1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.880
Sean Murray: Basically a big
payday lending company called

2
00:00:02.910 --> 00:00:09.330
AMG Capital Management. They got
a judgment against them for $1.3

3
00:00:09.360 --> 00:00:13.440
billion. It was obtained by the
Federal Trade Commission. This

4
00:00:13.440 --> 00:00:17.100
was at least several years ago.
And at that time, it was the

5
00:00:17.100 --> 00:00:20.400
largest judgment that the FTC
had ever gotten to litigation.

6
00:00:20.400 --> 00:00:24.900
$1.3 billion. And they, yeah,
they, it's a lot of money. Yeah.

7
00:00:24.900 --> 00:00:29.250
And so it was huge news at the
time. And what they did is they

8
00:00:29.250 --> 00:00:34.470
went and they effectively took
all the assets of the person who

9
00:00:34.530 --> 00:00:38.190
owned the company, a guy named
Scott Tucker. And Scott Tucker

10
00:00:38.220 --> 00:00:41.130
ultimately went to prison. He's
in he's actually in prison right

11
00:00:41.130 --> 00:00:45.060
now for things related to payday
lending. Yeah. This whole thing.

12
00:00:46.740 --> 00:00:50.430
But he appealed the judgment,
the $1.3 billion judgment from

13
00:00:50.430 --> 00:00:54.210
the FTC saying that they didn't
have the the statutory authority

14
00:00:54.600 --> 00:00:57.900
to get that type of restitution,
because they take in the 1.3

15
00:00:57.900 --> 00:00:59.910
billion, or at least whatever
they were able to get with

16
00:00:59.910 --> 00:01:03.060
hundreds of millions. And
they've given it all back to,

17
00:01:03.090 --> 00:01:06.600
you know, the victims or
whatever. And his argument was

18
00:01:06.600 --> 00:01:09.630
that they didn't have the
authority to do that. And it was

19
00:01:09.630 --> 00:01:12.960
an interesting argument, because
the FTC has essentially asserted

20
00:01:12.960 --> 00:01:16.680
that authority for like, 40 some
odd years. So no one really paid

21
00:01:16.680 --> 00:01:20.250
it any mind. He appealed it, he
lost, and they appeal it to the

22
00:01:20.250 --> 00:01:22.860
United States Supreme Court who
actually agreed to take on the

23
00:01:22.860 --> 00:01:26.940
case. And all eyes were on it,
because there was an oral

24
00:01:26.940 --> 00:01:30.690
arguments hearing several months
ago, and which it seemed like

25
00:01:30.690 --> 00:01:35.220
the, the justices of the Supreme
Court were sympathetic, or under

26
00:01:35.250 --> 00:01:40.830
understanding of the payday
lenders, arguments. And in fact,

27
00:01:40.830 --> 00:01:45.960
last week, they decided, nine to
zero, that the FTC did not have

28
00:01:45.960 --> 00:01:49.500
the authority to seek
restitution under this

29
00:01:49.500 --> 00:01:51.780
provision, in which they sued
the guy, which was something

30
00:01:51.780 --> 00:01:55.350
known as Section 13 B. And so
what the FTC does when they go

31
00:01:55.350 --> 00:01:59.190
after a lot of bad guys, is that
they assume under something

32
00:01:59.190 --> 00:02:01.440
called Section 13 B it allows
them to not only get an

33
00:02:01.440 --> 00:02:05.340
injunction, but historically it
has enabled them to go and get

34
00:02:05.370 --> 00:02:09.000
restitution to through a
judgment. And so this guy, Scott

35
00:02:09.000 --> 00:02:15.210
Tucker, effectively has won his
$1.3 billion back, which is

36
00:02:15.210 --> 00:02:16.170
crazy. Yeah.

37
00:02:16.650 --> 00:02:19.020
Johny Fernandez: To think about,
because it's a simple fact that

38
00:02:19.830 --> 00:02:24.090
he's essentially what he won.
Yeah he won. So he, you know, he

39
00:02:24.090 --> 00:02:26.820
essentially, the the original
judgment was overturned, he's

40
00:02:26.820 --> 00:02:28.650
still in prison, you know, he's
still had a.

41
00:02:28.800 --> 00:02:31.438
Sean Murray: Well, you could
tell I mean, you know, it's

42
00:02:31.500 --> 00:02:35.427
it'll be interesting to see what
happens in that regard. Whether

43
00:02:35.489 --> 00:02:39.171
or not he gets the money back or
whatever, you know, keep in

44
00:02:39.232 --> 00:02:42.792
mind, this has already been
distributed. Yeah. The FTC has

45
00:02:42.853 --> 00:02:45.983
already given all the money out.
At least that's my

46
00:02:46.044 --> 00:02:49.727
understanding. And the reason
it's so, so newsworthy, right,

47
00:02:49.788 --> 00:02:53.470
because we don't really report
on payday lending, is because

48
00:02:53.532 --> 00:02:57.030
the FTC has been very active
lately in the field of Small

49
00:02:57.091 --> 00:03:00.896
Business Finance, in fact we had
someone from the FTC speak at

50
00:03:00.957 --> 00:03:04.517
Broker, Fair, Broker Fair
virtual last June. And they were

51
00:03:04.578 --> 00:03:08.322
talking about how they intended
to be a lot more proactive in

52
00:03:08.383 --> 00:03:11.943
policing, the small business
finance industry. And so this

53
00:03:12.004 --> 00:03:15.318
has taken away probably one of
their one of their most

54
00:03:15.379 --> 00:03:19.184
instrumental powers, the ability
to get restitution, when they

55
00:03:19.246 --> 00:03:23.112
sue someone under Section 13 B,
they can still get restitution,

56
00:03:23.173 --> 00:03:26.671
if they see you under different
clauses of the FTC act or

57
00:03:26.733 --> 00:03:30.354
whatever. It's very technical
stuff. But apparently, it's a

58
00:03:30.415 --> 00:03:34.650
lot harder to do. And so the FTC
is very, very upset about this news.