•
STATE OF NORTH CAROLJNA

/INrTIHE-GENER.KL C0URT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
FILEtN0':
lf6 CV 12135
·' .,_c
;/ -,,_., ;
. ,; . ' .; '
,_ 1.... ,

COUNTY OF WAKE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLJNA, ex rel.
Josh Stein, Attorney General,
Plaintiff,

v.

I

, , ; .,

•

..-.- .,

'" •

..·

1

,._,_

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

MAZEN A. RADWAN; RIMA A.
RADWAN; DEAN P. ROBBJNS;
HERITAGE ASSET MANAGEMENT, JNC.,
d/b/a NATIONAL SECURE PROCESSJNG;
TRIBUNE MANAGEMENT, INC., d/b/a
STUDENT LOAN GROUP; D.O.R.M.
GROUP, JNC., d/b/a STUDENT LOAN
SERVICE MANAGERS and SLS
MANAGERS; MAXIMUM TECH
CORPORATION, d/b/a RUBIK PAYMENT
SOLUTIONS; and STUDENT LOAN
SERVICE MANAGERS, a California
partnership, a/k/a SLS MANAGERS;
individually and collectively; and other
unnamed individuals and entities,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CONSENT JUDGMENT AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTION

)
)

THIS CA USE came on to be heard before the undersigned judge for entry of a consent
judgment and permanent injunction. It appears to the Court that the State of North Carolina, ex
rel. Josh Stein, Attorney General (the "State") and defendants Mazen A. Radwan, Rima A.
Radwan, and Dean P. Robbins (the "Individual Defendants") as well as defendants Heritage
Asset Management, Inc., d/b/a National Secure Processing; Tribune Management, Inc., d/b/a
Student Loan Group; D.O.R.M. Group, Inc., d/b/a Student Loan Service Managers and SLS
Managers; and Maximum Tech Corporation, d/b/a Rubik Payment Solutions (the "Corporate
Defendants"); and defendant Student Loan Service Managers, a California Partnership, a/k/a
SLS Managers (the "Partnership Defendant") (collectively, all defendants may be referred to as
. "defendants"), have resolved the matters in controversy between them and have consented to the
terms of this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction.

-I -

 FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
The State filed its Complaint along with its Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, which included supporting affidavits and
documents, on September 29, 2016.

2.
In its Complaint, the State alleged that defendants were conspiring in the offer of
debt adjusting services and collecting advance fees for such services in violation of the Debt
Adjusting Act, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-423, et seq.; in unfair and deceptive practices in the
marketing, solicitation, and performance of their debt relief services, in violation of the Unfair
Practices Act, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1; and in violation of the of the Telephonic Seller
Registration Act, N.C. Gen; Stat. § 66-260, et seq.

3.
This C_ourt entered a Temporary Restraining Order on October 3, 2016, and a
Consent Preliminary Injunction Order on October 5, 2016.
4.
The Consent Prfdiminary Injunction Order, incorporated by reference herein,
speaks for itself. In general, among other things, defendants agreed in the Consent Preliminary
Injunction Order that, from the date of that order going forward, defendants would cease
soliciting or offering their debt relief services in the State of North Carolina, or collecting any
further fees from consumers in the State of North Carolina for such services. The Consent
Preliminary Injunction Order also froze certain assets held by defendant Maximum Tech
Corporation at Bank of America ("Max Tech BOA Acct. 9869").
5.
. Since October 5, 2016, defendants aver that they have complied with the terms of
the Consent Preliminary Injunction Order.
6.
Defendants have provided to the State (a) a verified list of all North Carolina
consumers to whom defendants provided student loan debt consolidation services since January
1, 2013, together with an accounting of all payments received from each such consumer (the
"Consumer List"); (b) the identity of each consumer's stated references as provided during the
consumer's enrollment; and (c) a listing identifying the current loan servicer(s), if known, for
each consumer identified on ·the Consumer List

7.
Defendants have wan-anted and attested that the Consumer List is accurate.
Among other things, the Consumer List demonstrates that defendants have provided student loan
debt consolidation services to 378 North Carolina consumers since January 1, 2013, and
collected $352,048.99 from those consumers.
Defendants have agreed to the terms .of this Consent Judgment and Pennanent
Injunction solely for the purpose of voluntarily resolving disputed claims and to avoid the
expense and uncertainty of continued litigation. In entering into this Consent Judgment and
Permanent Injunction, defendants do not admit or acknowledge that they have violated the law
in the conduct of their business in North Carolina or elsewhere.
8. .

9.
The Individual Defendants consent to this Consent Judgment and Permanent
Injunction as owners, officers, and/or control persons of the Corporate Defendants and the

-2-

 Partnership Defendant, and the Individual Defendants and the Partnership Defendant agree they
are bound by all tenns of this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction.
10.
The State has agreed to dismiss the Individual Defendants and the Partnership
Defendant solely for the purpose of voluntarily resolving disputed claims and to avoid the
expense and uncertainty of continued litigation, and does not adrriit or acknowledge that either
the Individual Defendants or the Partnership Defendant have not violated the law in the conduct
of business in North Carolina or elsewhere. Moreover, the agreement of the Individual
Defendants and the Partnership Defendant to be bound by all terms of this Consent Judgment
and Permanent Injunction is fundamental and material to the consideration upon which the State
has agreed to dismiss the Individual Defendants and the Partnership Defendant..
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

11.

The Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the

matter of this action.

12.

Each defendant was properly served process under N.C.R. Civ. P. 4.

13.
Good cause exists for the entry of this Consent Judgment and Permanent
Injunction, and the State is entitled to the relief set forth herein pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat §§
14-425, 66-266, 75-14, 75-15, and 75-15.1.

BASED ON THE FOREGOING and the record herein, the Court concludes that good
and sufficient cause exists for the entry of this judgment and permanent injunction pursuant to
Chapters 14, 66, and 75 the North Carolina General Statutes, and the Court adopts the agreement
of the parties and these findings as its determination of their respective rights and obligations.
INJUNCTIVE PROVISIONS
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Individual
Defendants, the Partnership Defendant, and Corporate Defendants, as well as their owners,
officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, affiliates, assigns,
successors, and all other persons in active or future concert or participation with ther;n, are hereby
permanently enjoined from:
A.
Advertising, offering, soliciting, providing, entering into contracts for" or being
compensated for providing, debt adjusting services to North Carolina consumers, including
student loan debt consolidation, in violation of the Debt Adjusting Act, N.C. Gen. Stat..§ 14-423,
et seq.·

B.
Advertising, offering, soliciting, entering into contracts for, or collecting any
monies for providing, services to the debt adjustment or student loan debt consolidation industry,
including but ·not limited to payment processing services or providing customer relation
management software, to the extent defendants are aware such services will be employed in
North Carolina by persons or entities offering debt adjusting services to North Carolina
consumers in violation of the Debt Adjusting Act, N.C. Gen. Stat.§ 14-423, et seq.

-3-

 C.
in unfair or deceptive practices in the offering or conduct of debt
adjusting services in North Carolina, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat.§ 75-1.1.
D.
in or attempting telephone solicitation in the offering or conduct of debt
adjusting or debt relief services, including student loan debt consolidation, in violation of the
Telephonic Seller Registration Act, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 66-266, et seq.
I
(I

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, within 60 days of the latter of the entry of this
Consent Judgnient and Permanent Injunction or the receipt of the Corporate Defendants'
Monetary Obligation (as defined below), the State shall send a letter through United States Mail
to each and every of the 378 North Carolina consumers identified on the Consumer List stating,
in substance, that: (a) the consumer had previously contracted with defendants for student loan
debt consolidation services; (b) defendants are no longer doing business in North Carolina; (c)
defendants' contract with the consumer is cancelled; (d) the consumer may be eligible for a
refund and enclosing a claim form to that effect; (e) the identity and contact information for the
consumer',S student loan servicer(s), if known; and (f) the consumer should contact his or her
student loan servicer(s) and regain control over his or her stadent loan accounts.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if any Corporate Defendant, or its owners, officers,
directors, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, affiliates, assigns, successors, or
any other persons in active or future concert or participation with such defendant, including but
not limited to the Individual Defendants or the Partnership Defendant, violates any injunctive
provision of this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction, the Attorney General may seek
the imposition of appropriate civil penalties against any one or more defendants for their own
violations pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 14-425 and 75-15.2.
1

AGREED FINANCIAL TERMS AND PAYMENT PROVISIONS'

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the State, pursuant to N.C. Gen.
Stat. §§ 14-425, 75-1.1, and 75-15.1, shall have and recover of the Corporate Defendants the
principal sum of $377,048.99, which sum represents the Corporate Defendants' total and
complete obligation, jointly and severally, to the State for monetary relief, including claims for
restitution as well as reimbursement of the State's costs and fees, as further provided below (the
"Corporate Defendants' Monetary Obligation").

The Corporate Defendants' Monetary Obligation shall be paid initially from the funds
frozen by the Consent Preliminary Injunction Order held in Max Tech BOA Acct. 9869, and,
thereafter, from any account held by any defendant until the Corporate Defendants' Monetary
Obligation is satisfied in full. Accordingly; within IO days of the receipt of a copy of this
Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction by any means, including but not limited to via
facsimile or email., Bank of America shall transfer to the Attorney General or his designated
agent the full amount ($377,048.99) of the Corporate Defendants' Monetary Obligation from
Max Tech BOA Acct. 9869. In the event Max Tech BOA Acct. 9869 contains less than the full
amount ($377,048.99) of the Corporate Defendants' Monetary Obligation, Bank of America
shall (a) transfer to the Attorney General or his designated agent the full balance of Max Tech
BOA Acct. 9869, (b) freeze all accounts held by any Corporate Defendant, and (c) provide to the
Attorney General a listing of all accounts and all balances so frozen. Defendants hereby grant to

-4-

 the Attorney General all rights and claims they have to any funds comprising the Corporate
Defendants' Monetary Obligation.
Following the total and complete satisfaction of the Corporate Defendants' Monetary
. Obligation, Max Tech BOA Acct. 9869 is expressly released from any encumbrance imposed by
any order in this action.
The monies paid pursuant to this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall be
paid in restitution to North Carolina consumers who were formerly, or are currently, enrolled in
defendants' student loan debt consolidation program, except that the Attorney General may
allocate an amount of up to $25,000.00 for the State's attorneys' fees, investigative costs, or for
consumer protection or restitution purposes and other purposes allowed by Jaw, in the discretion
of the Attorney General.
Defendants shall fully cooperate with the Attorney General in good faith in the Attorney
General's administration and issuance of such refunds, including responding to reasonable
requests by the Attorney General for customer information or any other information reasonably
necessary to effectuate the refund process.

DISMISSAL OF THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
AND THE PARTNERSHIP DEFENDANT
The State consents, and the Court so orders, that the claims asserted against the
Individual Defendants an.d the Partnership Defendant be and are hereby dismissed with
prejudice, subject to the continuing obligations imposed by this Consent Judgment and
Permanent Injunction.

GENERAL PROVISIONS
Cooperation with the State. In addition to cooperating in good faith with the State in the
administration and issuance of refunds pursuant to this Consent Judgment and Permanent
Injunction, defendants shall cooperate in good faith to resolve any consumer complaints filed
with the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Division.
Scope of Resolution. This Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall fully
resolve all legal claims and issues raised in the Complaint. for all activities of defendants up to
the date of this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction. Provided, however, that Jhis
Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall not be construed to deprive any consumer or
other person or entity of any private right under the law.
'
Binding Effect. This Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall be binding upon
the defendants, their owners, officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, ·
subsidiaries, affiliates, assigns, and successors, as well as upon the Attorney General; provided,
however, that this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall not bind any other offices,
boa!ldS, commissions, or agencies of the State of No11h Carolina.
Future Conduct & Enforcement. This Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall
not be construed as approval, sanction, or authorization of any act, practice, or conduct of any
-5-

 defendant Further, this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall not be construed to
limit the authority of the State to enforce prospectively laws, regulations, or rules against any
defendant, and shall not be construed as relieving any defendant of the obligation to comply with
all state or federal laws, regulations, or rules .. The facts alleged in the Complaint will be taken as
true and be given collateral estoppel effect, without further proof, in any proceeding based on the
entry of this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction, or in any subsequent civil litigation
by the State to enforce this Consent Judgment and Perm.anent Injunction or the State's rights to
any payment or monetary judgment under this Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction.
Construction. This Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction shall be construed
broadly to include any subterfuge, device, or practice engaged in by the Corporate Defendants,
the Individual Defendants, and the Partnership Defendant, and any person or entity participating
or acting in concert with them, in an effort to evade the dictates of this Consent Judgment and
Permanent Injunction. The Parties acknowledge that the statutes giving rise to the claims
asserted in this action are remedial in nature. This Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction,
therefore, shall be construed broadly by the Court to give full effect to the legislative policies and
purposes underlying such statutes.

-6-

 CONSENTED TO:
JOSH STEIN NORTH CAROLINA

BLANCHARD, MILLER, LEWIS

ATTORNEY

& ISLEY, P.A.

,By:

v

,-·-,-,_-·

Michael T. Henry
J(C. Bar No. 35338
Assistant Attorney General
North Carolina Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602
E-mail: mhenry@ncdoj.gov
For the State of North Carolina, ex rel.
Josh Stein, Attorney General.
INDIVIDUAL
By:

l

WW-

Heritage Asset l\janagement, Inc.,.
Processing
d/b/a National

-·- ..

-·/

By:

By:
Rima A. R7an
·
//• v'/)/
By:

By:

.

v,,;

Dean P. RO'bbins
'··

PARTNERSHIP

DE

By:
Maximum Tech Corporation,
d/b/a Rubik Payment Solutions

By:
Student
California Partnership, a/k!a SLS
Managers

IT IS so-ORDERED:
This the

(2____ day of

tN1 A-re I.I'--

By:

, 2017 .

.

Superior Court Judge Presiding

-7-