Also called: pension advance · veteran pension buyout · pension poaching · disability payment buyout · structured cash flow purchase
A pension advance scam offers a veteran, retiree or pensioner a lump sum in exchange for years of future pension or disability payments, marketed as a "purchase" rather than a loan. Federal law makes military and VA pensions unassignable, so the contracts are void, yet CFPB cases found effective interest rates topping 28%, with fees hidden throughout.
What it is
A company offers a lump sum of cash, a few thousand dollars, sometimes more, in exchange for years of
someone’s future pension or disability payments. The paperwork calls this a “purchase” or a “sale” of
those future payments, never a loan. That word choice is not a technicality: a loan comes with an
interest-rate disclosure and, for military and VA pensions, an outright federal ban on ever being pledged
as collateral in the first place. A “purchase” is dressed up to look like neither applies.
It does not work. Veterans’ disability compensation and Department of Defense military retired pay are
unassignable under federal law, a court will not enforce a contract that hands a third party the
right to collect them, no matter what both sides signed. The CFPB has brought four separate cases against
different pension-advance networks since 2015, each alleging the same structure: a “sale” that was
actually a high-interest loan, on payments the law says can never legally be sold.
How it actually works
The pitch
A company with a patriotic-sounding name or a seal-like logo advertises online, by mail or by phone,
offering a lump sum today for a share of a veteran’s or retiree’s future monthly pension or disability
payment.
A “purchase,” not a loan
The contract is written as a sale or assignment of the future payment stream, not a loan, specifically
so it can skip interest-rate caps and Truth in Lending disclosures a real loan would require.
Where it could have stopped
VA disability compensation and Department of Defense military retired pay cannot legally be assigned to a third party under any circumstances. The CFPB’s cases against Voyager Financial Group, Performance Arbitrage Company and Upstate Law Group all made the identical point: calling the deal a “purchase” does not change that these contracts were void the moment they were signed.
The lump sum
The consumer receives an immediate payment, a fraction of the total they will hand back over a contract
term the CFPB’s Corbett/Gamber case describes as running five to ten years.
The real cost, never disclosed
No interest rate appears anywhere in the paperwork. The CFPB calculated an effective rate exceeding
28% in its earliest documented pension-advance case, well above what a licensed consumer lender could
charge, and never described to the pensioner as an interest rate at all.
Some operators required consumers to buy a life insurance policy naming the company as beneficiary,
an additional undisclosed cost on top of the inflated effective rate, according to the CFPB’s own
consumer guidance on this product.
Payments routed through an account they control
The consumer is required to direct their monthly government deposit into an account the company can
access, so repayment is deducted automatically every month without the consumer initiating a single
payment themselves.
Enforcement, years later
Lawsuits arrive years into an operation’s run, one documented network operated for nearly seven years
before its 2020 complaint. Settlements typically produce a permanent industry ban and a fraction of
consumer redress, from $500 in nominal penalties to a $2.7 million judgment, rather than a criminal
conviction.
Why it works
The need is real and immediate. Someone facing a medical bill, overdue rent or a bad debt is looking
for cash now, not a lecture on assignability law, and a lump sum today answers that problem however the
contract is labelled.
The legal mechanism is genuinely confusing. Selling an asset is ordinary and legal; selling the right
to collect someone else’s future income is not, when that income is a federally protected pension or
disability benefit. Most consumers have no reason to know the distinction exists.
The word “purchase” does real legal work, for the company, not the consumer. Calling the deal a sale
rather than a loan is the entire reason it can dodge interest-rate caps and disclosure law, which is
exactly why every CFPB complaint on this page challenges that label directly.
Patriotic branding builds trust with exactly the audience being targeted. A name, seal or slogan that
reads as military-affiliated or government-endorsed works precisely because veterans are, by federal law,
the one population these contracts can never legally bind, the marketing target and the legal
protection point at the same people.
Automatic deduction removes the consumer from the transaction entirely. Once a government deposit is
routed through an account the company controls, repayment happens without the consumer having to hand
over money each month, which also means noticing the total cost, or that anything is wrong, takes far
longer.
Where it comes from
Domestic, professionally run, and unusually likely to involve a licensed attorney or broker rather than
an anonymous call centre.
These are registered US companies and, in one documented case, a practising lawyer. Voyager Financial
Group, Performance Arbitrage Company and Upstate Law Group all operated in the open, with named owners.
Candy Kern-Fuller, one of the individuals sued in 2020, is a South Carolina attorney whom the CFPB’s
complaint alleges acted as banker, legal counsel and debt collector for the scheme for nearly seven
years, a professional license lending credibility a call-center operator could not offer.
The same network of brokers recurs across separate corporate names. Mark Corbett, the broker
permanently banned in the 2019 CFPB action, worked with Andrew Gamber’s Voyager Financial Group before
regulators caught up with that entity, a pattern of moving between corporate vehicles that this site’s
sibling project on money laundering documents as a common way to outlast a single company’s regulatory
history.
Enforcement is civil, not criminal, in every documented case here. The CFPB and state attorneys
general pursue these operations under the Consumer Financial Protection Act’s ban on deceptive acts,
civil penalties, redress orders and lifetime industry bans, but no prison sentences, which is one reason
the same “purchase, not a loan” structure kept reappearing under new company names from at least 2011
through 2020.
Settlements are often suspended based on documented inability to pay. The $2.7 million judgment
against Gamber’s companies was suspended once he paid $275,000 combined, and Corbett’s own penalty was
set at $1, both based on sworn financial statements, a recurring feature that means the nominal
judgment amount and the money actually collected can differ enormously.
Real cases
2021 US Settled $725,000
The CFPB, the South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs and the Arkansas Attorney General sued attorney Candy Kern-Fuller, Howard Sutter III and Upstate Law Group LLC in February 2020, alleging Kern-Fuller acted as banker, legal counsel and debt collector for a pension-buyout network that wired millions of dollars between veterans and investors for nearly seven years, and separately misrepresented that non-paying consumers could face criminal prosecution. A stipulated final judgment in January 2021 imposed $725,000 in consumer redress and a permanent ban from the business.
Read the case file ·
2 sources
2020 US Settled
The CFPB and the South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs sued Katharine Snyder and her companies, Performance Arbitrage Company Inc. and Life Funding Options Inc., in October 2019, alleging the same purchase-not-loan pension-buyout structure documented in related CFPB cases, targeting disabled veterans and other pensioners. A stipulated final judgment entered in November 2020, after Snyder filed personal bankruptcy, permanently barred her and her companies from ever again collecting on the affected contracts or offering any consumer financial product or service.
Read the case file ·
2 sources
2019 US Settled $2.7m
In August 2019 the CFPB and the Arkansas Attorney General sued Andrew Gamber, his companies Voyager Financial Group LLC, BAIC Inc. and SoBell Corp., alleging they misled veterans and other consumers into "selling" their pension and disability payments through contracts that were actually high-interest loans, void under federal law. A separate CFPB action against the broker who arranged the underlying contracts, Mark Corbett, permanently banned him from the business for a $1 civil penalty tied to his documented inability to pay more.
Read the case file ·
3 sources
Red flags
- Any offer to “purchase” or “buy” your pension or disability payments rather than lend against them: VA and military retirement payments cannot legally be assigned at all.
- No interest rate disclosed anywhere in the paperwork, even though you are repaying far more than you received.
- A patriotic company name, seal-like logo, or any suggestion of government affiliation or endorsement.
- A requirement to buy a life insurance policy naming the company as the beneficiary.
- A request to redirect your government deposit into an account the company can access.
- A repayment term measured in years, five to ten, in documented cases, for a lump sum that is a small fraction of the total you will repay.
- Pressure to sign quickly, or discouragement from having an independent attorney review the contract.
If it’s happening to you
Stop any further payment or account access immediately if you have already signed, and do not sign
anything more before getting independent advice.
- Know that the contract may already be legally void. VA disability compensation and Department of
Defense military retired pay cannot be assigned to a third party under federal law, a court is
unlikely to enforce an agreement claiming otherwise, whatever you signed.
- Revoke any automatic deposit redirection with the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Defense
Finance and Accounting Service, or your pension administrator, and route your payments back to an
account only you control.
- Do not pay a “release” or “buyout” fee to exit the contract. Regulators have not documented a
legitimate exit fee in any case on this page.
- Report it to the CFPB at consumerfinance.gov/complaint and the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
See where to report for other countries.
- Check the CFPB’s consumer relief page at
consumerfinance.gov/enforcement/payments-harmed-consumers/ periodically, redress from a case that
settled years ago can still be distributed later, as it was in December 2023 for three of the networks
documented on this page.
- Get a free benefits or financial counselling review through a Veterans Service Organization or a
nonprofit credit counsellor before agreeing to any similar offer in the future.
Where the money goes
Stays domestic, moves through the broker’s own accounts and an investor pool, and is only partly
recovered, years later, and only when regulators catch it.
There is no offshore laundering chain documented in any case on this page. The lump sum is typically
funded by investors who are, in effect, buying the assigned payment stream from the broker; the broker
collects a fee and passes the deducted monthly payments through to those investors for the life of the
contract. When a state attorney general or the CFPB finally sues, the settlement recovers a fraction of
what was collected, from a few hundred dollars in nominal penalties to a $2.7 million judgment across
the three networks documented here, and that fraction can take years to reach consumers: the CFPB’s
December 2023 distribution followed lawsuits filed as early as January 2019.
No federal or state complaint dataset currently breaks “pension advance” scams out as its own category,
FTC Sentinel folds this pattern into its broader loan and lending categories, so this page’s “By the
numbers” section does not show a dedicated dataset until one becomes available.
By the numbers
No published dataset breaks this scheme out as its own category yet, so there is no chart to show.
The data page explains which agency categories exist and why some schemes are
invisible in official statistics.
Every factual claim above traces to one of these. Statistics are reported losses; see
methodology for what that does and does not measure.