The Global Holdings LLC lawsuit history centers on three matters: a 2014 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau enforcement action that produced a $7.1 million judgment against the company and its subsidiary Global Client Solutions, a $600,000 settlement with the Massachusetts Attorney General in 2022, and the company’s continuing role as a non-defendant payment processor in the StratFS receivership that began in 2024. All three arise from the same underlying issue: the handling of consumer money used to pay debt-settlement fees.
What Global Holdings Does
Global Holdings is a Tulsa, Oklahoma payment processor founded in 2003. It runs the dedicated bank accounts that consumers deposit money into while enrolled in debt settlement programs, and it releases fees from those accounts to the debt settlement companies. The company reports processing 43 million transactions and $15 billion in payments annually and serving more than 10 million customers.1Global Holdings. Global Holdings It is a portfolio company of New State Capital Partners.2New State Capital Partners. Global Holdings
That role matters because the Telemarketing Sales Rule prohibits debt settlement companies from collecting any fee until they have actually renegotiated or settled at least one of a consumer’s debts and the consumer has made at least one payment toward that settlement. A processor that releases fees before those conditions are met can be pulled into the same enforcement action as the debt settlement company itself.
The 2014 CFPB Enforcement Action
On August 25, 2014, the CFPB filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Global Client Solutions LLC, its parent Global Holdings LLC, and two principals: Robert Merrick and CEO Michael Hendrix. The case was docketed as No. 2:14-cv-06643.3Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Global Client Solutions
The Bureau alleged that since October 2010, Global Client Solutions had processed tens of millions of dollars in illegal upfront fees for hundreds of debt relief companies, affecting tens of thousands of consumers. The theory was that Global processed premature fee payments while knowing, or consciously avoiding knowing, that its debt relief clients were breaking the Telemarketing Sales Rule.4Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. CFPB Takes Action Against Global Client Solutions for Processing Illegal Debt Settlement Fees
Money and Conduct Terms
The case resolved by stipulated consent order signed on August 27, 2014. The defendants were jointly and severally liable for $6,099,000 in consumer relief, with $4 million due within ten days and the rest by December 2014, plus a separate $1 million civil money penalty.5Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Stipulated Final Judgment and Consent Order, CFPB v. Global Client Solutions
The order also imposed conduct rules. Global was permanently barred from providing payment processing or account maintenance to any debt relief company if it knew or consciously avoided knowing the company was collecting unlawful advance fees. Before onboarding a debt relief client, Global had to collect business data, marketing materials, contract templates, and records of prior complaints and legal actions. It had to conduct semi-annual audits of its debt relief clients and monitor for warning signs, including unauthorized return rates exceeding 0.5 percent or defined complaint thresholds. When triggers hit, Global had to suspend fee payments and investigate.5Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Stipulated Final Judgment and Consent Order, CFPB v. Global Client Solutions
Global also had to build an enhanced compliance management system within 90 days and hire an independent third-party monitor to report within 180 days. The CFPB kept supervisory authority for three years, with no option for early termination. The case is now listed as post-order and post-judgment.3Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Global Client Solutions
The 2022 Massachusetts Attorney General Settlement
On November 7, 2022, Global Holdings LLC entered a $600,000 settlement with Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, filed as an assurance of discontinuance in Suffolk Superior Court. The case grew out of Global’s relationship with DMB Financial LLC, a debt settlement company the state had already sued over illegal upfront fees.6Massachusetts Attorney General. AGs Office Reaches Settlement With Payment Processing Company Over Claims of Unlawful Fee Practices
The AG’s office alleged that Global Holdings aided and abetted DMB Financial’s violations of the Telemarketing Sales Rule by releasing consumer fees before the legally required conditions were met, and that Global provided “substantial assistance” while knowing about DMB’s misconduct, continuing to process the premature payments even after the AG had sued DMB.6Massachusetts Attorney General. AGs Office Reaches Settlement With Payment Processing Company Over Claims of Unlawful Fee Practices
Beyond the money, Global agreed to reengineer its platform within six months. Any settlement fee paid to a debt settlement provider would be linked to the consumer’s initial payment to a specific creditor, so at least one payment reaches each enrolled creditor under a negotiated settlement before the debt settlement company receives any portion of its fee for that debt.6Massachusetts Attorney General. AGs Office Reaches Settlement With Payment Processing Company Over Claims of Unlawful Fee Practices
The StratFS Receivership
In January 2024, the CFPB and seven state attorneys general sued StratFS LLC (formerly Strategic Financial Solutions LLC) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, alleging an illegal debt relief scheme that collected unlawful advance fees through shell companies. A receiver was appointed, and on March 4, 2024, the court issued a preliminary injunction that included an asset freeze.7CaseMine. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. StratFS LLC
Global Holdings is not a named defendant. It is identified in the case as a “Payment Processor” alongside RAM Payment LLC (also known as Reliant Account Management). Both companies held the dedicated consumer accounts used in programs run by StratFS and its subsidiaries, including Atlas Debt Relief LLC and Timberline Financial LLC.8Regulatory Resolutions. CFPB et al. v. StratFS LLC et al. – StratFS Receivership
Account Closures and Refunds
On January 7, 2025, the court granted the receiver’s motion to close certain consumer-dedicated accounts held at Global Holdings and RAM Payment. Both companies had to stop charging monthly fees immediately for consumers without active payment plans, and to stop fees for those with active plans once their final payment was made. Balances had to be refunded to consumers’ bank accounts within 30 days for those without active plans and within 45 days of the final payment for those who still had them. Where a bank refund was not possible, the processors had to contact the consumer to arrange an alternative and report their compliance to the receiver.8Regulatory Resolutions. CFPB et al. v. StratFS LLC et al. – StratFS Receivership
The closures ended the deduction of “Legal Administration Fees” and “Service Costs” from affected consumer accounts and triggered the return of dedicated account funds to clients.8Regulatory Resolutions. CFPB et al. v. StratFS LLC et al. – StratFS Receivership
Where the Case Stands
As of mid-2026, the StratFS litigation is active. A March 31, 2026 settlement conference produced no resolution, and discovery is expected to open shortly. Motions to dismiss remain pending. On appeal, the Second Circuit denied the defendants’ challenge to the preliminary injunction on June 2, 2025, leaving the injunction in place.8Regulatory Resolutions. CFPB et al. v. StratFS LLC et al. – StratFS Receivership A hearing on a motion to vacate the preliminary injunction is set for July 30, 2026.9PACER Monitor. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau et al. v. StratFS LLC et al.
Consumer Complaints Since the Orders
Global Holdings has 103 complaints on its Better Business Bureau profile over the past three years, with billing issues accounting for roughly two-thirds.10Better Business Bureau. Global Holdings LLC Complaints The pattern is consistent. Consumers report ongoing bank withdrawals after closing their accounts or exiting a debt settlement program, long delays in receiving refunds, difficulty accessing their dedicated accounts to check balances, and fees they consider excessive when no debts have been settled.
A recurring frustration involves Global’s response posture. The company consistently replies that it is only a payment processor and account manager, not a debt settlement provider, and directs questions about negotiations, fee structures, and program timelines back to the consumer’s debt settlement company. Consumers frequently report confusion about who is responsible for what, and some say they had no choice in selecting Global Holdings as their processor.11Better Business Bureau. Global Holdings LLC Complaints – Page 2
Is the Company Still Operating?
Yes. The 2014 consent order imposed penalties and conduct rules on both Global Holdings and Global Client Solutions, but neither entity was shut down or banned from the industry. Neither appears on the FTC’s list of companies and individuals banned from the debt relief industry,12Federal Trade Commission. Banned Debt and Mortgage Relief Providers List and Global Holdings continues to serve debt settlement firms nationally.