Benefit — FTC stance
What Snapshot-grade FTC stance actually saves you
FTC consent orders run 20 years and carry compliance-monitor cost that dwarfs the audit spend that would have prevented them. Non-bank mortgage lenders face FTC as the primary federal cop.
The three moments where it matters
- FTC Civil Investigative Demand. CID lands with short response window. Dated independent evidence is the response, not a scramble.
- Consent-order negotiation. Terms scale with dated diligence. Preventive record shifts negotiation toward narrower scope + shorter horizon.
- State AG piggyback. FTC action often triggers state-AG piggyback under state UDAP statutes. Same record answers both.
Dollar frame
FTC consent-order cost: $10M-$100M+ in restitution + disgorgement + civil penalty. 20-year compliance-monitor cost $500K-$3M annually.
Reputational drag: published FTC order is a permanent public record. Investor + lender-counterparty relationships are re-priced.
Preventive stance value: $499 Snapshot documents dated independent monitoring. Removes the "no evidence of good-faith diligence" gap.
Who at your org cares
- General Counsel — CID + consent-order defense
- Chief Compliance Officer — UDAP + advertising review
- CMO / Head of Marketing — AI-marketing claim review
- CFO — consent-order reserve modeling
- Board — oversight defensibility for a non-bank governance model
What "having it" looks like
Green: Snapshot on file. Dated monitoring record. CID response is prompt and complete. Consent-order negotiation opens with credibility.
Red: No dated evidence. CID response leans on vendor screenshots. Consent-order terms scope wide + horizon long.
$499. 3 business days.
The dated diligence proof your GC + Chief Compliance Officer want on file BEFORE the CID lands.
Buy $499