Company: AFRM
Filing Date: 2025-02-06
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001820953-25-000012
Chunk: 33

Company: Affirm Holdings, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-02-06
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 1
Chunk 33
---
 certain instances where a breach in representations and warranties is identified. Generally, a breach in representations and warranties could occur where a loan has been identified as subject to verified or suspected fraud, or in cases where a loan was serviced or originated in violation of Affirm’s guidelines. We would only experience a loss if the contractual repurchase price of the loan exceeds the fair value on the repurchase date. As of December 31, 2024, the aggregate outstanding balance of loans held by third-party investors or unconsolidated VIEs was $6.9 billion, of which we have recorded a repurchase liability of $4.0 million within accrued expenses and other liabilities in our interim condensed consolidated balance sheets.Legal Proceedings From time to time, we are subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business. The results of such matters often cannot be predicted with certainty. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, we establish an accrued liability for legal proceedings and claims when those matters present loss contingencies which are both probable and reasonably estimable. 

25

Kusnier v. Affirm Holdings, Inc.On December 8, 2022, plaintiff Mark Kusnier filed a putative class action lawsuit against Affirm, Max Levchin, and Michael Linford in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Kusnier action”). On May 5, 2023, plaintiffs Kusnier and Chris Meinsen filed their first amended complaint alleging that the defendants (i) caused Affirm to make materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that Affirm’s BNPL service facilitated excessive consumer debt (including with respect to certain for-profit educational institutions), regulatory arbitrage, and data harvesting; (ii) made false and/or misleading statements about certain public regulatory actions; and (iii) made false and/or misleading statements about whether Affirm’s business model was vulnerable to interest rate changes. On December 20, 2023, the Court granted Affirm’s motion to dismiss the first amended complaint with leave to amend. On January 19, 2024, plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint, which contains only the allegations from the first amended complaint relating to false and/or misleading statements about whether Affirm’s business model was vulnerable to interest rate changes. In light of the above, plaintiffs assert that Affirm violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and that Levchin and Linford violated Section 20