The Biz2Credit lawsuit is a Federal Trade Commission enforcement action filed in March 2024 accusing the New York fintech lender and its subsidiary Itria Ventures LLC of deceiving small businesses about how fast it would process Paycheck Protection Program loan applications during the pandemic. Biz2Credit agreed to pay $33 million and accept a permanent injunction just two days after the complaint was filed, without admitting or denying the allegations.1The WBK Firm. Stipulated Order, FTC v. Biz2Credit Inc.
What the FTC Accused Biz2Credit of Doing
The FTC filed the complaint on March 18, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, case number 1:24-cv-02001, before Judge Jennifer L. Rochon. The agency charged Biz2Credit and Itria Ventures with violating Section 5 of the FTC Act and the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act.2CourtListener. Federal Trade Commission v. Biz2Credit Inc.3Bank Director. How One Small Player Beat Out PNC, Wells Fargo and M&T for PPP Loans4FTC. Biz2Credit Complaint and Exhibits
The complaint centered on three related practices.
False Promises About Processing Speed
Biz2Credit advertised that it would process PPP applications in an average of 10 to 14 business days. The FTC alleged the real average was well over a month, sometimes double that, with tens of thousands of applicants waiting more than two months for a final decision. The 10-to-14-day claim kept running until near the end of the PPP program, according to the agency.5FTC. FTC Actions Against Companies Making Deceptive Pandemic Loan Promises Lead Record $59 Million Damages6FTC. Biz2Credit, Inc., FTC v.
Locking Applicants In
Once Biz2Credit submitted an application to the SBA and received an “e-tran” number, the borrower was effectively blocked from seeking PPP funds through any other lender unless Biz2Credit withdrew the application. Because PPP money went out on a first-come, first-served basis, applicants stuck with a slow lender risked receiving nothing.4FTC. Biz2Credit Complaint and Exhibits5FTC. FTC Actions Against Companies Making Deceptive Pandemic Loan Promises Lead Record $59 Million Damages
Ignoring Requests to Withdraw
When applicants realized the delay and asked to pull their applications so they could try elsewhere, Biz2Credit ignored what the FTC described as “repeated and urgent” requests. Some businesses ended up with no PPP funds at all before the program stopped taking applications in May 2021.5FTC. FTC Actions Against Companies Making Deceptive Pandemic Loan Promises Lead Record $59 Million Damages
How the Case Was Resolved
The case moved unusually fast. On March 20, 2024, two days after the complaint landed, Judge Rochon signed a stipulated order for permanent injunction, monetary judgment, and other relief, and the clerk closed the case that same day. The FTC approved the action by a 3-0 vote.2CourtListener. Federal Trade Commission v. Biz2Credit Inc.5FTC. FTC Actions Against Companies Making Deceptive Pandemic Loan Promises Lead Record $59 Million Damages
Biz2Credit and Itria Ventures agreed to pay $33 million to the FTC within seven days. Neither company admitted or denied wrongdoing.1The WBK Firm. Stipulated Order, FTC v. Biz2Credit Inc. In a public statement, the company called the settlement “a pragmatic decision to put the matter behind us” and defended its processing times as reflecting legitimate fraud-vetting, citing the SBA’s estimate that roughly $200 billion in PPP relief may have gone to fraudulent actors.7Banking Dive. FTC: $59 Million Womply, Biz2Credit PPP Loan Applications The FTC said the $33 million represents money consumers lost because of the conduct, even where those consumers made no direct payment to Biz2Credit.5FTC. FTC Actions Against Companies Making Deceptive Pandemic Loan Promises Lead Record $59 Million Damages
What the Order Requires Going Forward
The stipulated order permanently bars Biz2Credit from several practices tied to the FTC’s allegations:
- Making misleading claims about processing times, approval odds, application status, missing documentation, or any other material fact about a government benefit, unless supported by competent and reliable evidence.
- Failing to promptly let applicants withdraw or cancel a pending application.
- Failing to allow consumers to withdraw, check status, or submit missing documents through the same channel they used to apply.
- Failing to clearly notify consumers of documents needed to complete their application.1The WBK Firm. Stipulated Order, FTC v. Biz2Credit Inc.
The company must also keep detailed records for five years and submit compliance reports to the FTC.1The WBK Firm. Stipulated Order, FTC v. Biz2Credit Inc.
Can Affected Small Businesses Get Money Back?
Under the order, the $33 million may be deposited into a fund the FTC administers for consumer redress, covering both payments to affected small businesses and the administrative costs of running the program. If direct redress proves impracticable, or if funds remain after distributions, the FTC can direct the money to other consumer-protection purposes or to the U.S. Treasury.1The WBK Firm. Stipulated Order, FTC v. Biz2Credit Inc.
As of the most recent public information available, the FTC has not announced a claims process or begun paying refunds. The agency’s consumer alert on the case directs affected parties to watch its case page for updates.8FTC. Paycheck Protection Program Lender Pays Price for Lying About Loan Processing Times
Other Litigation Involving Biz2Credit
Two other cases sometimes surface in searches, though neither is connected to the FTC action.
InvenTel.TV v. Itria Ventures
In February 2022, InvenTel.TV filed a proposed class action against Itria Ventures and Biz2Credit, case number 1:22-cv-01059, alleging that Itria disguised loans as “future receivables purchases” and charged what the complaint described as criminally usurious rates of roughly 43% to 47% annualized on two transactions. The complaint included fraud and racketeering claims. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case without prejudice on March 2, 2022, less than a month after filing, without a public explanation.9ClassAction.org. Itria Ventures Hit With Class Action Over Allegedly Shady Money Lending Based on Future Receivables
Biz2Credit v. Kathuria
In 2016, Biz2Credit sued a former employee, Arjun Kathuria, in New York Supreme Court for breach of confidentiality, cooperation, and non-disparagement clauses in his employment agreement, alleging he disclosed information to Kalamata Capital, which had separately sued Biz2Credit and Itria. In September 2017, Judge Kelly A. O’Neill Levy dismissed the complaint, finding that Biz2Credit had not pleaded actual damages and calling its claims about legal costs and potential judgments “wholly speculative.”10Justia. Biz2Credit Inc. v. Kathuria