Eastern Financial Partners review.
Business debt restructuring including MCA
Decent Trustpilot score, a BBB C+, and six federal TCPA suits in six districts inside eighteen months. Verify everything before you sign.
Our verdict
Eastern Financial Partners markets attorney-led MCA restructuring and carries a 4.4 Trustpilot average across nearly 200 reviews, which is not nothing. Founded in 2023, it is one of the newer entrants working commercial files full time, and the commercial focus itself is genuine.
The transparency column is where this comes apart, and the court record is why. The legal entity is EFPTR, LLC, and it has been sued in six federal TCPA cases across six districts between October 2024 and March 2026, two of them pleaded as class actions. Those are allegations, not findings, and we located no judgment against the company. But six suits in six districts inside eighteen months is a pattern about how a company contacts people, and the robo-dialer complaints on the BBB file describe the same thing more quietly. BBB grades them C+ and has not accredited them.
One correction we owe the record. A competitor-run ranking site reported that Eastern Financial Partners and MCA Resolve share personnel, and we repeated it. Checked, the only support is a caption naming a John Doe defendant with Eastern Financial Partners given as an alias, which is an unadjudicated allegation against an unidentified party. Eastern Financial was never a named defendant there. We withdraw the claim. What corporate records do show is a different overlap: Adam Cuddyer appears as a principal of this firm and as a manager of Corporate Rescue Advisors, ranked #22, and he is named individually alongside the LLC in one of the TCPA suits.
What we like
- Full-time commercial and MCA focus
- 4.4 Trustpilot average across 192 reviews
- Markets an attorney-led model rather than pure negotiation
What gave us pause
- BBB C+ and not accredited
- Complaints cite robo-dialer contact and disputed refunds
- Named in MCA litigation
- Six federal TCPA suits across six districts between 2024 and 2026, two pleaded as class actions
- Founded 2023, no long-cycle track record
Who it’s for
- Owners who have done their own verification and want a newer, hungrier shop
Who should look elsewhere
- Anyone who cannot get the fee, the refund policy, and the attorney relationship in writing
- Owners who want an established compliance record
How Eastern Financial Partners stacks up against our #1 pick
Local guides where readers use this review
In their own words
What customers wrote about Eastern Financial Partners
What satisfied customers wrote
There are none. This company’s review average is 1.0 out of 5 across all 5 reviews on file, which is only arithmetically possible if every single one is a one-star. We looked for something positive to publish and there was nothing to find.
What complaints and critics wrote
“I have asked multiple times to be put on a do not call list and they ignore it. I will be reaching out to an attorney because they blow up my phone all day long.”
★ Charlie W · 05/15/2026 · BBB customer review
The company repliedThank you for the feedback, [name withheld]. If you would like to be removed from our call or mailing list, you will need to email us your full name and phone number so we can identify your contact file for removal. Our sincerest apologies for the disruption to your day. Take care.
“This company employs robo-dialers (targeting by region/venue) and has no respect for being asked to remove your number from their call list. They are a hustle house and not be used in any way ever. I have requested of them to remove my number from their call list every time they called. They mask their origination point with the dialers and never remove your number. Very imprudent way of doing business.”
★ Art M · 04/27/2026 · BBB customer review
The company repliedThank you for the feedback, Art. If you would like to be removed from our call or mailing list, you will need to email us your full name and phone number to [name withheld] so we can identify your contact file for removal. Our sincerest apologies for the disruption to your day. Take care.
“Multiple harassing daily calls/texts for the wrong person and business I do not own. Multiple attempts to remove my phone number from their calling list has been met with rude comments, hangups, and no resolution.”
★ Chiquita N · 02/06/2026 · BBB customer review
The company repliedThank you for the feedback, [name withheld]. If you would like to be removed from our call or mailing list, you will need to email us your full name and phone number to [name withheld] so we can identify your contact file for removal. Our sincerest apologies for the disruption to your day. Take care.
Quotes are reproduced exactly as written, including original spelling and punctuation, and are trimmed only with an ellipsis where marked. Where the BBB has redacted an employee’s name we show [name withheld]. Reviewers are identified only by the display name their platform shows. We pick quotes to represent the range on each profile, not to make a case, and we publish the overall rating and review count beside them so you can judge how typical any one of them is. Retrieved August 24, 2026.
The court record
Lawsuits involving Eastern Financial Partners
8 matters naming this company, grouped by who did the suing, because those are not the same fact. We confirmed 6 against a court record ourselves. The other 2 are listed as compiled by a third party with the docket unverified, and each one says so.
Lawsuits involving Eastern Financial Partners (8)
Each entry is tagged by who brought it. A funder suing a settlement firm and a client suing one are close to opposite facts, so read the tag before the caption.
-
Client sued Rozzi v. EFPTR, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company d/b/a Eastern Financial Partners, Adam Cuddyer, Frank Venezio, Michael Froio, John Doe Telemarketers, and ABC Entities 1-10 Dismissed, with prejudice
DispositionDismissed WITH PREJUDICE as to all defendants by stipulation. STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE filed January 15, 2025 (Dkt. 14): 'IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties and/or their respective counsel(s), pursuant to Fed R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the above-referenced case is dismissed with prejudice as to all Defendants and without an award of costs or fees to any party.' This resolves the prior uncertainty about the pro se plaintiff's January 14-15, 2025 filings. No judgment and no ruling on the merits.
A pro se individual plaintiff brought Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims against EFPTR, LLC d/b/a Eastern Financial Partners and against three individuals sued in their individual capacities, along with unidentified telemarketers; the case was terminated on January 15, 2025.
View the record ↗ -
Client sued Abdullah v. EFPTR LLC Dismissed, without prejudice
DispositionDismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ORDER OF DISMISSAL entered November 26, 2025 by Judge Laura M. Provinzino on the parties' stipulation: 'This matter is before the Court on the parties' Stipulation to Dismiss Without Prejudice (Stipulation), ECF No. 25. Based on the parties' Stipulation, and on the files, records, and proceedings in this case, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all claims between the parties in this matter are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, without costs, attorneys' fees, or disbursements to any party.' The underlying stipulation (Dkt. 25, dated November 2025) was taken under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). No judgment and no ruling on the merits.
An individual plaintiff brought Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims against EFPTR LLC; the docket records a cause of 47:227 and the case was terminated on November 26, 2025.
View the record ↗ -
Client sued Freund v. EFPTR, LLC Dismissed, without prejudice
DispositionSETTLED and dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ORDER OF DISMISSAL entered October 14, 2025 by Judge Maxine M. Chesney (Dkt. 24): 'The parties having jointly informed the Court at the Case Management Conference, conducted October 10, 2025, that the parties have agreed to a settlement of this cause, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's claims alleged against defendant be dismissed without prejudice; provided, however, that if any party shall certify to this Court, within sixty days, that the agreed-upon consideration for said settlement has not been delivered over, the foregoing Order shall stand vacated and this cause shall forthwith be restored to the calendar for further proceedings as appropriate.' No judgment and no ruling on the merits.
An individual plaintiff, represented by KJC Law Group, filed a putative class complaint under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act against EFPTR, LLC.
View the record ↗ -
Client sued Monday v. EFPTR LLC See disposition
DispositionStatus not verified; no termination date appears on the CourtListener docket.
An individual plaintiff brought claims against EFPTR LLC in the Middle District of Florida.
View the record ↗ -
Client sued Tyler Bearde v. EFPTR, LLC See disposition
DispositionStatus not verified; no termination date appears on the CourtListener docket.
An individual plaintiff brought claims against EFPTR, LLC in the Central District of California.
View the record ↗ -
Client sued Rogers v. EFPTR LLC See disposition
DispositionStatus not verified; the docket reflects a case management conference noticed 2026-03-17 and a termination hearing order dated 2026-04-13, and no termination date appears on the CourtListener docket.
Mathew Rogers filed a putative class action complaint on behalf of himself and others similarly situated alleging that EFPTR LLC, identified in the complaint as doing business as Eastern Financial Partners, made telemarketing calls to numbers on the National Do-Not-Call Registry, used prerecorded or artificial voices, and failed to honor opt-out requests, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act; the complaint seeks statutory damages and injunctive relief.
View the record ↗ -
Funder sued Specialty Capital, LLC v. Corporate Rescue Advisors, LLC, Eastern Financial Partners; and Frank Venezio Docket not verifiedSearch this court’s portal ↗
-
Funder sued Fundfi Merchant Funding LLC v. MCA Resolve LLC, 1st Colonial Business Solutions, Inc., Elliot Dinov, Ari Dinov, Benjamin Dinov, John Doe #1 AKA Eastern Financial Partners, John Doe #2 aka Mike Jacobson Docket not verifiedSearch this court’s portal ↗
Claims we could not verify, and therefore do not state as fact: “Fundfi Merchant Funding LLC v. MCA Resolve LLC, 1st Colonial Business Solutions, Inc., Elliot Dinov, Ari Dinov, Benjamin Dinov, John Doe #1 AKA Eastern Financial Partners, John Doe #2 aka Mike Jacobson – Nassau County Supreme Court, NY” (https://www.beaconclient.com/lawsuitsentities; case record indexed at https://unicourt.com/case/ny-sue1-casegg5e70f578c5cf-2312174); “Specialty Capital, LLC v. Corporate Rescue Advisors, LLC, Eastern Financial Partners; and Frank Venezio” (https://www.beaconclient.com/lawsuitsentities and https://www.beaconclient.com/settlementlawsuits); “Eastern Financial Partners and MCA Resolve share personnel” (public reporting referenced in the research assignment; echoed on competitor review sites including mcasettlementreviews.com (operated by Coastal Debt Resolve)); “Complaints that Eastern Financial Partners took funds with little progress and denied refund requests as 'used for attorneys'” (mcasettlementreviews.com); “Specialty Capital, LLC v. Corporate Rescue Advisors, LLC, Eastern Financial Partners; and Frank Venezio — New York County Supreme Court” (beaconclient.com/settlementlawsuits); “Fundfi Merchant Funding LLC v. MCA Resolve LLC, 1st Colonial Business Solutions et al. establishes litigation against Eastern Financial Partners” (beaconclient.com/settlementlawsuits). Each appears online with no court, caption, or docket behind it. We list them so you know we looked.
Part of this list was compiled by Beacon Client Solutions, which is itself a debt-resolution firm and a competitor of most companies it names. We reproduce its entries because the captions are real and checkable, we verified what we could, and we label the rest rather than dropping them. Read the selection with its source in mind, ours included.
Court records are public and they change. A filed complaint contains allegations, not findings, and a case appearing here is not a conclusion that the company did anything wrong. Where a case ended, we say how it ended. Where we could not confirm a docket, we say that too. One limit worth knowing: free docket sources show only what someone has already paid to fetch, so a case we describe as open may have been resolved since the date shown against it. Treat every date here as the last time the record was refreshed, not as today. Last verified August 24, 2026.