/regulation & compliance

News and resources on regulation, compliance, legal and governance issues for banks and fintechs.

Payments processor BlueSnap reaches $10m settlement with FTC

BlueSnap and its former CEO have settled with the Federal trade Commission (FTC) for knowingly processing payments for "deceptive and fraudulent" companies.

  4 2 comments

Payments processor BlueSnap reaches $10m settlement with FTC

Editorial

This content has been selected, created and edited by the Finextra editorial team based upon its relevance and interest to our community.

The payments company, ex-CEO Ralph Dangelmaier and SVP Terry Monteith agreed to turn over $10 million for consumers and to stop processing payments for certain high-risk clients.

In a federal court complaint, the FTC charged that BlueSnap and its officers processed millions of dollars in credit card payments for ACRO Services despite substantial evidence that the company was fraudulent.

BlueSnap, Dangelmaier and Monteith "turned a blind eye to glaring warnings" that ACRO Services was defrauding consumers from at least 2019 to 2021, according to the complaint.

The FTC says that BlueSnap continued to process payments for ACRO even though reports from Visa repeatedly showed that between 29% and 40% of the company’s charges were being disputed as fraudulent and even after American Express directly contacted Monteith asking her to close down ACRO’s accounts.

In addition, BlueSnap’s own internal fraud monitoring team reported to both Dangelmaier and Monteith that ACRO was defrauding consumers and they still failed to act to shut down the company’s accounts, according to the complaint.

BlueSnap was also accused of processing payments for other companies accused of fraud.

“Companies like BlueSnap that knowingly process payments for scammers are breaking the law and making it easier to cheat consumers,” says Samuel Levine, director, FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Sponsored [Webinar] PREDICT 2025: The Future of AI in the US

Comments: (2)

A Finextra member 

The FTC compliant is fascinating in how the Bluesnap execs stiff armed the requests from the Fiserv account staff.   While at First Data / Fiserv I recommended serveral times acquiring services for Bluesnap be ended due to a series of Bluesnap misbehavior and malfeasance.   Each time senior staff blocked my recommendations, apparently due to personal cronysim and financial relationships between Mr. Dangelmaier and First Data executives (Alledgedly).  The FTC did the acquiring industry as a whole a favor here, its regrettable Fiserv executives abdicated their responsibilities.

Ketharaman Swaminathan

Ketharaman Swaminathan Founder and CEO at GTM360 Marketing Solutions

We keep hearing that merchants lose their merchant accounts if chargebacks exceed a tiny percentage like 0.5% per quarter. In the case of this fraudulent merchant, Visa reported it was 29-40%, albeit over a longer period. Given that Visa was involved in each transaction from this merchant, why couldn't it block them? Even assuming that Visa "outsources" the blocking decision to acquirers / PSPs, why didn't Visa block the PSPs for continuing to acquire transactions from a merchant with such a high chargeback rate? Why did this have to go to regulator FTC?

[Webinar] PREDICT 2025: The Future of AI in the USFinextra Promoted[Webinar] PREDICT 2025: The Future of AI in the US