Archives for November 2016

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey announced yesterday that national student loan servicer ACS – now known as Xerox Education Services, LLC, (ACS/XES) has agreed to pay a $2.4 million settlement over allegations that it failed to properly process struggling students’ applications for federal repayment plans intended to lower their monthly payments, and engaged in harassing debt collection practices.

The Assurance of Discontinuance, filed on Monday in Suffolk Superior Court, also alleged that ACS, which services federal loans made under the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program, along with private loans, charged some borrowers excessive late fees, failed to protect some active-duty servicemembers as required by federal law, and made excessive phone calls to borrowers.

The press release from the AG’s office notes that ACS/XES is a company responsible for servicing millions of student loan accounts across the country.

In December 2015, the AG’s office launched an investigation into certain student loan servicing practices by ACS, and found that the company allegedly failed to properly process student borrowers’ applications for federal loan relief associated with the Income-Based Repayment Plan established by the Higher Education Act. The investigation suggested that ACS also allegedly violated the state’s debt collection regulations by contacting students more than twice a week and did not investigate credit reporting disputes, which led to inaccurate information about students being sent to credit reporting agencies.

ACS/XES cooperated fully with AG Healey’s investigation and is implementing the enhancements to its loan servicing practices.

Under the terms of the settlement, ACS/XES will pay a total of $2.4 million, a portion of which will be paid as restitution to hundreds of Massachusetts borrowers who applied for, but were unable to successfully enroll or remain on, income-based repayment plans. ACS/XES has also stopped abusive debt collection practices, has reformed the accounts of affected servicemembers, and has credited any late fee overcharges.

In addition, ACS/XES will establish a designated “Borrower Advocacy Group” to provide direct assistance to student borrowers for income-based repayment plan applications and will administer a “Second Look Program” for applications that are rejected to ensure eligible students have every opportunity possible to qualify. The Borrower Advocacy group will also provide information on federal loan discharge applications to students with loans associated with predatory for-profit schools like American Career Institute, Corinthian Colleges, and ITT Tech.

“To address this student debt crisis, we need students to be on repayment plans that will help them succeed, not fall further into debt,” AG Healey said. “ACS/XES failed to meet this standard and regularly undermined the opportunity for students to access appropriate repayment plans. This conduct increases the already high cost of education, damages credit, and prevents students and their families from achieving long-term economic security.”

Student loan borrowers who are interested in learning more about income-driven repayment plans, need help resolving defaulted loans, have questions about their options, or would like to know if they are eligible for relief under the ACS settlement, should call the Attorney General’s Student Loan Assistance Unit’s Hotline at 1-888-830-6277 or file a Student Lending Assistance Request at www.mass.gov/ago/studentloans.

insideARM Perspective

This action by the Massachusetts AG’s office is not surprising.  Servicing of student loans has been a hot-button issue for consumer groups and regulators for quite some time.  Horror stories about confusion and inconsistencies from student borrowers are easy to find.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has also announced to the world that they are looking to dramatically reform the industry. On September 29^th of this year the Bureau issued a Student Loan Servicing Report which included recommendations for reform, and the CFPB’s October, 2016 Supervisory Highlights report shared findings from recent examinations in the areas of student loan servicing.

In an Enforcement Advisory released last Friday, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a reminder that Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) restrictions apply not only to calls to cell phones, but also text messages.

The advisory states that the TCPA limits autodialed calls and prerecorded – or artificial voice – calls to wireless numbers; emergency numbers; guest or patient rooms at hospitals, health care facilities, elderly homes, or similar establishments; and to any service for which the called party is charged for the call. The FCC’s corresponding rules restrict the use of prerecorded-voice calls and automatic telephone dialing systems, including those that deliver robotexts.

Like calls, robotexts to any to any telephone number assigned to a cell phone or other mobile device (such as a pager) are prohibited, unless made with the prior express consent of the called party, and unless the calls or text messages are:

(1) made for emergency purposes;

(2) free to the end user and have been exempted by the Commission, subject to conditions prescribed to protect consumer privacy rights; or

(3) made solely to collect debts “owed to or guaranteed by the United States.”

Those contending that they have prior express consent to make robotexts to mobile devices have the burden of proving that they obtained such consent. This includes text messages from text messaging apps and Internet-to-phone text messaging where the technology meets the statutory definition of an autodialer. The fact that a consumer’s wireless number is in the contact list of another person’s wireless phone does not, by itself, demonstrate consent to receive robotexts. Further, recipients may revoke their consent at any time using any reasonable method. When a recipient of an autodialed text has revoked consent to receive future robotexts, the text sender may immediately send one final autodialed text to confirm the recipient’s opt-out request.

The Commission has determined that when a caller reasonably relies on prior express consent to robocall or robotext a wireless number and does not discover that the number has been reassigned to another party prior to making the call or text, the caller is not liable for the first call or text going to the called party who did not provide consent. They are, however, liable for any continued calls or text messages to a reassigned number after the initial call or text, regardless of whether or when they learn of the reassignment.

Robotext violations are subject to enforcement by the FCC, including forfeiture penalties up to $18,936 per violation, and state enforcement agencies. (Emphasis added)

insideARM Perspective

While this notice is not specifically directed at debt collectors, and most debt collectors do not presently text consumers – at least not in their initial communications – the ability to communicate with consumers in ways that are most familiar and comfortable to them has become increasingly challenging.

The ARM industry has argued that debt collectors are not telemarketers, and the ability to communicate with consumers is critical to their ability to resolving their past due accounts. ACA International’s lawsuit against the FCC on this matter is on-going, with oral arguments delivered just last month. ACA, jointly with other petitioners including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have argued that the FCC’s 2015 Order “rewrote the TCPA,” “jeopardizes desirable communications that Congress never intended to ban,” and “encourage[s] massive TCPA class actions seeking crippling statutory damages.”

The democratic FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has not been swayed by these arguments, even when vigorously defended by republican commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O’Rielly, who wrote,

Today’s order has been hailed as “protecting” Americans from harassing robocalls and texts. That is a farce. Instead, the order penalizes businesses and institutions acting in good faith to reach their customers using modern technologies. I’m sure it will be said that we are approving half of the petitions before us. But, that is a completely misleading point, because many of the petitions were filed due to the belief that the Commission would not do anything to properly address the two big issues: reassigned numbers and autodialers.

He further added,

Starting with a threshold issue, I disagree with the premise that the TCPA applies to text messages. The TCPA was enacted in 1991 – before the first text message was ever sent. The Commission should have had gone back to Congress for clear guidance on the issue rather than shoehorn a broken regime on a completely different technology.

This FCC activity proceeds as parallel federal rulemaking efforts related to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act also move forward. Many stakeholders are pushing for modernization of the Act to incorporate the practical use of newer technologies such as text and email, which consumers increasingly prefer. While on the one hand government favors “Fin Tech” and new approaches to consumer-friendly access to financial services, on the other hand it would wind back the clock in the name of privacy and protection.

Time will tell whether a Trump administration will have any effect on this moving train.

Editor’s Note: insideARM maintains a free TCPA resources page to provide the ARM community a destination for information on the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (“TCPA”). This page is generously supported by LexisNexis. See the page here or find it in our main navigation bar from any page on insideARM.

The cornerstone of the page is a chart of significant TCPA cases. Click on the link in the chart for the complete text of the decision. Where insideARM has already published a story on the case, we provide a link. Case information is provided by the Bedard Law Group.

This article previously appeared on Maurice Wutscher’s Consumer Financial Services Blog and is republished here with permission.

Applying Campbell-Ewald, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit revived a consumer plaintiff’s ability to proceed with a putative class action, holding that an unaccepted offer of settlement or judgment generally does not moot a case, even if the offer would fully satisfy the plaintiff’s demands for relief.

A copy of the opinion is available at:  Link to Opinion.

A consumer filed a putative class action against a debt collector under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and survived the defendant debt collector’s motion to dismiss. The debt collector subsequently offered the plaintiff consumer judgment in his favor, but the consumer decided against the offer and the offer expired.

The debt collector moved to dismiss once again on the basis that it had offered the consumer all the relief he sought, and that consequently there was no longer a live case or controversy.

The district court, applying then binding precedent of O’Brien v. Donnelly Enters., 575 F.3d 567 (6th Cir. 2009), dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and entered judgment in the consumer’s favor, over the consumer’s objections.  The district court also dismissed the consumer’s class certification motion as moot.  The consumer appealed.

The Sixth Circuit began its analysis by addressing the applicability of the Supreme Court of the United States’ ruling in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 S. Ct. 663 (2016), a case decided after the district court entered the judgment at issue.  As you may recall, in Campbell-Ewald, the Supreme Court held that an unaccepted offer of settlement or judgment generally does not moot a case, even if the offer would fully satisfy the plaintiff’s demands for relief.

The Court of Appeals rejected the debt collector’s argument that the district court’s entry of an enforceable final judgment in favor of the consumer granting him all the relief he wanted distinguished the present matter from Campbell-Ewald.  In so ruling, the Sixth Circuit noted that the district court stated it had felt compelled to enter such an order as a result of O’Brien.  Consequently, the Sixth Circuit held that under the Supreme Court’s ruling in Campbell-Ewald, there was an Article III controversy between the consumer and the debt collector.

Next, the Sixth Circuit examined the debt collector’s argument that the Court lacked jurisdiction to review the appeal because the district court’s final judgment for the consumer had already given him all the relief he sought.  The debt collector argued that the debtor had no stake in the litigation as a result of the judgment entered by the district court and that stake was required to retain jurisdiction for an appeal.

The Court of Appeals rejected the debt collector’s argument, ruling that an erroneously entered judgment does not deprive a plaintiff of his stake in the underlying litigation.  In other words, the Sixth Circuit held, an appellate court has jurisdiction to correct an erroneous judgment by a trial court, including under the circumstances here in light of Campbell-Ewald.

Last, the Court found it unnecessary to address the merits of the consumer’s motion for class certification.  The Sixth Circuit reasoned that if it were erroneous to enter a judgment, then it was also erroneous to dismiss the consumer’s motion for class certification as moot.   Consequently, the Court held, the class certification motion was best decided through litigation before the district court.

Thus, the Sixth Circuit vacated the trial court’s judgment dismissing for lack of jurisdiction and entering a money judgment, and remanded the case.

WEST MONROE, La. — Coast Professional, Inc. (Coast) is pleased to announce the recent hiring of Todd Langusch to Chief Information Officer for the company headquartered in West Monroe, Louisiana, with offices in Geneseo, New York, and Rochester, New York. Mr. Langusch is responsible for managing and leading the Information Technology Department, ensuring the continued security of data, and maintaining an industry leading, state-of-the-art technology environment.  He will also provide oversight of system and security risk mitigation strategies, establish new technical requirements of Coast’s government contracts, facilitate security audits, and implement new technologies.

Mr. Langusch brings 25 years of experience in the development, implementation, and management of global Information Technology & Security programs, with 17 dedicated to the financial services industry. Prior to joining Coast, Mr. Langusch was the President and CEO of TECH LOCK, Inc., an information technology consulting firm which specializes in collection system technology, business processes, and holistic information security. In addition, he has held multiple top IT leadership positions including the role of CIO. During his time as CIO, Todd was responsible for the reduction of IT costs and nearly doubled employee productivity that resulted in the highest revenue in a quarter for the company.

Mr. Langusch is an active participant in the accounts receivable industry, including being a member of ACA International (the association of credit and collections professionals), the Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA), and the International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium (ISC)². He has also performed more than 800 security assessments, has held more than 25 different information technology certifications, is an ACA International Certified Instructor and has been previously named as one of the Top 50 Most influential Collection Professionals by Collection Advisor magazine.

Mr. Langusch is an Operation Desert Shield Service Disabled Veteran and was awarded a Southwest Asia Service Medal, a National Defense Service Medal, and a Good Conduct Medal.  During his service, he also earned the Navy’s “E” Ribbon, a Meritorious Unit Commendation, a Sea Service Ribbon, an Overseas Service Ribbon, and various other awards and commendations during his eight years of active duty service.

Brian Davis, CEO, commented on Mr. Langusch’s hiring, “Todd brings an exceptional background of information security knowledge and system implementation to the Coast team. His efforts ensure that Coast continues our technical excellence in securing our clients’ data.”

Everett Stagg, CFO, added, “We have seen firsthand, Todd’s ability to lead a team to success, facilitate large technical projects, and establish secure collection environments. He will help us ensure our continued technical compliance with government requirements and protocol. We are excited to have him join our growing team and help us continue to be a top performer.”

“We are excited to welcome Todd to the Coast Family,” said Roxanne Baker, President of Coast Professional. She continued, “He brings substantial industry experience and an outstanding reputation of providing the highest levels of security to Coast and we anticipate his long-term success with the company.”

About Coast Professional, Inc.

Coast Professional, Inc. is an accounts receivable management company, dedicated to the respectful and ethical collection of higher education and government debt. Coast provides professional collection services to over 200 campus based colleges and universities, guaranty agencies, and government clients. Coast is a five time honoree on the Inc. 5000 list for American’s Fastest-Growing Private Companies provided by Inc. Magazine and has been recognized for the third consecutive year as one of the “Best Places to Work In Collections 2016” by insideARM.com and Best Companies Group. Since 1976, Coast has worked closely with clients to increase recoveries by assisting consumers in resolving their financial obligations. Coast’s success is exemplified by exceptional recoveries, superior service, and dedication to the highest levels of compliance.

This article previously appeared on Ballard Spahr’s CFPB Monitor and is republished here with permission. The post was co-authored by John L. Culhane, Jr. and Christopher J. Willis.

The CFPB has filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff in Arias v. Gutman, Mintz, Baker & Sonnenfeldt, PC and 1700 Development Co., a FDCPA case on appeal to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.  In its brief, the CFPB states that its interest in the case stems from its FDCPA enforcement authority and its special mandate to protect older Americans from unfair, deceptive or abusive practices.

The defendants in the case are a landlord and a debt collection law firm seeking to collect a default judgment against the plaintiff for unpaid rent obtained by the landlord.  The law firm issued a restraining notice to the plaintiff’s bank  which restrained a portion of the plaintiff’s funds on deposit after establishing that the remaining funds were automatically protected as deposits of Social Security benefits.  The plaintiff subsequently claimed an exemption for all of the funds in his account on the basis that  the only deposits to the account were monthly Social Security benefits. 

The law firm objected to the exemption claim by commencing a special proceeding in state court supported by an affirmation.  In its supporting affirmation, the law firm claimed that (1) it was not possible to determine the amount of exempt funds because the plaintiff did not provide any records starting from a zero balance, and (2) the Social Security benefits would lose their exempt status if commingled with non-exempt funds and the plaintiff failed to provide documents showing there had been no commingling.  The law firm eventually stipulated to the release of the restrained funds.

The plaintiff thereafter filed an action in federal district court in which he alleged that the law firm’s objection was false, misleading, and deceptive in violation of the FDCPA and was also unfair and unconscionable in violation of the FDCPA.  The district court assumed the claims made by the law firm in the objection were false but determined they were not actionable because they were not material.

The court found that the misrepresentations would not have impeded the ability of the “least sophisticated consumer” to respond to or dispute collection because the objection sought a prompt hearing and, even though he appeared pro se, the plaintiff had received an exemption notice that included information about how to obtain free legal representation.  The court also determined that the least sophisticated consumer would realize that the law firm’s misstatement about commingling funds would not have been a sufficient ground to allow the law firm to garnish the funds.

In addition, the court concluded that the law firm could not have engaged in unfair or unconscionable conduct because it had objectively complied with New York process, whether or not it had acted in bad faith.  The court also found that the existence of a separate remedy under New York law made it  unnecessary to impose liability under the FDCPA.  Accordingly, the court granted judgment on the pleadings to the defendants.

In its brief, the CFPB argues that the district court erred in rejecting the consumer’s claims and asks the Second Circuit to vacate the judgment on the pleadings and remand the case to the district court.  According to the CFPB, under the objective least sophisticated consumer standard, the district court should have considered the effect of the law firm’s misstatement about commingling on a hypothetical consumer, rather than on a plaintiff who claimed never to have commingled his account.  It also asserts that the law firm’s misrepresentations were material because the information would have been important to the least sophisticated consumer in deciding how (and whether to) respond to the law firm’s objection.

The CFPB also calls the district court’s reliance on the law firm’s compliance with New York procedures “fundamentally misplaced,” arguing that the plaintiff’s allegation that the law firm filed a baseless pleading in the hopes of recovering exempt funds stated a FDCPA claim.  It also argues that the plaintiff’s claim “is no less viable because he could have also pursued relief under New York law.”

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. – LiveVox Inc., a leading provider of cloud contact center solutions, announced that it will host a follow up event to last month’s highly attended webinar, “Fortify Your TCPA Defenses”, that will dive deeper into the effective use of technology as part of a multi-layered TCPA defense strategy

To register, click here.

How should you go about vetting technology for consumer outreach?  What are the key factors in determining whether technology is or is not an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS)? What signals are the courts sending regarding technology use?  How can you best leverage technology to defeat TCPA claims?

Leading TCPA defense attorney Michael J. Stortz, Partner, Drinker Biddle, will join Mark Mallah, General Counsel for LiveVox, and Dusty Whitesell, Chief Evangelist, LiveVox, to discuss these and related topics.

Make sure your operations are prepared this year and into 2017, register today.

About the event:

• PANEL: Technology for Effective TCPA Defense: What You Need to Know

• DATE/TIME: Wednesday, November 30^th, 2016 at 11:00am PT/ 2pm ET

• PANELISTS:
  • Michael J. Stortz, Partner, Drinker Biddle
  • Mark Mallah, General Counsel, LiveVox, Inc.
  • Dusty Whitesell, Chief Evangelist, LiveVox, Inc. (Moderator)

• To register, click here

About LiveVox, Inc.

LiveVox is a leading provider of cloud contact center solutions, managing more than 6 billion interactions a year across Outbound, Inbound, Self-Service Voice, SMS and emails.  Founded in 1999, LiveVox built a pure multi-tenant cloud platform that improves agent productivity, drives smarter operations and mitigates TCPA/CFPB compliance risks. LiveVox is recognized for high scale operations, innovative features delivered quarterly, and its dedication to stay ahead of regulatory trends. Clients trust LiveVox consultants for driving operational insights and business results.  LiveVox complements its powerful platform with enhanced offerings such as business intelligence, cross-agency monitoring, campaign analytics, and open APIs for integration and partnering.

MUNCIE, Ind. -– Ontario Systems, a leading accounts receivable management (ARM) and healthcare revenue cycle management (RCM) software and services provider, has announced it has hired former Convergent Resources CTO Derek Whitaker as a Senior Systems Architect. A patent holder, 20-year ARM technology veteran and IT consultant, Whitaker will lead strategic software and VoIP telephony systems design and development for the company as it continues to support the ARM industry, and expand its footprint in both healthcare and government.

“I’m fortunate to have the opportunity to continue doing what I love with long-time partners at Ontario Systems: engineering and implementing creative solutions that help businesses grow and gain a competitive edge,” Whitaker says. “I’m looking forward to finding new and inventive ways to push the envelope as the next generation of contact management systems are brought to market, and I’m excited to see how they’re applied by our clients.”

Whitaker counts extensive experience leading technology teams and initiatives, building and consolidating call center systems, and promoting, designing and implementing future generation software among many highlights in a long career. He will work closely with Ontario’s product management team, with a key focus on the company’s Contact Savvy® technology, in collaboration with Rip Harris, Sr. Product Manager. Together, they will continue to develop new products to help leading clients reach more consumers, and reduce cost to collect.

“The best minds in the market will create the best contact solutions to our industries’ most important challenges,” says Ontario Systems VP of Product Management & Marketing, Casey Stanley. “We hired Derek because he has shown himself to be a beacon for thought leadership in the ARM industry. We look forward to the rewards the solutions we build together will bring.”

About Ontario Systems

Ontario Systems, LLC is a leading provider of revenue cycle management (RCM) and accounts
receivable management (ARM) software, services and solutions to the ARM, healthcare and
government industries. Established in 1980 and headquartered in Muncie, Ind., Ontario
Systems also has a location in Vancouver, Wash., and employees in 27 states. Ontario
Systems offers a full portfolio of software, services and business process expertise, including
product brands such as Artiva RM™, Artiva HC™, Contact Savvy®, Columbia Ultimate and
RevQ. Ontario Systems customers include eight of the 10 largest ARM companies and five of the 15 largest hospital networks in the U.S.  With Ontario Systems’ solutions, hospital network customers actively manage over $40 billion in receivables collectively.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — This week the Consumer Relations Consortium (“CRC”)  recognized the immense contributions of Stephanie Eidelman to the collection industry by bestowing upon her the inaugural Trailblazer Award.  Stephanie was instrumental in founding the CRC in 2013, which has grown to a membership of 30 larger market participants whose insights and opinions are sought by regulators and consumer groups in Washington DC and across the country.  Stephanie pursued a groundbreaking strategy of organizing the interests of larger market participant agencies who focus on compliance and fostering open dialog among those agencies, consumer groups and regulators.

Michael Kraft, General Counsel of the CCS Companies, and a CRC steering committee member commented on Eidelman’s achievements stating, “through Stephanie’s strategic efforts, the CRC is humbled to have met with federal and state regulators on a wide range of issues over the past three years.  Stephanie’s approach has been to facilitate open forums for fact-finding and innovation.” 

“Stephanie’s tireless efforts and clear vision for the collaboration of the collection industry with representatives from consumer groups, as well as state and federal regulators has resulted in unique experiences for larger market participants who take consumer protection seriously.  Representatives of debt collectors engaging with consumer groups in various settings and regarding a host of compliance subjects has been rewarding and effective,” noted Leslie Bender, VP/Government Affairs and general counsel at BCA Financial Services, another CRC steering committee member.

Among other initiatives, the CRC collaborated with Consumer Action to produce When a collector calls: An insider’s guide to responding to debt collectors.

For more information on the CRC, visit: http://www.crconsortium.org/

Today at 11AM MST, The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) plans to host a Field Hearing on consumer access to digital financial records.

In his prepared Hearing statement, CFPB Director Richard Cordray characterized digital financial records as “an opportunity and a challenge.”

These records yield “enormous insight that can empower consumers to make decisions and improve their financial lives” and can “enable great efficiencies,” he said, but added that there are also “unanswered questions about how the information is being shared, by and to whom, and how safely.”

At the hearing, the CFPB intends to discuss several of those questions, including:

• How and to what extent can consumers authorize data aggregators to access and/or share their digital financial records?
• How may financial institutions share digital financial information with third parties safely?
• What market incentives or disincentives are there for consumers to access their information?
• How are financial records transmitted to and stored by third parties?

Scheduled speakers include:

Richard Cordray, Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Zixta Martinez, Associate Director of External Affairs, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Edward (Ed) Leary, Department of Financial Institutions Commissioner, Utah

Steven Boms, Vice President, Yodlee

Ryan Falvey, Managing Director, Center for Financial Services Innovation

Alaina Gimbert, Senior Vice President, The Clearing House

Ed Mierzwinski, Consumer Program Director, Public Interest Research Group

Rob Morgan, Vice President, American Bankers Association

Joe Valenti, Director of Consumer Finance, Center for American Progress

The insideARM Perspective

Of course, digital financial records play a very large role in the debt collections space, so any signal, opinion, enforcement action or potential future rule from the CFPB on the use, storage and transmission of digital financial records will have an outsized impact on creditor and collector operations. insideARM will continue to monitor the Hearing and the CFPB for any new developments.

AMBLER, Penn. – Radius Global Solutions LLC (“RGS”), a global technology-enabled provider of end-to-end accounts receivable and customer relationship management solutions, announced today that Northland Group Inc. (“NGI”), a Minneapolis, MN-based provider of accounts receivable and customer relationship management solutions primarily to the financial services sector, has merged with RGS. Immediately following the transaction Northland Group will operate as a business unit of RGS.

Commenting on the transaction, Michael J. Barrist, Chief Executive Officer of RGS stated, “Through their culture of compliance, superior technology-enabled analytics and their focus on protecting their clients’ brands, Northland has become a leading provider of ARM and CRM solutions within the financial services sector. We are most excited about leveraging Northland’s platform to identify and match key consumer attributes with the optimum treatment method in order to achieve the best results with minimum consumer interaction. The addition of Northland’s analytical capabilities with Radius’ global footprint and virtualized technology, truly positions us to achieve our client’s long-term objectives.” Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated served as financial advisor to Radius Global Solutions LLC.

Lance Black, President of NGI, further stated, “We are truly excited about this merger with RGS and eager to expand our capabilities and benefits to our customers and team members. Both companies have passionate employees who are committed to compliance, technology and innovation. Working together with forward thinking industry veterans will bring new opportunities for us all.” Robert W. Baird & Co. acted as financial advisor to Northland Group Inc.

About RGS
RGS provides end-to-end accounts receivable and customer relationship management solutions through advanced technology that allows a variety of clients in the financial, government, education, healthcare, utilities, telecom, travel and commercial sectors with the flexibility to meet their financial and operation goals while maintaining their brand.

About NGI
Founded in 1982, Northland Group provides business process outsourcing services focused on accounts receivable management and collection services for national credit grantors. Our proven performance helps our customers increase profitability and dramatically improve recovery rates while preserving the relationship with the consumer.

Inquiries: Paul Weitzel
                 Managing Director
                 Radius Global Solutions LLC
                 1-267-419-1114