Vivus Servicing $16.5 Million LDF High-Interest Loan Settlement, Who Qualifies, How Much Borrowers Can Get and the January 4, 2027 Deadline

A second class action settlement over high-interest online loans tied to the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians (LDF) has received preliminary court approval. In Jeffrey Bradby, et al. v. Vivus Servicing, Ltd., et al., seven settling defendants have agreed to create a $16.5 million cash fund and to stop helping the LDF lending businesses for at least three years. The settlement covers people who took out loans from Lendgreen, Radiant Cash and other LDF lenders between July 24, 2016, and October 1, 2023.

The defendants deny wrongdoing. The court has not decided who is right, and final approval is still pending.

The key point for borrowers: most people do not need to file a new claim form. If you cashed your check from the first LDF settlement and qualify for a payment here, it will be sent automatically. If you were owed a first-settlement check and never cashed it, you must request payment from the new administrator. Amounts vary by the state where you lived and how much you paid.

Vivus Servicing Settlement: Quick Facts

Settlement detail	Information
Total settlement fund	$16,500,000
Contributors	MoneyLion Technologies Inc. (9million);VivusServicingLtd.andAS4financeLtd.(7.5 million)
Other relief	Three-year restriction on assisting LDF lenders and collecting covered loans
Lawsuit	Jeffrey Bradby, et al. v. Vivus Servicing, Ltd., et al.
Case number	3:26-cv-00633-RCY-MRC
Court	U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division
Judge	Roderick C. Young (Magistrate Judge Mark R. Colombell)
Named plaintiffs	24 class representatives
Class period	July 24, 2016 to October 1, 2023
Who is included	Consumers residing in the United States who obtained loans from the LDF lending companies
Estimated class size	About 1.4 million people
Cash payment	Varies by state and payment history; $5 minimum for any calculated award
New claim form needed	No, for most borrowers
Request for payment needed	Yes, for people who never cashed a first-settlement (Fitzgerald) check
Award eligibility estimator	Expected December 15, 2026
Opt-out deadline	January 4, 2027
Objection deadline	January 4, 2027
Preliminary approval	October 16, 2026
Final approval hearing	February 18, 2027, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time
Settlement administrator	American Legal Claims Services LLC
Administrator phone	1-800-681-3736
Settlement website	consumerloansettlement2.com
Class counsel	Kelly Guzzo PLC
Current status	Preliminary approval granted; final approval pending

What Is the Vivus Servicing $16.5 Million Settlement About?

The lawsuit targets companies and individuals that allegedly helped run, finance or collect on online loans made under the names of businesses connected to the Lac du Flambeau Band. The plaintiffs say these loans carried annual interest rates above what many states allow, and that the defendants took part in an enterprise that provided services, funding, operations support or collection help.

Interest rate limits differ from state to state. A rate that is lawful in one state can be illegal in another, depending on the loan size, lender licensing and where the borrower lives. The plaintiffs argue that borrowers were charged rates above the limits in their own states.

The defendants deny liability. They argue that the lending companies were owned and operated by the Tribe, that the rates were authorized by tribal law, and that borrowers agreed their loan contracts would be governed by tribal law. The settlement ends the claims against the settling defendants without a trial.

How This Settlement Follows the First LDF Settlement (Fitzgerald v. Wildcat)

This is the second settlement involving the LDF loan network. The first, Fitzgerald, et al. v. Wildcat, et al., No. 3:20-cv-00044-NKM-JCH (W.D. Va.), received final approval in December 2024. It canceled roughly $1.4 billion in outstanding loans from the same group of LDF-affiliated lenders and created a $37.35 million fund for cash payments.

The Bradby settlement goes after additional businesses and individuals who were not part of that earlier deal. Its benefits are on top of what borrowers received before. The settlement agreement also preserves the possibility of further recoveries from non-settling defendants in related litigation.

Why Were Vivus Servicing, AS 4finance and MoneyLion Sued?

The official settlement FAQ splits the seven settling defendants into two groups.

The Lendgreen-connected defendants. The plaintiffs allege Vivus Servicing Ltd. and AS 4finance Ltd. were affiliated with Lendgreen’s lending operations. Mary Jo Walker and Mark Bettiol are also settling defendants. They deny unlawfully making or collecting the loans and say they did not make the loans themselves.

The Radiant Cash-connected defendants. MoneyLion Technologies Inc., Diwakar Choubey and Richard Correia are alleged to have been connected to Radiant Cash’s operations. MoneyLion is to contribute $9 million for this group. They dispute the allegations and deny liability.

The settling defendants are not the lending brands that issued the loans. They are additional service providers and individuals, so the settlement does not resolve claims against every business in the LDF network.

Which LDF Lending Companies Are Covered by the Settlement?

You are not limited to Lendgreen or Radiant Cash borrowers. The class covers qualifying loans from the LDF lending companies named in the official notice:

L.D.F. Business Development Corporation; LDF Holdings, LLC; Lendgreen; LendUMo; Zfunds; Makwa Financial; Brightstar Cash; National Small Loan; Bear Claw Lending; Stone Lake Lending; Sky Trail Cash; Loan at Last; Nine Torches; Bridge Lending Solutions; Lakeshore Loans; UbiCash; Cash Aisle; MitigCapital; Avail Blue; Evergreen Services; Blue River Lending; Quick Help Loans (Greenline); and Radiant Cash.

If you borrowed from any of these between July 24, 2016, and October 1, 2023, check whether you are included.

Related Article: Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail $1.5 Million Mass Strip Search Settlement, Who Qualifies and How to Claim at Least $5,000

Who Filed the Jeffrey Bradby v. Vivus Servicing Lawsuit?

The case is pending in the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, under Case No. 3:26-cv-00633-RCY-MRC. Jeffrey Bradby is the lead plaintiff among 24 named class representatives. The settlement action was opened on July 2, 2026, after the court severed the claims against the settling defendants from the earlier litigation. The plaintiffs filed their complaint and preliminary approval papers on July 15, 2026, and Judge Roderick C. Young granted preliminary approval on October 16, 2026.

The court appointed Kelly Guzzo PLC as class counsel and American Legal Claims Services LLC as settlement administrator.

Which Laws Are Involved in the Vivus Servicing Lawsuit?

The settlement agreement describes allegations and releases rather than proven violations, so none of the laws below should be read as findings against the defendants. They are the legal frameworks that give a case like this its weight.

1. Federal RICO Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968)

The public docket lists 18 U.S.C. § 1962 as the cause of action. Section 1962(c) bars conducting an enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or the collection of an “unlawful debt,” and § 1962(d) bars conspiring to do so. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1961(6), an unlawful debt includes one that is unenforceable under state or federal usury law and was incurred in a lending business at a rate at least twice the enforceable rate. Section 1964(c) lets injured people sue for three times their damages plus attorneys’ fees, which explains why borrower classes use RICO in lending cases. The defendants dispute that RICO applies.

2. State Usury and Licensing Laws

Usury caps and small-loan licensing rules are set state by state. In Virginia, where the case sits, the general usury ceiling and consumer finance rules appear in Title 6.2 of the Virginia Code, including Va. Code § 6.2-303 and the Virginia Consumer Finance Act. Because the class is nationwide, the settlement calculates awards using each borrower’s state of residence when the loan was made. That is why some states receive nothing: the settlement says no cash goes to borrowers who made no payments, to borrowers in states with no interest-rate cap (Utah and Nevada), to borrowers in certain states who paid only principal, or to borrowers in listed states who did not pay interest above the legal limit.

3. Tribal Sovereign Immunity

Federally recognized tribes generally cannot be sued without their consent. The Supreme Court has said so in Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez (1978), Kiowa Tribe v. Manufacturing Technologies (1998) and Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community (2014), which extended immunity to off-reservation commercial activity. But immunity belongs to the tribe and its true “arms,” not automatically to outside companies and individuals. In Lewis v. Clarke (2017) the Court held that suits against individual tribal employees over their own conduct are not barred. In Williams v. Big Picture Loans, LLC, 929 F.3d 170 (4th Cir. 2019), the Fourth Circuit, which covers Virginia, allowed claims to proceed against tribal-affiliated lending entities after finding they had not shown they were arms of the tribe. This is the legal backdrop to the non-tribal defendants in the Bradby case.

4. Tribal Choice-of-Law and Forum Clauses

The defendants argue borrowers agreed that tribal law would govern their loans. In Hengle v. Treppa, 19 F.4th 324 (4th Cir. 2021), the Fourth Circuit refused to enforce a tribal choice-of-law clause that effectively waived borrowers’ federal statutory rights. Courts generally will not enforce contract terms that strip consumers of federal protections.

5. Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.; 12 C.F.R. Part 1026)

Lenders must disclose the annual percentage rate and finance charges. TILA is often pleaded alongside usury claims in high-cost lending cases.

6. Electronic Fund Transfer Act (15 U.S.C. § 1693 et seq.; 12 C.F.R. § 1005.10(e))

This law bars conditioning credit on a borrower’s agreement to repay by preauthorized electronic transfers. It matters in online lending, where lenders often debit bank accounts.

7. Federal Consumer Finance and Unfair Practices Laws

The Consumer Financial Protection Act (12 U.S.C. §§ 5531, 5536) and Section 5 of the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. § 45) prohibit unfair, deceptive or abusive practices. Regulators use them against lenders that collect debts they have no legal right to collect. In CFPB v. CashCall, Inc. (9th Cir. 2022), a court upheld liability for collecting tribal-branded online loans that could not lawfully be enforced under state law. Private borrowers rely on state consumer protection statutes in a similar way.

8. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and the Class Action Fairness Act

The settlement is governed by Rule 23. Rule 23(e) requires court approval after notice, a fairness hearing and a finding that the deal is fair, reasonable and adequate. Rule 23(h) governs attorneys’ fees. The Class Action Fairness Act (28 U.S.C. § 1715) requires notice of the proposed settlement to the appropriate federal and state officials.

9. Federal Tax Rules on Debt Cancellation

The first LDF settlement canceled loans. Canceled debt can be taxable income under 26 U.S.C. § 61(a)(11), with exceptions such as insolvency under § 108, and lenders may issue Form 1099-C. Ask a tax professional how this applies to you.

Who Qualifies for the Vivus Servicing Settlement?

The Settlement Class includes all consumers residing in the United States who signed a loan agreement with an LDF lending company between July 24, 2016, and October 1, 2023. Membership is automatic unless you opt out. If you received a formal notice, the records identified you as a class member.

Whether you receive money depends on your state and what you paid. The Estimated Award Eligibility page on consumerloansettlement2.com is expected to open around December 15, 2026.

How Much Money Can Borrowers Get From the $16.5 Million Settlement?

Payments are not equal. Each award is based on how much a borrower paid in principal or interest above the legal limit of their state when the loan was made. Because the fund is limited, payments are a proportional share of that excess, not full repayment. The minimum for any calculated award is $5.

Fund item	Amount
Total settlement fund	$16,500,000
MoneyLion Technologies Inc. share	$9,000,000
Vivus Servicing Ltd. and/or AS 4finance Ltd. share	$7,500,000
Attorneys’ fees and costs requested	Up to $5,500,000
Service awards to class representatives	Up to $10,000 each, up to $240,000 total
Notice and administration costs	Paid from the fund
Remainder	Distributed as cash awards

With 1.4 million potential class members and a fund reduced by fees and costs, individual awards may be small for many people. Check the estimator tool before deciding what to do.

How to Get Paid: Automatic Payments vs. Request for Payment

Did you cash your check from the first LDF settlement?

If you cashed your Fitzgerald check and are entitled to a payment here, you will be paid automatically. Checks will go to the address on file, the one used for your notice. Update your address on the settlement website if you moved, and select an alternative payment method if one is offered.

Did you never cash your first-settlement check?

You must affirmatively request payment from the new administrator, American Legal Claims Services LLC. You can do this online, by email or by mail, and you will need to provide your name, Notice ID, current mailing address and contact information. Use the Request for Payment page at consumerloansettlement2.com.

Didn’t receive a notice?

Call 1-800-681-3736 and ask the administrator to verify your status.

Key Deadlines

Date	What happens
October 16, 2026	Preliminary approval granted
December 15, 2026	Award eligibility estimator expected to open
January 4, 2027	Opt-out request must be postmarked; objection must be filed with the court and served on counsel
February 18, 2027, 11:00 a.m. ET	Final approval hearing, Richmond, Virginia
About 90 days after final approval	Payments issued, if no appeal is pending

If the court grants final approval on February 18, 2027, payments would likely begin in mid-to-late spring 2027. An appeal could delay that.

Your Options: Stay In, Opt Out or Object

Stay in the settlement. You keep your eligibility for payment and release claims against the settling defendants and related released parties over the covered loans. For most people this means doing nothing, except for the uncashed-check request above.

Opt out. Send a written request postmarked by January 4, 2027. It must include the case name and number, your full identifying information (such as the last four digits of your Social Security number or your loan details), a clear statement that you want to be excluded, and your signature. You get no payment but keep the right to sue the settling defendants yourself.

Object. Stay in the class and tell the court why the deal is unfair. Your written objection must be filed with the court and served on counsel by January 4, 2027, explain your grounds, confirm you are a class member and include the other information the notice requires. You cannot object if you opt out.

What the Settlement Requires From the Defendants

For at least three years after the settlement becomes effective, the settling defendants may not knowingly provide capital, services or other affirmative assistance to any LDF lending company or its known successors. They also may not knowingly help collect loans those companies made during the class period, including through third-party collectors.

Tips for Borrowers

• Find your notice or Notice ID. You will need it for any request.
• Update your mailing address now so a check does not go to the wrong place.
• Look for any uncashed check from the first settlement.
• Check the estimator tool after it opens in December.
• Beware of scams: the settlement does not require fees, and the official site is consumerloansettlement2.com.
• Keep your payment records and any administrator emails.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Vivus Servicing Settlement

Who is eligible for the Vivus Servicing $16.5 million settlement?

Consumers residing in the United States who obtained a loan from an LDF lending company between July 24, 2016, and October 1, 2023. Payment depends on your state and what you paid.

Do I need to file a claim for the Bradby v. Vivus Servicing settlement?

Not in most cases. People who cashed their first-settlement check are paid automatically. People who never cashed it must submit a Request for Payment.

How much will I get from the Vivus Servicing settlement?

It varies. The minimum calculated award is $5. Amounts depend on your state’s legal interest limits and your payments, and are a proportional share because the fund is limited.

Which lenders are covered?

Lendgreen, Radiant Cash, LendUMo, Zfunds, Makwa Financial, Brightstar Cash, Bear Claw Lending, Stone Lake Lending and the other LDF lenders listed above.

Why might I get nothing?

You may be excluded if you made no payments, lived in Utah or Nevada, paid only principal in certain states, or did not pay interest above your state’s limit.

What is the deadline to opt out or object?

January 4, 2027. Opt-out requests must be postmarked by that date, and objections must be filed with the court and served on counsel.

When will payments be sent?

About 90 days after final approval and the end of any appeals. The final approval hearing is February 18, 2027.

I got money from the first LDF settlement. Does that affect this one?

No. This settlement is in addition to the debt cancellation and payments in Fitzgerald v. Wildcat.

What if I never cashed my first-settlement check?

Submit a Request for Payment online, by email or by mail with your name, Notice ID, current address and contact information.

Did Vivus Servicing, MoneyLion or the others admit wrongdoing?

No. All settling defendants deny the allegations. The court has not found them liable.

Can I still sue if I stay in the settlement?

No. Staying in releases claims against the settling defendants and related parties over the covered loans. Only opting out preserves that right.

Is the settlement payment taxable?

Possibly. Ask a tax professional, especially if you also had loans canceled in the first settlement.

How do I contact the administrator?

Call American Legal Claims Services LLC at 1-800-681-3736 or use the contact details on consumerloansettlement2.com.

Sources and Verification

• Court-authorized Notice, Settlement Agreement and Preliminary Approval Order, consumerloansettlement2.com
• Jeffrey Bradby, et al. v. Vivus Servicing, Ltd., et al., No. 3:26-cv-00633-RCY-MRC (E.D. Va.)
• Fitzgerald, et al. v. Wildcat, et al., No. 3:20-cv-00044-NKM-JCH (W.D. Va.)
• 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968; 15 U.S.C. §§ 45, 1601 et seq., 1693 et seq.; 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531, 5536; 12 C.F.R. Parts 1005 and 1026; 28 U.S.C. § 1715; 26 U.S.C. §§ 61, 108; Fed. R. Civ. P. 23
• Va. Code Title 6.2
• Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez; Kiowa Tribe v. Manufacturing Technologies; Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community; Lewis v. Clarke; Williams v. Big Picture Loans, LLC, 929 F.3d 170 (4th Cir. 2019); Hengle v. Treppa, 19 F.4th 324 (4th Cir. 2021); CFPB v. CashCall, Inc. (9th Cir. 2022)

Information was verified against the settlement documents as of November 9, 2026. Deadlines and approval status can change, so confirm current details on the official settlement website or with the administrator.

About the author: Israr Ahmad is the founder and legal content researcher at AllAboutLawyer.com, where he researches class action settlements and consumer finance topics from court records and official sources. He is not a licensed attorney.

This article is general legal information based on the court-authorized settlement notice and public records. It is not legal advice, and the author is not an attorney. For advice about your own loans or rights, consult a licensed attorney.