Riverside agrees to $600,000 FTC and Washington settlement

Riverside Payments Inc., affiliate Cascade Equipment Leasing LLC and executives Brandon Skinner and Jason Reese have agreed to pay $600,000 to resolve Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Washington allegations over deceptive payment-processing savings claims and cancellation practices, the FTC said on 2 November 2026. The proposed stipulated final order was filed with the complaint in the US District Court for the Western District of Washington.

The order imposes a $32,083,921 judgment against the four defendants, suspended after the $600,000 payment because of their claimed inability to pay. The full judgment becomes due if they are found to have misrepresented their finances. It also requires customer notices and a 60-day period during which Riverside will waive its early termination fee and any other penalty for rescinding merchant-processing agreements.

The complaint contains allegations, not findings. The FTC says it had “reason to believe” the defendants were violating or were about to violate the law. A stipulated final order has the force of law only after approval and signature by the district court judge.

What the complaint alleges

Riverside allegedly told prospective customers they could save 40% to 60% by switching processors. The quote sheets compared customers’ existing costs with Riverside’s proposed charges but omitted activation, batch, data-security non-compliance and inactive-processing fees. Businesses that switched typically paid more than with their previous provider, according to the complaint.

The FTC and Washington also allege that Riverside’s 26-page electronic contract failed to clearly disclose key terms during sales discussions. These included automatic renewal after an initial three-year processing term, a $695 early termination fee and Cascade’s equipment lease. The equipment contract automatically renewed and lasted one year longer than the processing agreement.

The companies allegedly marketed cancellation as “risk-free”, promising that customers could cancel without penalty, return to their previous processor and receive $500 for their “time and hassle”. Customers trying to cancel were allegedly diverted between calls, received no response or were told there was no direct cancellation line and that they had to wait for a callback.

The complaint also challenges recruitment claims that commissioned sales agents could earn $75,000 to $95,000 a year, with top agents making “100k”. The FTC alleges agents actually earned an average of $3,787 annually. It says the conduct violated the FTC Act and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act by obtaining consumers’ financial information through false or fraudulent statements.

Controls imposed on Riverside

The order prohibits the defendants from misrepresenting:

- costs, savings or cancellation conditions;
- any other material fact about goods or services;
- the savings customers are likely to achieve;
- sales-agent earnings; or
- any aspect of a negative-option feature.

Before obtaining billing information, the defendants must clearly and conspicuously disclose all material transaction terms, obtain consumers’ express informed consent to a negative-option billing plan and provide a simple cancellation method. Those requirements directly address the automatic-renewal and equipment-leasing arrangements described in the complaint.

The settlement follows the FTC’s recent payment-sector actions, including a proposed $4.85m Nuvei settlement with merchant-screening duties and a proposed $2.1m Doxo settlement over alleged deceptive bill-payment practices.

The FTC’s vote to authorise the complaint and stipulated final order was 2-0. The next step is approval and signature by the Western District of Washington judge.