CKS Prime Investments Lawsuit: Defenses and the Colon Ruling

A CKS Prime Investments lawsuit is a debt-collection case filed by a New Jersey debt-buying company that purchases charged-off consumer accounts, typically from subprime credit card issuers, and sues to recover the full balance through outside law firms.¹ CKS Prime did not lend you money. It bought the account after the original creditor wrote it off, and as a debt buyer it has to prove in court that it owns your specific debt and that the amount it claims is accurate.²

Who CKS Prime Investments Is

CKS Prime Investments LLC was incorporated in Florida in October 2016 and is wholly owned by Velocity Portfolio Group, Inc.³ It operates from 1800 Route 34 North, Suite 305, in Wall, New Jersey, and describes itself as a “passive portfolio company” that holds the debts on paper while a sibling company, Velocity Investments LLC, master-services the accounts and hands them out to third-party collection agencies and law firms.⁴

The portfolios CKS Prime buys come mostly from subprime credit card issuers and online lenders, including Verve Credit Card, Celtic Bank, Reflex Credit Card, The Bank of Missouri, and WebBank. The company pays a fraction of face value and then seeks to collect the full amount.¹ A separate entity, CKS Financial (the trade name for Webcollex LLC in Chesapeake, Virginia), acts as a servicing agent on CKS Prime accounts, so consumers sometimes see both names on paperwork tied to the same account.⁵

How CKS Prime Sues Consumers

CKS Prime collects primarily by filing lawsuits. It doesn’t appear in court under its own staff; it uses outside firms, with Roach & Murtha Attorneys at Law and Malen & Associates PC serving as its primary counsel.⁶ The playbook is straightforward: file a complaint, wait for the deadline to answer, and if the consumer doesn’t respond, request a default judgment. Once a judgment is entered, the company can move to garnish wages, freeze bank accounts, place liens on real property, or ask a court to appoint a receiver to seize funds.¹

Court records show active filings in New Jersey, New York, Texas, and Arkansas in 2025. Some cases move to default judgment within months; others get dismissed once a defendant engages in discovery or the plaintiff’s own attorney moves to withdraw.⁷ The pattern matters, because it shows what changes the outcome: showing up.

What Happens If You Ignore the Lawsuit

Deadlines to file an answer typically run 14 to 35 days depending on the state. Missing that deadline is what turns a lawsuit into a judgment, and a judgment is what enables garnishment, account freezes, and liens. A judgment can remain enforceable for up to 20 years and hit your credit report for seven years or longer.¹

Consumers reporting complaints to the Better Business Bureau describe the sequence bluntly: money vanishes from a bank account with no prior awareness that a case was ever filed. One consumer reported a $1,559.62 hold placed on their account without notice of any lawsuit or service of process.⁶ Whether service was actually proper is a separate question, and one worth raising in court, but the practical effect of not answering is the same either way.

Defenses That Work Against a Debt Buyer

Because CKS Prime bought the debt rather than originating it, it carries a heavier evidentiary burden than a bank suing on its own account. To win, it must prove three things: that it has standing to sue, that the specific debt belongs to you, and that the amount claimed is accurate. Any documents it offers, such as old account statements, have to be authenticated by someone with personal knowledge of how those records were created and kept. Without that foundation, the documents are hearsay and can be excluded.²

The chain-of-title problem is real. In Velocity Investments v. Dybvig Installations (2013), the South Dakota Supreme Court reversed a summary judgment because Velocity, the parent-side servicer that handles CKS Prime accounts, could not establish the chain of title proving it legally owned the debt.⁸ A federal court in Plummer v. Atlantic Credit & Finance, Inc. (S.D.N.Y., 2014) also rejected Velocity’s argument that it was merely a “passive buyer” outside the reach of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.⁹

Common defenses to raise in an answer include:

Lack of standing or failure to prove ownership of the debt through a complete chain of assignments.
The statute of limitations has expired on the underlying account.
The debt is not yours, including cases involving identity theft.
The balance is inflated beyond what was actually owed to the original creditor.
Improper service of process.

A consumer rights firm was actively taking on CKS Prime cases as of December 2025, offering to defend collection suits and file counterclaims under the FDCPA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.¹⁰

If You Already Signed a Settlement: The Colon Ruling

If CKS Prime has offered you a settlement, or you’ve already signed one, read it carefully. In July 2024, a New Jersey judge in CKS Prime Investments, LLC v. Denise Colon struck down the company’s practice of writing settlement agreements that let it enter judgment for the balance “without motion or notification to the Defendant” if a payment was missed.¹¹

The underlying facts: CKS Prime claimed Colon owed $1,591.99 on a Celtic Bank account. The parties settled in March 2024 for three payments totaling $1,236.74. When CKS Prime said Colon had paid only $824.00, it asked the court to enter judgment for the remaining $767.99 without telling her, based only on a certification from its attorney.¹¹

Judge D. Santomauro refused. The court held that any waiver of the constitutional right to notice has to be “knowing and informed,” and the settlement’s language never explained to Colon, who was representing herself, that she was giving up the chance to contest whether a default had actually happened. The judge expressed “significant skepticism” toward the whole practice, likening it to a judgment by confession, which New Jersey courts treat as “fundamentally unfair and oppressive.” The court severed the notice-waiver clause, left the rest of the settlement intact, and ordered CKS Prime to refile any judgment application with proper notice.¹¹

Complaints and Enforcement Against Related Entities

CKS Prime has accumulated 415 complaints with the Better Business Bureau over the past three years, with 12 closed in the most recent 12-month period. The company is not BBB-accredited. Complaints break down into roughly 168 involving order issues, 137 billing disputes, 55 service problems, and 38 customer-service issues. Consumers repeatedly describe learning about lawsuits only after money was seized, being pursued for debts they say resulted from identity theft, and watching small balances grow into large ones. One consumer reported an original debt of roughly $125 that had become $2,634.58 by the time CKS Prime came calling.⁶

In its BBB responses, CKS Prime typically says it bought the accounts “in good faith and for value,” that outside law firms handled the litigation, and that consumers were served properly. When identity-theft claims are raised, the company says an internal compliance team investigates, and in some cases it has agreed to stop credit reporting or close the account as a “gesture of good faith.”⁶

The parent side has drawn more formal scrutiny. Velocity Investments has been named in several proposed class actions under federal debt-collection laws, and 335 consumer complaints have been filed against it with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. About a quarter of those complaints alleged the debt did not belong to the consumer, and 76 involved threatened or actual lawsuits, including 38 allegations of being sued without proper notification. None resulted in monetary relief; all were closed with an explanation only.⁸

In June 2025, the New York State Department of Financial Services issued a consent order against Roach & Murtha, one of CKS Prime’s primary law firms, covering conduct from 2018 through 2022. The DFS found that the firm violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by failing to conduct meaningful attorney review of case files before pursuing bank restraints and wage garnishments, and by enforcing judgments that had already been vacated or were time-barred. The firm paid a $40,000 civil penalty and agreed to overhaul its review procedures.¹² If a Roach & Murtha filing on behalf of CKS Prime is what brought you to court, the DFS findings are worth raising with your attorney.

1
Weston Legal. Who Does CKS Prime Investments Collect For
2
Nahoum Law. Sued by CKS Prime Investments in New York or New Jersey
3
Florida Division of Corporations. CKS Prime Investments LLC Filing Detail
4
Velocity Recoveries. CKS Prime Investments
5
IRP CDN Website. TBOM Settlement Document
6
BBB. CKS Prime Investments LLC Complaints
7
Arkansas Courts. CKS Prime Investments v. Shaw, 58CV-25-156
8
Get Out of Debt. Velocity Investments Debt Collector
9
The Langel Firm. Velocity Investments LLC
10
Edelman Combs Latturner & Goodwin. CKS Prime Investments LLC Debt Buyer
11
NJ Courts. CKS Prime Investments v. Colon, ESX-DC-4496-24
12
NY DFS. Consent Order: Roach & Murtha Attorneys at Law