Company: GOLD
Filing Date: 2025-02-10
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0000950170-25-016909
Chunk: 28

Company: Gold.com, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-02-10
Form: 10-Q
Item: Item 4
Chunk 28
---
 and could increase negative perceptions of our business and industry. Additionally, the use of lead providers and marketing affiliates could subject us to additional regulatory cost and expense. If our ability to use lead providers or marketing affiliates were to be impaired, our business could be materially adversely affected.

96

Judicial decisions, CFPB rulemaking, or amendments to the Federal Arbitration Act could render the arbitration agreements we use illegal or unenforceable.

We include arbitration provisions in our loan and financing agreements and to our Direct-to-Consumer terms and conditions. These provisions are designed to allow us to resolve any customer disputes through individual arbitration rather than in court and explicitly provide that all arbitrations will be conducted on an individual and not on a class basis. Thus, our arbitration agreements, if enforced, have the effect of shielding us from class action liability. Our arbitration agreements do not generally have any impact on regulatory enforcement proceedings. We take the position that the arbitration provisions in loan and financing agreements, including class action waivers, are valid and enforceable; however, the enforceability of arbitration provisions is often challenged in court. If those challenges are successful, our arbitration and class action waiver provisions could be unenforceable, which could subject us to additional litigation, including class action litigation.

In addition, the U.S. Congress has considered legislation that would generally limit or prohibit mandatory arbitration agreements in consumer contracts and has enacted legislation with such a prohibition with respect to certain mortgage loan agreements and also certain consumer loan agreements to members of the military on active duty and their dependents. Further, the Dodd-Frank Act directed the CFPB to study consumer arbitration and authorized the CFPB to adopt rules limiting or prohibiting consumer arbitration, consistent with the results of its study. In July 2017, the CFPB issued a new rule on arbitration, which would have prohibited class action waivers in certain consumer financial services contracts. However, in November 2017, a joint resolution passed by Congress was signed disapproving the rule under the Congressional Review Act. Because the rule was disapproved, it cannot be reissued in substantially the same form, and the CFPB cannot issue a substantially similar rule, unless the new rule is specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the joint resolution disapproving the original rule.

Any judicial decisions, legislation or other rules or regulations that impair our ability to enter into and enforce consumer arbitration agreements and class action waivers could increase our exposure to class action litigation as well as litigation in plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions, which would be costly and could