Archives for August 2020

Whoever said that a pandemic has to stop or slow down the pace of regulatory rulemaking for debt collectors apparently didn’t send that message to the regulators. Since the pandemic started, New York City issued its Limited English Proficiency Rule and the Consumer Finacial Protection Bureau reiterated its intent to have the final debt collection rules out before the end of the year (and received comments on its supplemental time-barred debt rules). Colorado decided to join the fray as the most recent state to press forward with debt collection-related rule changes while the industry—and the world—is still knee-deep in COVID-19 adjustments.

The Administrator of the Colorado Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (CFDCPA) scheduled a stakeholder meeting for Tuesday, August 25 at 2pm (presumably Mountain time) to discuss amending and clarifying the rules under the CFDCPA and to solicit topics for rulemaking from interested parties. 

Proposed Changes

The Administrator’s proposed amendments to the current rules are available in redline here. Some highlights of the proposed changes include adding a 2-year call recording retention requirement, some clarification about who can sell and refer accounts, and changes to certain timeframes/dollar value in the rules.

The timeframe/dollar value changes include:

• Extends the time period in which a collection agency must provide an account statement to the consumer upon request to 14 days (originally 10 days).
• Increases the amount a collection agency can charge a consumer if he requests statements beyond the free 12-month period of statements to $10 per statement (originally $5 per statement).
• Changes the time period in which a collection agency must provide a written statement to the consumer that a debt has been paid or settled in full to 14 calendar days after the debt has been paid or settled (originally 10 business days). 
• Changes the time period in which a collection agency must refund a payment disputed by the consumer to 7 calendar days (originally 5 business days).
• Extends time period in which a licensee must file a new bank authorization if any trust account information in the license or renewal application changes to 35 days (originally 30 days).
• Extends the time period in which an agency must return payment if it cannot identify the account to which the payment should be applied to 35 days (originally 30 days).

Meeting Access Information

The meeting will be held on Zoom with the following details:

Zoom link: https://zoom.us/j/97668606404?pwd=SEFiMTQ3Rm5TOEszaHNzajdnbC9BQT09
Meeting ID: 976 6860 6404
Passcode: 038991

Call-in Option: (346) 248 7799
Meeting ID: 976 6860 6404
Passcode: 038991

[article_ad]

insideARM Perspective

We would like to encourage insideARM readers who do business in the state of Colorado to attend this meeting. While the changes proposed by the Administrator seem benign, the meeting is worth attending for fact that the Administrator will be taking notes on what rule changes stakeholders recommend. This not only allows agencies to make their voices heard about updating certain outdated or overly cumbersome current rule requirements, but it also allows the industry to hear and immediately address changes that consumers and their advocates propose. 

GENESEO, N.Y. — Coast Professional, Inc. (Coast) has invested approximately $300,000 in glass partitions and other safety measures for its four office locations and has begun installation of the partitions in its Geneseo, NY office. Coast recently began bringing employees back to the office following state-specific guidance. In a conscious effort to protect the health and safety of all staff members, the decision was made to add glass partitions around cubicles and in offices where social distancing is not possible.

The glass partition investment and newly implemented safety measures, such as enhanced social distancing policies, mask requirements, and daily health assessments, are a necessary step to keep employees safe. The 24-inch-tall partitions will act as an additional protection barrier between employees and will be sanitized on a daily basis. Coast has also invested in extensive safety measures including additional daily cleanings of the offices, approximately 100 hand-sanitizing stations across all office locations, and the purchasing of additional CDC recommended cleaning supplies. In addition to these safety measures, Coast purchased sanitation foggers, which are used to effectively disinfect and sanitize large areas. The foggers are used at the end of each business day. 

According to Jonathan Prince, Chief Operating Officer, the decision to add the partitions was a unanimous one for the Board of Directors. 

“The health of our employees is of the utmost importance to us and is something we don’t take lightly,” he said. “In order to begin the process of bringing employees back into our offices, we must do our part to make our office a safe, comfortable, and controlled environment. The glass partitions and added safety measures were investments we deemed absolutely essential in order to maintain the well-being of our team.”

About Coast Professional, Inc.:

Coast Professional, Inc. is an accounts receivable management and call center-based company, dedicated to the respectful and ethical communication with consumers. Coast provides professional call center services to over 200 campus-based colleges, universities, and government clients. Coast is a six-time honoree on the Inc. 5000 list for America’s Fastest-Growing Private Companies provided by Inc. Magazine and in 2020, was recognized for the fifth time as one of the “Best Places to Work In Collections” 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. More information about Coast can be found at www.coastprofessional.com.

Editor’s Note: This article, authored by Jacob Rheaume and Joseph Messer, originally appeared on the Messer Strickler, Ltd. Blog and is republished here with permission.

—

As the Nation slouches – ever so slowly – towards a full reopening, one fact has become clear. In a head-to-head match-up, a pandemic can and will outlast a human’s ability to out-wait.

While brave few never stopped the excursions outside their homes, the rest of us have to come to grips with returning to normal life in a COVID-19 rocked world. Business owners will be instrumental in assuring their employee’s return to work goes smoothly and safely as possible.

Business owners may consider several different strategies for ensuring their employees do not contract the virus or cause an outbreak. Some businesses have opted for conducting temperature checks while others have opted for coronavirus screening by nasal swab. Others still have considered conducting antibody tests via blood draws. But are these preventative measures legal?\

[article_ad]

In order to be legal, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) require any mandatory medical test given to employees must be “job related and consistent with business necessity.”[1] Generally, a medical examination of an employee is job-related and consistent with business necessity when an employer has a reasonable belief, based on objective evidence, that an employee’s ability to perform essential job functions will be impaired by a medical condition; or an employee will pose a direct threat due to a medical condition.[2] Both temperature measuring and COVID screening are considered medical examinations under federal employment law.[3]

Assessments of whether an employee poses a direct threat in the workplace must be based on objective, factual information, “not on subjective perceptions . . . [or] irrational fears”.[4] A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of the individual or others that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation.”[5]  The EEOC’s regulations identify four factors to consider when determining whether an employee poses a direct threat: (1) the duration of the risk; (2) the nature and severity of the potential harm; (3) the likelihood that potential harm will occur; and (4) the imminence of the potential harm.[6]

Thankfully for business owners who would like to require the testing of employees for the virus, governmental agencies have been labeling the coronavirus as a “direct threat” starting in March 2020.[7] This means you should not fear violating the law by subjecting employees to temperature checks or screening. Prior to implementing any employee program to regularly administer temperature or COVID tests, business owners should become familiarize the current list of authorized COVID tests.[8] COVID screening tests are frequently added or removed from the list of approved tests based on the latest evidence. Using an outdated test may cause test results that are of little or no use.

 Limiting Principle: Avoid Anti-Body Testing

The EEOC has adopted the position that business owners cannot force workers to take COVID antibody tests.[9] In a July 29, 2020 post the EEOC clarified that while businesses can require workers to take a viral test to determine whether they are actively infected, businesses have no legitimate interest in determining whether an employee previously contracted the virus.[10] As such, business owners seeking to mitigate risk should focus on risks that are clear and present: actively seek to limit the chances your employees contract and spread the virus through the use of temperature checks and screenings.

By comparing the permissible medical exam techniques (temperature and nasal swab) and non-permissible (blood draw), business owners should gain a better sense of what is and is not acceptable conduct towards employees. Even in pandemics, the law protects employees’ privacy rights. Business owners should focus on taking measures that pursue safety without putting themselves in legal jeopardy.

Footnotes:

• [1] “What you should know about Covid-19”, https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-covid-19-and-ada-rehabilitation-act-and-other-eeo-laws, last accessed 7/30/20.

• [2] 42 U.S.C. § 12112(d). Equal Employment Opportunity Comm’n, Enforcement Guidance: Disability-Related Inquiries and Medical Examinations of Employees under the Americans with Disabilities Act, § B of “General Principles” (2000), https://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/guidance-inquiries.html#4 [hereinafter Inquiries and Exams], last accessed 7/30/20.

• [3] Ibid.

• [4] Id.; 29 C.F.R. pt. 1630 app. § 1630.2(r).

• [5] 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(r).

• [6] Ibid.

• [7] See, fn 2, supra.

• [8] “Emergency Use Authorized Medical Devices”, https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/vitro-diagnostics-euas, last accessed 7/30/20.

• [9] See, fn 1, supra.

• [10] “Employers Cannot Require Antibody Tests”, https://abcnews.go.com/Business/employers-require-covid-19-antibody-tests-eeoc/story?id=71319374, last accessed 7/30/20.

As the COVID-19 pandemic presses on with still an unknown end in sight, many governmental bodies—both federal and state—are trying to figure out what to do to keep businesses and people from spiraling any further into a financial disaster. The Supreme Court of Virginia took it upon themselves to help tenants who are unable to pay rent by issuing an ex parte order that suspends the issuance of writs for evictions for failure to pay rent. This order is effective from August 10, 2020, through September 7, 2020. However, the order also includes a scalding dissent from 5 judges on the court’s bench.

The first somewhat mild dissent agrees that there is a need to suspend evictions, but says that the judicial branch should not be the one affecting such change. The judicial branch of government needs to remain neutral and should not give preferential treatment to one litigant over another—in this case, giving the upper hand to tenants over landlords.

The second dissent is much more intense, acknowledging that there is a housing emergency, but that it is a socio-economic emergency—not a judicial emergency. Since the wording of the dissent is so poignant, the majority of this article will be in direct quotes.

The dissent begins:

“Legal obligations that exist but cannot be enforced,” Justice Holmes once said, “are ghosts that are seen in the law but that are elusive to the grasp.” The ex parte order entered today places the legal rights of thousands of Virginia citizens outside the grasp of the judicial system. How long will Virginia courts be closed for the enforcement of landlords’ legal rights? Will this order be extended as so many of the other judicial emergency orders have been? No one knows.

(Internal citation omitted.) It then lays into four different reasons why such an order is improper:

1. The court does not have the statutory authority to enter such an order;
2. The order usurps the statutory remedy provided by the state’s legislature in addressing the housing crisis.
3. That the order goes against due-process traditions by forgoing the adversarial process (legal briefs, oral arguments, hearing the impacts on those affected by the order).
4. The order ignores constitutional concerns—such as temporary takings and the judicial branch suspending rights provided by the legislative branch—that “may not be legally dispositive, but they should not be summarily dismissed by an ex parte order.”

The court notes:

This statute [allowing the courts to close] is meant to ensure that access to the courts is not denied because of missing a deadline or filing requirement during a disaster. Nothing in subsections A or D authorizes closing the courthouse doors to some litigants on the ground that enforcing their legal rights would economically harm other litigants. We obviously have the inherent authority to close a courthouse if it presents a health or safety risk to those who enter it. If a courthouse is on fire, we can order everyone out. We can do the same when the close quarters of a courthouse creates a hotbed of disease. An eviction moratorium, however, has nothing to do with preventing the spread of disease by limiting social interactions in the courthouse, which is the only underlying justification for a judicial emergency order because of COVID-19.

The order continues:

The majority’s only response is to speak vaguely about “disadvantaged” tenants who suffer from “certain health conditions.” Because of these unspecified health conditions, the majority asserts, tenants who are behind on paying their rent cannot “avail themselves of the court,” and thus need protection of Code § 17.1-330. Whatever the stated purpose of the majority order, its only effect is to prevent landlords from exercising their right to “avail themselves of the court.” The tenants are not clamoring to go to court to “avail” themselves of their rights or seeking “relief from deadlines, time schedules, or filing requirements.” Even if they were, how can the majority so broadly generalize tenants as “disadvantaged” individuals suffering from “certain health conditions”? Do landlords have a due process right to contest the majority’s generalization in particular cases? Apparently not. For the duration of this ex parte order, it does not legally matter that a particular tenant is not “disadvantaged” by “certain health conditions.” The majority has declared them all to be so – without taking evidence, hearing from witnesses, reading legal briefs, or receiving arguments from any of the thousands of litigants (tenants or landlords) affected by the order.

(Internal citations omitted, emphasis added.)

The order ends with:

The COVID-19 pandemic and its resulting economic fallout are crises of monumental proportions. I do not question my colleagues’ motives in issuing this ex parte order. But we must do the right thing, the right way, for the right reason. One out of the three is not enough.

[article_ad]

CHERRY HILL, N.J. — MRS is pleased to welcome Evelina Shalevich as Senior Vice President of IT. With more than 15 years of experience in design, development and delivery of mission critical software systems, Evelina brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to MRS, one of the Collection Industry’s technology thought leaders. Her vast knowledge of technology pairs perfectly with MRS’s vision and the company believes that she will help MRS accelerate its industry leadership in technology. 

Chief Innovation Officer Michael Meyer said, “Evelina’s deep experience leading teams that design, develop and deliver services to global financial organizations will help MRS scale rapidly to meet its unparalleled growth”.

Evelina has spent her career in financial services technology roles in product development, strategy and automation. Prior to joining MRS, she spent nine years at Dovetail Solutions, later acquired by Fiserv, leading teams focused on next generation products. Prior to that, Evelina spent seven years at payment processing industry leader ACI leading product development teams. She has a degree from Drexel University in Computer Science. 

“This is a very exciting time to join MRS and I look forward to helping the company drive it’s vision to continue to be a leader in the digital and traditional collection services,” remarked Evelina. 

ABOUT MRS BPO, LLC

Founded in 1991, MRS has served the accounts receivable management needs of companies within the Healthcare, Banking, Financial, Government, Student Loans, Telecommunications, and Utility sectors for 26 years.

MRS BPO, LLC is a full service accounts receivable management firm based in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. The company’s unique combination of experience, technology, and compliance management processes allows them to provide industry-leading debt recovery solutions while enhancing their client’s brand and reputation. For more information on MRS BPO, LLC, visit them online at http://www.mrsbpo.com.

PEACHTREE CORNERS, Ga. — The FFAM360 Alliance of Companies, with the support of its executive leadership and countless valued employees, took part in the One Team ATL 5k, a virtual race to raise money for social justice education. 

FFAM360 is proud to serve the communities in which we live. Through participation in this company-wide event, we demonstrated our commitment to Intentional Living and creating positive change in our communities. Coordinated by the Atlanta Track Club in Atlanta, GA, the event was a Virtual 5k Run/Walk benefiting the National Center for Civil and Human Rights. Its purpose was to raise awareness for Social and Racial injustices that weave their way into societies, both in the U.S. and around the globe. Together with the Atlanta Track Club, The Atlanta Braves, Atlanta Dream, Atlanta Falcons, Atlanta Hawks, and Atlanta United, participants around the world completed the virtual One Team ATL 5K in their local areas between 5 a.m. on Saturday, July 11 and 5 p.m. on Sunday, July 12, 2020.  

“Each year, we spend countless hours brainstorming and carefully crafting a workplace philosophy,” says Matthew Maloney, President and Chief Investment Officer of the FFAM360 Alliance of Companies. “For the next calendar year, we ask our employees to embody this philosophy in every aspect of their lives through a call-to-action that each team member can carry out through their daily actions. In early 2020, we introduced this year’s annual motto: Clearly Go Above and Beyond. During the first half of the year, I can honestly say that our entire workforce within the FFAM360 Alliance of Companies has unceasingly personified what it means to Clearly Go Above and Beyond, especially in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, and more recently, the Civil and Human Rights injustices that have been thrust into the national spotlight.”  

Mr. Maloney continued, “I often say that the greatest and most successful human beings understand that our ability to grow and succeed in our quest of living life to its fullest potential starts with God, is followed by living with a purpose, and is influenced only by 10% what happens to us (our circumstances), and 90% how we respond to it those circumstances. Our responses not only provide a glimpse into our Emotional Intelligence (EQ) but also help contribute to our success in all situations. By taking personal actions and responding in constructive & purpose-driven ways, even the smallest of actions can trigger a chain-reaction that has the potential to change-the-world. FFAM360’s co-participation in the OneTeam ATL 5k benefiting the National Center for Civil and Human Rights is just one small, but profound example of how the employees and leadership at the FFAM360 Alliance of Companies are aiming to Clearly Go Above and Beyond.” 

For more information about the One Team ATL 5k, please visit the event website.

About FFAM360

The FFAM360 group of companies deploys world-class people, operations, and technology to deliver revenue cycle solutions to their clients that optimize their credit and revenue lifecycles. Founded in 2002 with the vision of creating a best-in-class organization that provides comprehensive solutions across the Insurance Subrogation, Healthcare, Staffing, and Financial Service sectors, FFAM360 has achieved many significant awards and recognitions including being honored by the Women’s Business Enterprise National Council (“WBENC”) as a Certified Women-Owned Business Enterprise. FFAM360 is headquartered just outside Atlanta, GA, with additional offices in Phoenix, AZ and Paso Robles, CA.

DICKSON CITY, Pa. — Abrahamsen Gindin LLC, a multi-state creditors’ rights law firm based in eastern Pennsylvania, recently announced that it has added the State of New York to its practice area. On June 30, AG Law’s Chief Compliance Officer Joshua Borer, Esq. was sworn into the New York State Bar. The firm’s jurisdiction now encompasses Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York.

“We are excited about the opportunity to expand our business into the New York area. This will allow us to better serve our existing clients,” said Josh Gindin, founding partner at Abrahamsen Gindin LLC.

Mr. Borer said, “I am excited about the opportunity for the firm to expand its footprint and to better service its clients. Our current clients are pleased that we are able to service their needs in the mid-Atlantic region.”

About Abrahamsen Gindin LLC 

Abrahamsen Gindin LLC collects on outstanding receivables for clients, using the legal process across various verticals. The firm utilizes a state-of-the-art automated process that provides efficiency while maintaining effective and compliant attorney involvement. AG Law’s compliance system lowers legal and litigation risk for its clients, which include major financial companies, credit card companies, and student loan servicers.

Last week, the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) provided some clarity to debt collectors on its newly-enacted Limited English Proficiency Rule (LEP Rule). DCA issued an FAQ document and a form for the annual reporting requirement for the LEP Rule, and also announced yet another extension of its grace period for enforcement, which now runs through October 1, 2020. In this article, you’ll find a summary of the three-page, thirteen-question long document.

Applicability

• The LEP Rule applies to anyone who is required to obtain a Debt Collection Agency license in NYC.
• When asked if the LEP Rule applies to creditors, DCA says “yes, no, and maybe” depending on the functions of the creditor’s actions and other statutory litmus tests (citations can be found in the FAQ document).
• The LEP Rule does not apply to litigation activities that can only be performed by a licensed attorney, such as filing a lawsuit or requesting an income execution.

Annual reporting requirement

The annual report form is a lot less convoluted than many speculated when the rule was first issued. The reporting form can be found here, and only requires collectors to keep a month-by-month log of the:

• Number of NYC consumer accounts on which the agency collected or attempted to collect a debt in a language other than English; and
• Number of employees who collected or attempted to collect a debt from NYC consumers in a language other than English. 

These are aggregate numbers, the report form does not call for an account-by-account or consumer-by-consumer log. 

Agencies need to maintain the annual report but don’t need to send it to DCA on an annual basis. DCA only wants to see it if they request it.

Specifics on requesting language preference

We’ll briefly summarize this in bullet points:

• Language preference must be solicited for each consumer from whom the agency attempts to collect. This means that if there are multiple consumers on the account, then a language preference must be solicited from each.
• The request for language preference can come after the consumer verifies his identity and after the debt collector provides required disclosures (e.g., Mini-Miranda).
• Once a debt collector has obtained and recorded the language preference—or exhausted reasonable attempts to do so—they need not make the request again in subsequent communications. Debt collectors may not infer a language preference.
• If a consumer declines to provide a language preference, the agency may record the non-response to satisfy its obligation.

[article_ad]

Validation letter and website requirements

The FAQs seem to imply that a debt collector must list the language access services it provides in its validation letter to consumers and on its publicly-accessible websites. This includes if the agency has the option for a consumer to speak with a multilingual company representative, to receive collection letters in the preferred language, and to list the languages in which the debt collector provides language access services.

There does not seem to be a requirement to provide specific language access services. A debt collector may provide some, but not all, services so long as this is clearly and conspicuously articulated in the validation letter and on the website. For example, just because a debt collector provides a multilingual representative for consumers to speak with on the phone, that does not mean that the debt collector must also provide written communications in that language.

If a collector does not provide language access services, then it must state so in the validation letter.

While it is not explicitly specified, there does not seem to be a requirement for agencies to request a language preference in the validation letter or on its websites. 

What, exactly, are language access services?

DCA provides examples of language access services, including but not limited to:

• Collection letters in a language other than English
• Customer service representatives who speak in a language other than English
• A translation service for the collector’s website
• A service that interprets phone conversations in real-time.

Wilmington, DE — Katabat, a leading global provider of debt management software solutions for lenders, fintechs, and collection agencies, announced today a strategic growth investment from Tritium Partners, a growth-focused private equity firm with extensive experience investing in fintech and financial services companies, and Terminus Capital, an enterprise software private equity firm. The investment provides Katabat with significant resources to expand and enhance its industry-leading suite of debt collection products. The transaction also represents an exit for Katabat’s venture backers, including Camden Partners, Osage Venture Partners and Activate Venture Partners. Terms of the transaction were not disclosed.

Katabat is a recognized global leader in cloud-based debt collection managed service software products. Founded by consumer lending experts, the Katabat platform has been built from the ground up to provide unparalleled ease and flexibility. The software synchronizes customer offers, implements customer workflows, and builds integrated content and treatments across all customer channels. Powered by machine learning, Katabat’s products are easily deployed to enable speed to ROI for its clients, and its products ensure full compliance with policy and regulatory guidance.  

“We were made for this moment. Having begun operations during the 2008 financial crisis, we are battle-tested and ready to support our clients, both today, as they grapple with the economic effects of Covid-19, and in the future,” said Ray Peloso, President and CEO of Katabat. “We recognize the criticality of product functionality, flexibility, speed and auditability as our clients require unprecedented speed to react to today’s rapidly shifting credit environment.” Mr. Peloso added, “We are thrilled to have Tritium and Terminus as our partners as we enter the company’s next phase of growth.”

Chris Steiner, Principal at Tritium Partners, commented, “Katabat has created a world-class platform that delivers a clear and compelling return on investment to its clients, making it the debt collections software solution of choice for credit and collection professionals. We see significant potential for Katabat as a leader in a market that is increasingly seeking out intelligent, compliance-minded, and data-driven work-flow management capabilities that enable a true omni-channel experience for consumer customers throughout the entire credit lifecycle. No other platform can duplicate the unique capability that Katabat offers to its clients.”  

Alex Western, Managing Director at Terminus, added, “We are focused on ensuring a quality customer experience and creating a transparent, positive presence in the sector. We are investing to expand Katabat’s go-to-market team and further enhance its product differentiation to meet the demand from clients who seek technology to improve operational success and better serve consumers.” Mr. Western also commented, “We are thrilled to be partnering with Ray Peloso, CEO, and Ye Zhang, Co-Founder and Head of Product Strategy, and we are confident that the company is well-positioned to dominate the market for debt collection software.”

About Katabat

With more than a decade of experience delivering debt collection solutions to global banks and debt collection agencies, Katabat combines collections and machine learning expertise to help clients engage with customers and increase collections. Katabat partners with lenders and collectors across multiple industries to stay at the cutting edge of debt management, machine learning, automation, regulatory compliance, and data security. To learn more about our full range of debt management products, contact Katabat at info@katabat.com. 

About Tritium Partners

Founded in 2013, Tritium is a private equity firm focused on companies with exceptional growth potential. For over 17 years, both at Tritium and prior vehicles, Tritium’s founders have deployed over $850 million of equity capital while partnering with talented founders and executives to build market-leading companies. Tritium’s approach emphasizes creating long-term value through strategic growth initiatives and acquisitions, with a focus on internet and information services, financial and business services, and supply chain and logistics.

About Terminus Capital

Terminus Capital Partners is a private equity firm focused on business software companies, founded in 2017 and based in Atlanta, GA. Differentiated by its industry expertise, sourcing engine, operations playbook, and buy-and-build methodology, Terminus strives to be the premier partner for capital providers, bankers, and management teams in the enterprise software sector.

CORAL SPRINGS, Fla. — MCU Holdings, LLC, announces support of our nation’s fallen special operations heroes through a donation to Naked Warrior Project, a nonprofit organization that helps to preserve the memory of the fallen while providing support for their families. 

“Few deserve our gratitude and respect more than our fallen military heroes who gave the ultimate sacrifice to protect our country and our freedoms,” says MCU Holdings’ Managing Member Alan Malke. “Our team proudly supports our nation’s active military, veterans, and fallen heroes. The Naked Warrior Project is an amazing organization with an incredible mission: to honor the fallen and support their families. It is our honor to support them and the meaningful services they provide.” 

After the death of Navy SEAL Ryan Owens, his family started Naked Warrior Project in memoriam of their beloved hero. Understanding the great loss that other veterans and families endure, the organization was created to support the memory of our nation’s fallen Navy SEALs and Special Operatives. Through education, connecting families, fundraising events, and erecting accessible memorial sites in fallen warriors’ hometowns, Naked Warrior Project honors the fallen, supports their families, and provides a sense of community for those who have faced similar challenges. 

“MCU Holdings exists not just in our offices, but also in our communities,” continues Mr. Malke. “We support organizations and charities that are working to create positive change. Through our support of Naked Warrior Project, we are helping to preserve the memory of our fallen heroes and all they have done through their service and sacrifice. As their families reach out for support, we want to help ensure that Naked Warrior Project is able to respond.” 

For more information about Naked Warrior Project, please visit nakedwarriorproject.org.

About Naked Warrior Project

Naked Warrior Project is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization established in 2017 to honor and preserve the memory of our fallen Navy SEAL and Special Operations heroes. The organization also provides support and a sense of community to the Gold Star Families left behind. The mission of the Naked Warrior Project is to honor the fallen and support their families through donations and funds at hosted events. The Naked Warrior Project is based in Deerfield Beach, FL.

About MCU Holdings

MCU Holdings is a professional third-party debt collection company providing customized debt collection programs for creditor businesses and best-in-class experiences for consumers. The Company is located in Coral Springs, FL.