 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at Charles Schwab;
mmm.
Account Number XXXXXXXX-8297 in the name of David J. Moseley and Richard F. Moseley, Jr. at Bank of America;
nnn.
Account Number 8106746 in the name of Gustavus F. Moseley at Missouri Bank;
ooo.
Account Number 8106754 in the name of Gustavus F. Moseley at Missouri Bank;
ppp.
Account Number 0101441148 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. Family Trust at Country Club Bank;
qqq.
Account Number 0024562786 in the name of Richard F. Moseley, Sr. at Arvest Bank; and
rrr.
Real property located at 233 Norte, Building 2 Norte, #233 N, Playa Del Carmen, Quintana Roo 77710, Mexico.
Case 4:14-cv-00789-SRB Document 214 Filed 08/10/18 Page 27 of 27