Attached files

file filename
EXCEL - IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT - DEBT RESOLVE INCFinancial_Report.xls
EX-31.1 - CERTIFICATION - DEBT RESOLVE INCdrsv_ex311.htm
EX-32.1 - CERTIFICATION - DEBT RESOLVE INCdrsv_ex321.htm
EX-21.1 - LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES - DEBT RESOLVE INCdrsv_ex211.htm

 

 

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

x

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013

 

¨

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the transition period from ____________ to ____________

 

Commission File No.: 001-33110

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

 

Delaware

 

33-0889197

(State or other Jurisdiction of

 

(I.R.S. Employer

Incorporation or Organization)

 

Identification No.)

     

1133 Westchester Ave., Suite S-223

   

White Plains, New York

 

10604

(Address of principal executive offices)

 

(Zip Code)

 

(914) 949-5500

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

Title of Each Class

 

Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered

Common Stock, par value $.001 per share

 

None

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¨ No x

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ¨ No x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ¨ No x

 

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (Sec. 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

Large accelerated filer

¨

Accelerated filer

¨

Non-accelerated filer

¨

Smaller reporting company

x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12 b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No x

 

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting stock held by non-affiliates of the issuer was approximately $2,325,797, based on the last sale price of $0.021 per share on December 31, 2013, as quoted in the OTC Pink marketplace.

 

As of February 15, 2015, 98,187,082 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock were outstanding.

 

Documents Incorporated by Reference: None

 

 

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

PART I.

     
         

Item 1.

Business

   

3

 

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

   

12

 

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

   

22

 

Item 2.

Properties

   

22

 

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

   

22

 

Item 4.

Mine Safety Disclosures

   

22

 
           

PART II.

       
           

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

   

23

 

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data

   

23

 

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

   

24

 

Item 7A.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

   

29

 

Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

   

29

 

Item 9.

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

   

29

 

Item 9A.

Controls and Procedures

   

29

 

Item 9B.

Other Information

   

30

 
           

PART III.

       
           

Item 10.

Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

   

31

 

Item 11.

Executive Compensation

   

35

 

Item 12.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

   

37

 

Item 13.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

   

39

 

Item 14.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

   

40

 

Item 15.

Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

   

42

 
   

Signatures

   

44

 
   

Financial Statements

   

F-1

 

 

 
2

 

PART I.

 

ITEM 1. Business

 

This report contains forward-looking statements regarding our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates” and similar expressions or variations of such words are intended to identify forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of identifying forward-looking statements in this report. Additionally, statements concerning future matters such as the development or regulatory approval of new products, enhancements of existing products or technologies, revenue and expense levels and other statements regarding matters that are not historical are forward-looking statements.

 

Although forward-looking statements in this report reflect the good faith judgment of our management, such statements can only be based on facts and factors currently known by us. Consequently, forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties and actual results and outcomes may differ materially from the results and outcomes discussed in or anticipated by the forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences in results and outcomes include without limitation those discussed under the heading “Risk Factors” below, as well as those discussed elsewhere in this report. Readers are urged not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this report. Except as required by federal securities laws, we undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements in order to reflect any event or circumstance that may arise after the date of this report. Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made in this report, including under Item 1A. , “Risk Factors, which attempt to advise interested parties of the risks and factors that may affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

 

Overview

 

Debt Resolve, Inc. is a Delaware corporation formed in April 1997. Our primary business is providing software solutions to consumer lenders or those collecting on consumer loans using a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model. These solutions facilitate web-based payments or the resolution of delinquent or defaulted consumer debt. We have marketed our services primarily to consumer banks, collection agencies, collection law firms and the buyers of defaulted debt in the United States, Europe and Asia. Other opportunities exist for marketing our software to hospitals and large physician groups. In addition, client results show that our solution is attractive for the collection of low balance debt, such as that held by utility companies and online service providers, where the cost of traditionally labor intensive collection efforts may exceed the value collected. We will pursue these markets as well as our traditional markets. We do not anticipate any material incremental costs associated with developing our capabilities and marketing to these creditors, as our existing Debt Resolve solutions can already handle most types of debt, and we make contact with these creditors in our normal course of business. However, we are continually upgrading our solutions to address specific client needs or to open new markets for our web solutions with our existing staff.

 

As past experience has shown, effective utilization of our system will require a change in thinking on the part of the collection industry, but we believe the effort will result in new collection benchmarks. We intend to provide detailed advice and hands-on assistance to clients to help them make the transition to our system and to document the performance of our solutions in each market to provide strong return-on-investment data to these prospective clients. Clients tell us that they are happy with the results that they are getting. However, there is still an extensive sales process to get prospective clients comfortable with using web-based collection technology. 

 

 
3

 

The Debt Resolve solution utilizes our “double-blind” bidding system that works in real-time to resolve consumer obligations by taking offers from debtors and creditors and finding a resolution between the offers. Protected by five U.S. patents, our process is fully automated and does not require human intervention. The core patent, no. 6,330,551, has been upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Cybersettle, Inc. vs. National Arbitration Forum, Inc. (2007-1092). The product’s infrastructure was built to accommodate significant scaling. We also created an early stage delinquency solution which is suited to internal bank collection operations. The benefits of our Debt Resolve solutions versus traditional collection methods have been lower cost, higher average collections per account and higher portfolio recovery rates. In addition, our solutions are designed to help our clients keep satisfied customers, since our systems are much less intrusive than traditional collection techniques.

 

 Our Debt Resolve solutions bring creditors (or parties who service their credit) and consumer debtors together to resolve defaulted consumer debt online through a series of steps. The process is initiated when one of our creditor or servicer clients electronically forwards to us a file of debtor accounts, and sets rules or parameters for handling each class of accounts. The client then invites its consumer debtor to visit a client-branded website or a generic solution, developed and hosted by us, where the consumer is presented with an opportunity to satisfy the delinquent or defaulted debt through one of our Debt Resolve solutions. Through our hosted website, the debtor is allowed to make three or four offers, or select other options to bring current or settle the obligation. If the debtor makes an offer acceptable to our creditor client, payment can then be collected, sent through the client’s payment processor and deposited directly into the client’s account. We never touch our client’s money. The entire resolution process is accomplished online.

 

Finally, during the course of 2014, a new strategy was developed to diversify revenue sources through the use of our core competencies in e-commerce based debt collection and internet based product development. In December 2014, Progress Advocates LLC, a Debt Resolve joint venture, was launched to provide services to holders of student loans. Its early success is supportive of current forecasts for both revenue and profitability, significant to our business viability. A second initiative to support our new strategy was also started during 2014. This initiative has resulted in the development of a new online consumer to consumer debt negotiation service, named Settl.it. Anticipated launch of this application, which is transaction fee supported, is in March 2015. Both business initiatives have a very low cost basis for Debt Resolve. Each will increase Debt Resolve’s revenue and profit based on the rate of marketing investment. This will allow Debt Resolve to manage its growth in line with available financial resources. It is anticipated that both new businesses will be accretive to our 2015 financial results.

 

Corporate and Background Information

 

We were incorporated as a Delaware corporation in April 1997 under our former name, Lombardia Acquisition Corp. On May 7, 2003, our certificate of incorporation was amended to change our corporate name to Debt Resolve, Inc.

 

 
4

 

Our principal executive offices are located at 1133 Westchester Ave., Suite S-223, White Plains, New York 10604, and our telephone number is (914) 949-5500. As of December 31, 2013, we had no subsidiaries. Our website is located at http://www.debtresolve.com. Information contained in our website is not part of this report.

 

Our Strengths

 

Through formal focus groups and one-on-one user studies conducted by us with consumer debtors who would be potential candidates to use the original Debt Resolve system, we designed the system to be user-friendly and easily navigated.

 

We believe our Debt Resolve solutions have a number of key features that make them unique and valuable:

 

 

·

One solution utilizes a blind-bidding system for settling debt – This feature is the subject of patent protection and to date has resulted in settlements and payments that average above the floor set by our clients.

 

 

 

 

·

They facilitate compliance with regulations.

     
 

·

They promote best practices – the collections industry is very results-driven. To adopt new techniques or technology, participants want to know exactly what kind of benefits to expect. We recognize this and also know that Internet-based collection is a newer technology, and there is room to improve its performance. By working with our clients to build best practices, we expect to help secure sales and improve revenue to us.

     
 

·

By providing a web channel, total liquidation rates are increased in our clients’ portfolios.

 

We believe the main advantages to consumer debtors in using our Debt Resolve solutions are:

 

 

·

A greater feeling of control over the debt collection process.

     
 

·

Confidentiality, security, ease-of-use and 24-hour access.

     
 

·

A less threatening experience than dealing directly with debt collectors.

 

Despite these advantages, neither we nor any other company has established a firm foothold in the market for online debt collection. Effective utilization of our solutions will require a change in thinking on the part of the debt collection industry, and the market for online collection of defaulted consumer debt may never develop to the extent that we envision or that is required for our Internet solutions to become a viable, stand-alone business. Debt Resolve is now ten years old without any significant adoption of web collections technology. However, we intend to continuously enhance and extend our offerings and develop significant expertise in consumer behavior with respect to online debt payment to remain ahead of potential competitors. We believe we have the following key competitive advantages:

 

 

·

To our knowledge, we were the first and only company to market an integrated set of Internet-based consumer debt collection tools. The patent license to the Internet bidding process protects Debt Resolve’s key methodology and limits what future competitors may develop for the duration of the patents

 

 
5

 

Our Business

 

Our Cloud-based Solutions

 

Our Debt Resolve solution brings creditors or servicers and consumer debtors together to resolve defaulted consumer debt through a series of steps. The process is initiated when one of our clients electronically forwards to us a file of debtor accounts and sets rules or parameters for handling each class of accounts. The client then invites its customer (the consumer debtor) to visit a client-branded website, developed and hosted by us, where the consumer debtor is presented with an opportunity to satisfy the defaulted debt through the hosted solution. The consumer debtor is allowed to make three or four offers, or select other options, to resolve or settle the obligation. If the consumer debtor makes an offer acceptable to our creditor client, payment can then be collected and passed to the client’s payment gateway and deposited directly into the client’s own designated account. The entire resolution process is accomplished online.

 

During the course of 2014, a new strategy was developed to diversify revenue sources through the use of our core competencies in e-commerce based debt collection and internet based product development. In December 2014 Progress Advocates LLC, a Debt Resolve joint venture was launched to provide services to holders of student loans. Its early success is supportive of current forecasts for both revenue and profitability, significant to our business viability. A second initiative to support our new strategy was also started during 2014. This initiative has resulted in the development of a new online consumer to consumer debt negotiation service, named Settl.it, which will charge a fee per transaction. Anticipated launch of this application is in March 2015. Both business initiatives have a very low cost basis for Debt Resolve. Each will increase our respective revenue and profit based on the rate of marketing investment. This will allow Debt Resolve to manage its growth in line with available financial resources. It is anticipated that both new businesses will be accretive to our 2015 financial results.

 

In connection with entering into the Progress Advocates LLC joint venture with LSH, LLC, (see below), we issued to LSH, LLC two five-year warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,500,000 shares of series A convertible preferred stock of Debt Resolve at an exercise price of $0.50 per preferred share. The first warrant for 1,000,000 shares of Debt Resolve preferred stock vests and becomes exercisable 25% upon issuance and the balance upon the achievement by Progress Advocates of specific increasing revenue goals. The second warrant for 500,000 shares of Debt Resolve preferred stock vests and becomes exercisable when Progress Advocates achieves at least $1,000,000 in cumulative “operating income.”

 

Utilizing the financial resources provided by these new initiatives, a plan has been developed for 2015 to re-purpose the traditional Debt Resolve Solution into a more fully featured Accounts Receivable Management solution for the healthcare industry. When completed, hospitals and medical groups will look to Debt Resolve for the low cost collection and management of patient pay receivables, the fastest growing debt in their industry, from billing to charge offs.

 

 
6

 

Our Industry

 

According to the U.S. Federal Reserve Board, consumer credit has increased from $133.7 billion in 1970 to $3,097.9 billion in December 2013, a compound annual growth rate of approximately 7.6% for the period. In parallel, the accounts receivables management (“ARM”) industry accounts for $15 billion in annual revenues according to industry analyst Kaulkin Ginsberg.

 

There are several major collections industry trends:

 

 

·

Profit margins are stagnating or declining due to the fixed costs of telephone-based collections. In addition, periods when the economy is weak means more delinquencies to collect but a higher inability on the part of debtors to pay. Thus, costs increase to generate the same level of revenue. The ACA International’s 2012 Benchmarking & Agency Operations Survey shows that more than 50% of the operating costs are directly related to the cost of the collections agents, making the business difficult to scale using traditional staffing and collections methods.

     
 

·

Small to mid-size agencies will need to offer competitive pricing and more services to compete with larger agencies, as well as focus on niche areas that require specialized expertise.

     
 

·

Off-shoring has been used by both creditors and third-party collectors, but their results were less than expected due to cultural differences.

     
 

·

Debt buyers may start collecting more debt themselves while agencies may start buying more debt, creating more competitiveness within the ARM industry.

 

The collections industry has always been driven by letters and agent calls to debtors. In the early 1990’s, dialer technology created an improvement in calling efficiency. However, it was not until the early 2000’s that any new technologies were introduced. These new technologies include analytics, Interactive Voice Response systems (IVR) and Internet-based collections. Of these, IVR systems and Internet-based collections have the ability to positively impact the cost-to-collect by reducing agent involvement, while analytics focus agent time on the accounts with the highest potential to collect.

 

Our Business Growth Strategy

 

Our goal is to become an important participant in the ARM industry by making our Debt Resolve solutions key collection tools at all stages of delinquency across all categories of consumer debt. The key elements of our business growth strategy are to:

 

 

·

Accelerate our marketing efforts and extend target markets for the Internet product. Initially, we marketed our Debt Resolve Solution to credit issuers, their collection agencies and collection law firms and the buyers of their defaulted debt in the United States. We also entered the auto collections vertical in 2007 with the addition of several clients in this area. In 2010, we implemented our first client in the retail sector. We were actively targeting new market segments like healthcare companies, and new geographic markets. Other markets in the United States may include student loan debt, utilities, Internet/payday lending and other low balance debt.

     
 

·

Form strategic industry partnerships. Starting in 2011, we changed the principal thrust of our sales and marketing efforts from direct sales to forming partnerships with large, well established collection industry players. The partners would then market our solutions to their existing client base and thereby significantly accelerate our revenue growth. In late 2014, we formed Progress Advocates LLC along with our new partner LSH, LLC to focus on the student loan market with 51% owned by the Company and 49% owned by LSH, LLC.

     
 

·

Expand our service offerings. We may decide to pursue opportunities, either through software licensing, acquisition or product extension, to enter related markets well-suited for our proprietary technology and other services. We are working with partners to provide one-stop shopping to our clients for a broad array of collection related services, including payment processing, analytics and collection floor software and other technology. For example, we are completing our new consumer-to-consumer application, Settl.it, to resolve disputes between consumer end users.

     
 

·

Grow our client base. As discussed above, we are growing our client base principally through our new partnerships. With our suite of online products, we believe we can expand our client base by offering a broader range of services with our partners. We believe that our clients can benefit from our patented, cost-effective technology and other partner services, and we intend to continue to market and sell our services to them under long-term recurring revenue contracts.

     
 

·

Increase adoption rates. Our clients typically pay us either flat monthly fees that vary by number of accounts loaded or a percentage of the monthly recoveries collected using our solutions. Using our proprietary technology and our marketing processes, we will continue to assist our clients in growing the adoption rates for our services.

     
 

·

Provide additional products and services to our installed client base. We intend to continue to leverage our installed client base by expanding the range of new products and services available to our clients, through internal development, partnerships and alliances. Some of these services include mailing services, analytics, tracing technology, collection floor software or voice -driven technology. 7

 

 
7

 

 

·

Maintain and leverage technological leadership. Our technology and integration expertise has enabled us to be among the first to introduce an online method for the resolution of consumer debt, and we believe we pioneered the online collection technology space. We believe the scope and speed of integration of our technology-based services gives us a competitive advantage and with our efforts on continued research and development, we intend to continue to maintain our technological leadership. We implement our typical client in 30 days or less. Also, we completed three major enhancements to our solutions including true multiple account functionality, the ability for a consumer user to go back to previous screens and the Settl.it proprietary solution.

     
 

·

Facilitate and leverage growth. We believe our growth will be facilitated by the fact that we have already established “proof of concept” of our system with our initial national and international clients. Our client statistics show that clients can collect more money at a lower cost than the traditional collection methods of phone and mail alone. In addition, the increasing level of consumer debt both in the United States and internationally and the significant level of charge-offs by consumer debt originators is driving clients to take new technologies more seriously. Finally, major changes in consumer bankruptcy laws have impacted our markets. The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, which became effective in October 2005, significantly limits the availability of relief under Chapter 7 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, where consumer debts can be discharged without any effort at repayment. Under this law, consumer debtors with some ability to repay their debts are either barred from bankruptcy relief or forced into repayment plans under Chapter 13 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In addition, this law imposes mandatory budget and credit counseling as a precondition to filing bankruptcy. We believe that these more stringent requirements will make bankruptcy a much less attractive option for most consumer debtors to resolve outstanding debt and will increase the pool of accounts suitable for our Debt Resolve solutions and potentially lead more creditors to utilize our system.

 

 Sales and Marketing

 

Our current sales efforts are focused on our United States partnerships and healthcare entities, as well as the launch of our Settl.it consumer-to-consumer portal. Our primary targets are the major companies in each of these segments: hospitals and large provider groups, retailers and holders of low balance consumer debt. Once the Company achieves profitability, we will re-engage with the large consumer credit issuers who have wanted to use our solutions but had to wait until our financial condition improved.

 

The economics of an Internet model means that our fixed costs will be relatively stable in relation to growth of our business, thereby improving margins over time. We have been able to upgrade our solutions and develop new ones without increasing our costs. It is our intention to base pricing on the value gained by clients rather than on our direct costs. In general, we believe that if our services are priced at a reasonable discount to the relative cost of traditional collections, the economic advantages will be sufficiently compelling to persuade clients to offer our Debt Resolve solutions to a majority of their target debtors as a preferred or alternate channel. A key part of our sales strategy is to build a proof-of-concept by sub-market. This involves tracking results by each sub-market on the percentage of debtors that use our online system, the number that pay, and the amount paid compared to the settlement “floor” that our clients desire. These results form the basis for the business case and are key to closing sales by providing a clear expected return on investment to prospective clients. Results will come from existing clients, new partnerships and from our current and new business partners or contacts. This will be a departure from previous years where clients were often unwilling to share their costs and performance data.

 

Our marketing efforts will focus on strengthening our image versus that of our competition, providing new industry leading technologies, refining our message by market, and re-introducing our company as a financially-sound, growing enterprise. As revenue begins to increase during 2015, this revenue growth will provide further evidence of the viability of our solutions.

 

 
8

 

Technology License and Proprietary Technology

 

At the core of our Debt Resolve solution is a patent-protected bidding methodology co-invented by the co-founders of our company. We originally entered into a license agreement in February 2003 with the co-founders for the licensed usage of the intellectual property rights relating to U.S. Patent No. 6,330,551, issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on December 11, 2001 for “Computerized Dispute and Resolution System and Method” worldwide. This patent, which expires August 5, 2018, covers automated and online, double blind-bid systems that generate high-speed settlements by matching offers and demands in rounds. Four subsequent patents have been issued and form a five patent “cluster” underpinning our license agreement. In June 2005, we amended and restated the license agreement in its entirety. The license agreement can be found in our SEC filings.

 

The licensed usage is limited to the creation of software and other code enabling an automated system used solely for the settlement and collection of delinquent, defaulted and other types of credit card receivables and other consumer debt and specifically excludes the settlement and collection of insurance claims, tax and other municipal fees of all types. The licensed usage also includes the creation, distribution and sale of software products or solutions for the same aim as above and with the same exclusions. In lieu of cash royalty fees, the co-founders have agreed to accept stock options to purchase shares of our common stock, which were granted as follows:

 

 

·

initially, we granted to each of the co-founders a stock option for up to such number of shares of our common stock such that the stock option, when added to the number of shares of our common stock owned by each of the co-founders, and in combination with any shares owned by any of their respective immediate family members and affiliates, would equal 14.6% of the total number of our outstanding shares of common stock.

     
 

·

if, and upon, our reaching (in combination with any subsidiaries and other sub-licensees) $10,000,000 in gross revenues derived from the licensed usage in any given fiscal year, we will grant each of the co-founders such additional number of stock options as will equal 1% of our total number of outstanding shares of common stock on a fully-diluted basis at such time,

     
 

·

if, and upon, our reaching (in combination with any subsidiaries and other sub-licensees) $15,000,000 in gross revenues derived from the licensed usage in any given fiscal year, we will grant each of the co-founders such additional number of stock options as will equal 1.5% of our total number of outstanding shares of common stock on a fully-diluted basis at such time, and

     
 

·

if, and upon, our reaching (in combination with any subsidiaries and other sub-licensees) $20,000,000 in gross revenues derived from the licensed usage in any given fiscal year, we will grant each of the co-founders such additional number of stock options as will equal 2% of our total number of outstanding shares of common stock on a fully-diluted basis at such time.

 

The stock options granted to the co-founders pursuant to the license agreement have an exercise price of $5.00 per share and are exercisable for ten years from the date of grant.

 

The term of the license agreement extends until the expiration of the last-to-expire patents licensed (now 5 patents) and is not terminable by the co-founders, the licensors. The license agreement also provides that we will have the right to control the ability to enforce the patent rights licensed to us against infringers and defend against any third-party infringement actions brought with respect to the patent rights licensed to us subject, in the case of pleadings and settlements, to the reasonable consent of the co-founders. The terms of the license agreement, including the exercise price and number of stock options granted under the agreement, were negotiated in an arm’s-length transaction between the co-founders, on the one hand, and our independent directors, on the other hand.

 

 
9

 

Cybersettle, Inc. also licenses and utilizes the patent-protected bidding methodology co-invented by the co-founders, exclusive to the settlement of personal injury, property and worker’s compensation claims between claimants and insurance companies, self-insured corporations and municipalities. Cybersettle is not affiliated with us.

 

In addition, we have developed our own software based on the licensed intellectual property rights. We regard our software as proprietary and rely primarily on a combination of copyright, trademark and trade secret laws of general applicability, employee confidentiality and invention assignment agreements and other intellectual property protection methods to safeguard our technology and software. We have not applied for patents on any of our own technology. We have obtained through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office a registered trademark for our Debt Resolve corporate and system name as well as our slogan “Debt Resolve – Settlement with Dignity.”

 

Technology and Service Providers

 

We outsource our web hosting to Cervalis LLC, a Tier 1 data center providing our security in a SSAE 16 and PCI certified environment. The Cervalis hosting facility is located in Wappingers Falls, New York. We use Cervalis’ servers to operate our proprietary software developed in our corporate offices.

 

Competition

 

Internet-based technology was introduced to the collections industry in 2004 and has many participants at this time. The original three were us, Apollo Enterprise Solutions, LTD. and Online Resources Corp. A large number of collection agency software providers now offer an internet payment portal included with their software.

 

Apollo Enterprise Solutions, LTD. is a public company with venture backing. Apollo has a mixed team of employees/consultants who are located at their facility in Irvine, CA or are geographically dispersed. Their marketing and sales efforts are focused on high-end banks and some large agencies, both in the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as healthcare providers. We believe Apollo spent more than their competitors on advertising and trade show sponsorships. Their sales strategy has been to be the lowest-cost provider. In terms of product positioning, Apollo emphasizes their technology – especially their rules engine that allows a client to set treatment strategies, and the ability to process real-time credit scores for inclusion in the debtor treatment strategy. Overall, Apollo had a feature set similar to our Debt Resolve solution – including the rules engine – and appeared to replicate our proprietary blind bidding system. In January 2007, we filed a patent infringement law suit against Apollo. On November 5, 2007, Debt Resolve and Apollo jointly announced that they had reached a settlement of the pending patent infringement lawsuit. The parties came to agreement that Apollo’s system, as represented by Apollo, does not infringe on Debt Resolve’s United States Patents: Nos. 6,330,551 and 6,954,741, both entitled Computerized Dispute Resolution System and Method. The parties further agreed to respect each other’s intellectual property to the extent it is validly patent protected with the parties reserving all of their legal rights. After a restructuring in 2010, Apollo went public in 2012. Their financial disclosures filed since going public, show Apollo has had a significant loss for each quarter filed to this date.

 

Online Resources Corp. is an established, publicly-traded company whose primary businesses are online banking and online payments. Their online collections product was built by Incurrent Solutions, Inc., a company that Online Resources acquired in late 2004. Incurrent had a small base of credit card issuers as clients of their self-service website product line. Their online collections product has been initially sold to large U.S. card issuers (top 25) but Online Resources has begun sales efforts to agencies. Online Resources has documented results from a top card issuer, but their product is not as complete as either Apollo’s or ours. However, their partnering with Intelligent Results to provide rules engine technology shows that Online Resources is addressing product deficiencies. From a sales and marketing perspective, they have benefited from being a stable, relatively large-sized company. Online Resources has been able to reap some advantages from the integration of online bill payment capabilities with their online collections.

 

 
10

 

Our Debt Resolve solutions have client tools that make setting up treatment programs as flexible as those offered by Apollo and Online Resources, but we believe are especially easy for our clients to use. Implementation time is typically a 30-day maximum, and we have a track record that supports this claim. Our solutions do not have an in-house payment processing system. Instead, we partner with major payment processing providers to offer competitive rates on this service. Many potential clients already have a processing system, and we can provide an interface to that system. In addition, although Apollo plays up its ability to handle real-time credit scores as a key differentiator, we have not found any evidence that this is a requirement in the industry. However, we believe that matching that feature, if it becomes an issue, is a fairly straightforward process.

 

There are many new competitors entering the online collections market at this time. We are very closely monitoring their functionality to prevent an infringement of our patented settlement engine. Several cease and desist letters have been sent in 2012 and 2013 to potential infringers to stop using technology that appears to use our protected process, and we will vigorously enforce our rights to protect our technology.

 

Government Regulation

 

We believe that our Internet technology business is not subject to any regulations by governmental agencies other than those routinely imposed on corporate and Internet technology businesses. We believe it is unlikely that state or foreign regulators would take the position that our solutions effectively constitute the collection of debts that is subject to licensing and other laws regulating the activities of collection agencies, as we have no client funds in our custody at any time. We simply provide a software suite that our clients use to conduct their business.

 

Existing laws and regulations for traditional collection agencies would include applicable state revolving credit, credit card or usury laws, state consumer plain English and disclosure laws, the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the federal Truth in Lending Act (including the Fair Credit Billing Act amendments) and the Federal Reserve Board’s implementation of Regulation Z, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, and state unfair and deceptive acts and practices laws. Collection laws and regulations also directly apply to an agency’s business, such as the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and state law counterparts. Additional consumer protection and privacy protection laws may be enacted that would impose additional requirements on the enforcement of and collection on defaulted consumer debt, and any new laws, rules or regulations that may be adopted, as well as existing consumer protection and privacy protection laws, may adversely affect our ability to collect. Finally, federal and state governmental bodies are considering, and may consider in the future, other legislative proposals that would regulate the collection of consumer debt. Our failure to comply with any current or future laws or regulations applicable to us could limit our ability to collect on any consumer debt.

 

For our Internet technology business, any penetration of our network security or other misappropriation of consumers’ personal information could subject us to liability. Other potential misuses of personal information, such as for unauthorized marketing purposes, could also result in claims against us. These claims could result in litigation. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission and several states have investigated the use by certain Internet companies of personal information. The Company has liability insurance policies to protect itself from computer crime by its employees and external sources. The Company believes its coverages will adequately meet its potential monetary damages.

 

 
11

 

In addition, pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, our financial institution clients must require us to include in their contracts with us that we have appropriate data security standards in place. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act stipulates that we must protect against unauthorized access to, or use of, consumer debtor information that could result in detrimental use against or substantial inconvenience to any consumer debtor. Detrimental use or substantial inconvenience is most likely to result from improper access to sensitive consumer debtor information because this type of information is most likely to be misused, as in the commission of identity theft. We believe we have adequate policies and procedures in place to protect this information; however, if we experience a data security breach that results in any penetration of our network security or other misappropriation of consumers’ personal information, or if we have an inadequate data security program in place, our financial institution clients may consider us to be in breach of our agreements with them, and we may be subject to litigation.

  

Also, as we move into the healthcare space, our healthcare clients must require us to include in their contracts with us that we meet the data protection provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. This law is designed to ensure that patient care data is not personally identifiable in the event of a breach of our solutions. Again, this type of information is very susceptible to misuse in the commission of identity theft. We believe we have adequate policies and procedures in place to protect this information; however, if we experience a data security breach that results in any penetration of our network security or other misappropriation of consumers’ personal information, or if we have an inadequate data security program in place, our healthcare clients may also consider us to be in breach of our agreements with them, and we may be subject to litigation.

 

The laws and regulations applicable to the Internet and our services are evolving and unclear and could damage our business. It is possible that laws and regulations may be adopted, covering issues such as user privacy, pricing, taxation, content regulation, quality of products and services, and intellectual property ownership and infringement. This legislation could expose us to substantial liability or require us to incur significant expenses in complying with any new regulations. Increased regulation or the imposition of access fees could substantially increase the costs of communicating on the Internet, potentially decreasing the demand for our services. A number of proposals have been made at the federal, state and local level and in foreign countries that would impose additional taxes on the sale of goods and services over the Internet. Such proposals, if adopted, could adversely affect us. Moreover, the applicability to the Internet of existing laws governing issues such as personal privacy is uncertain. We may be subject to claims that our services violate such laws. Any new legislation or regulation in the United States or abroad or the application of existing laws and regulations to the Internet could adversely affect our business. Finally, in foreign countries certain restrictions on the use of the internet for certain activities are restricted or prohibited.

 

Employees

 

As of February 15, 2015, we had two full-time employees and two independent contractors. Our employees and contractors are based at our corporate headquarters in White Plains, New York. None of our employees is subject to a collective bargaining agreement, and we believe that our relations with our employees and contractors are good.

 

ITEM 1A. Risk Factors

 

Cautionary Statements and Risk Factors

 

Set forth below and elsewhere in this report and in other documents we file with the SEC are important risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results of operations, business and financial condition to differ materially from the results contemplated by the forward looking statements contained in this report.

 

 
12

 

Risks Related to Our Business

 

We have experienced significant and continuing losses from operations which could impede the process of raising capital.

 

For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, we had inadequate revenues and incurred net losses of $474,882 and $1,568,341, respectively. Cash used in operating activities for operations was $471,859 and $446,982 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Based upon projected operating expenses, we believe that our working capital as of February 15, 2015 may not be sufficient to fund our plan of operations for the next 12 months. Our continued net operating losses increase the difficulty in meeting such goals and there can be no assurances that we will prove successful.

 

We need to raise additional capital in order to be able to accomplish our business plan objectives. We have historically satisfied our capital needs primarily from the sale of debt and equity securities. We are continuing our efforts to secure additional funds through debt and/or equity instruments. The principal sources of capital for us are private individual accredited investors and investment banks specializing in raising capital for micro-cap companies like us. Since 2009, the principal source of funding for us has been these private accredited investors, who have invested in notes (including convertible notes) and in stock purchases. Also, a bank loaned us $300,000, of which $125,000 was still outstanding as of December 31, 2013. On February 15,2015, there remains $50,000 still outstanding. Finally, board members and management have loaned us $799,211 that has not been repaid or may be converted to stock and has provided either short term or longer term capital to us. These totals do not include other short term loans principally from non-affiliated third parties that were loaned to us and repaid since 2009.

 

We have raised capital for our day-to-day operations since our inception in January 2003; however, no assurance can be provided that we will continue to be able to do so. There is no assurance that any funds secured will be sufficient to enable us to attain profitable operations or continue as a going concern. To the extent that we are unsuccessful, we may need to curtail our operations and implement a plan to extend payables and reduce overhead until sufficient additional capital is raised to support further operations. At any time until substantial capital is raised, there is also a significant risk of bankruptcy. There can be no assurance that any plan to raise additional funding will be successful. The financial statements contained in this filing do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

 

If we are unable to retain current clients and attract new clients, or if our clients do not actively submit defaulted consumer debt accounts on our solutions or successfully promote access to the solutions, we will not be able to generate revenues or continue our business.

 

We expect that our revenue will come from taking a success fee equal to a percentage of defaulted consumer debt accounts that are settled and collected through our online Debt Resolve solutions, from a flat fee per settlement or from recurring monthly fees for the use of our system, potentially coupled with success or other transaction fees. We depend on our creditor clients, who include but are not limited to first-party creditors such as banks, lenders, credit card issuers, telecoms and utilities, third-party collection agencies or collection law firms and purchasers of charged-off debt, to initiate the process by submitting defaulted consumer debt accounts on our system along with the settlement offers. We cannot be sure that we will be able to retain our existing clients, and enter into new. relationships with creditor clients in the future. In addition, we cannot be certain that we will be able to establish these creditor client relationships on favorable economic terms. Finally, we cannot control the number of accounts that our clients will submit on our system, how successfully they will promote access to the website, or whether the use of our solutions will result in any increase in recovery over traditional collection methods. If our client base, and their corresponding claims submission, does not increase significantly or experience favorable results, we will not be able to generate sufficient revenues to continue and sustain our business.

 

 
13

 

We will rely heavily on the financial success of Progress Advocates LLC.

 

Going forward, we expect a substantial part of our revenue to come from our new subsidiary, Progress Advocates LLC. This business operates in an entirely new market segment for us. We have no prior experience in the student loan debt sector, although our business partner does have experience in this sector. We are relying heavily on their expertise, systems and guidance to launch this new business. As a result, there is substantial risk to this endeavor until adequate revenue is established for it to be profitable.

 

If we are unable to implement our marketing program or if we are unable to build positive brand awareness for our company and our services, demand for our services will be limited, and we will not be able to grow our client base and generate revenues.

 

We believe that building brand awareness of our solutions and marketing our services in order to grow our client base and generate revenues is important to the viability of our business. Furthermore, we believe that building brand awareness will ultimately be a key differentiating factor among providers of online services, and given this, we believe that brand awareness will become increasingly important as competition has increased substantially in our target markets. In order to increase brand awareness, we must devote significant time and resources in our marketing efforts, provide high-quality client support and increase the number of creditors and consumers using our services. While we may maintain a “Powered by Debt Resolve” logo on each screen that consumer’s view when they log on to our solutions, this logo may be inadequate to build brand awareness among consumers. If clients do not perceive our services to be of high quality, the value of our brand could be diluted, which could decrease the attractiveness of our services to creditors and consumers. If we fail to promote and maintain our brand, our ability to generate revenues could be negatively affected. Moreover, if we incur significant expenses in promoting our brand and are unable to generate a corresponding increase in revenue as a result of our branding efforts, our operating results would be negatively impacted.

 

Currently, we are targeting our marketing efforts towards the collection and settlement of overdue or defaulted consumer debt accounts generated primarily in the United States. To grow our business, we will have to achieve market penetration in this segment and expand our service offerings and client base to include other segments and international creditor clients. We have been unsuccessful over ten years of previously marketing our services and may not be able to implement our sales and marketing initiatives. We may be unable to hire, retain, integrate and motivate sales and marketing personnel. Any new sales and marketing personnel may also require a substantial period of time to become effective. There can be no assurance that our marketing efforts will result in our obtaining new creditor clients or that we will be able to grow the base of creditors and consumers who use our services.

 

We also lost considerable marketing exposure while we restructured our balance sheet with limited resources by discharging certain notes, interest and payables by stock or settlement in 2009-2013. We are working to regain the market awareness that we had prior to the period where we were less active and visible. There can be no assurance that we can rebuild the original perception that we were the original company and leader in the industry for web collections technology. The ultimate validation of our market position will be our ability to generate meaningful revenue from our solutions.

 

We may not be able to protect the intellectual property rights upon which our business relies, including our licensed patents, trademarks, domain name, proprietary technology and confidential information, which could result in our inability to utilize our technology platform, licensed patents or domain name, without which we may not be able to provide our services.

 

Our ability to compete in our sector depends in part upon the strength of our proprietary rights in our technologies. We consider our intellectual property to be critical to our viability. We do not hold patents on our consumer debt-related product, but rather license technology for our Debt Resolve solution from the co-founders of our company, whose patented technology is now, and is anticipated to continue to be, incorporated into our service offerings as a key component.

 

 
14

 

Unauthorized use by others of our proprietary technology could result in an increase in competing products and a reduction in our sales. We rely on patent, trademark, trade secret and copyright laws to protect our licensed and proprietary technology and other intellectual property. We cannot be certain, however, that the steps that we have taken to protect our proprietary rights to date will provide meaningful protection from unauthorized use by others. We have initiated litigation and could pursue additional litigation in the future to enforce our intellectual property rights, to protect our trade secrets or to determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others.

 

However, we may not prevail in these efforts, and we could incur substantial expenditures and divert valuable resources in the process. In addition, many foreign countries’ laws may not protect us from improper use of our proprietary technologies. Consequently, we may not have adequate remedies if our proprietary rights are breached or our trade secrets are disclosed.

 

Finally, protection of our intellectual property through legal means is very expensive. We may not have the funds available to enforce our rights, which would allow other parties to violate these rights. Our efforts to protect our intellectual property will consume capital that would otherwise go to sales, marketing and operations and may negatively impact our financial performance in the short term. We believe that it is critical to our long term success to allocate resources to these activities from time to time.

  

In the future, we may be subject to intellectual property rights claims, which are costly to defend, could require us to pay damages and which could limit our ability to use certain technologies in the future and thereby result in loss of clients and revenue.

 

Litigation regarding intellectual property rights is common in the Internet and technology industries. We expect that Internet technologies and software products and services may be increasingly subject to third-party infringement claims as the number of competitors in our industry segment grows and the functionality of products and services in different industry segments overlaps. Under our license agreement, we have the right and obligation to control and defend against third-party infringement claims against us with respect to the patent rights that we license. Any claims relating to our services or intellectual property could result in costly litigation and be time consuming to defend, divert management’s attention and resources, cause delays in releasing new or upgrading existing products and services or require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements. Royalty or licensing agreements, if required, may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all. There can be no assurance that our services or intellectual property rights do not infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties. A successful claim of infringement against us and our failure or inability to license the infringed or similar technology or content could prevent us from continuing part of our business. Conversely, a very expensive effort to protect our rights even if successful may negatively impact our ability to operate by draining our cash resources from us.

 

The intellectual property rights that we license from our co-founders are limited in industry scope, and it is possible these limits could constrain the expansion of our business.

 

We do not hold patents on our consumer debt-related product, but rather license technology for our Debt Resolve solution from the co-founders of our company, whose patented technology is now, and is anticipated to continue to be, incorporated into our service offerings as a key component. This license agreement limits usage of the technology to the creation of software and other code enabling an automated system used solely for the settlement and collection of credit card receivables and other consumer debt and specifically excludes the settlement and collection of insurance claims, tax and other municipal fees of all types. These limitations on usage of the licensed technology could constrain the expansion of our business by limiting the different types of debt for which some of our Debt Resolve solutions can potentially be used, and limiting the potential clients that we could service.

 

 
15

 

Potential conflicts of interest exist with respect to the intellectual property rights that we license from our co-founders, and it is possible our interests and their interests may diverge.

 

We do not hold patents on our consumer debt-related product, but rather license technology for our Debt Resolve solution from the co-founders of our company, whose patented technology is now, and is anticipated to continue to be, incorporated into the Debt Resolve Solution as a key component. This license agreement presents the possibility of a conflict of interest in the event that issues arise with respect to the licensed intellectual property rights, including the prosecution or defense of intellectual property infringement actions, where our interests may diverge from those of the co-founders. The license agreement provides that we will have the right to control and defend or prosecute, as the case may require, the patent rights licensed to us subject, in the case of pleadings and settlements, to the reasonable consent of the co-founders. Our interests with respect to such pleadings and settlements may be at odds with those of the co-founders.

 

Under the terms of our license agreement, the co-founders of our company will be entitled to receive stock options to purchase shares of our common stock if and to the extent the licensed technology produces specific levels of revenue for us. They will not be entitled receive any stock options for other debt collection activities such as off-line settlements or transactions not involving the DR Settle technology. The license agreement may present the co-founders with conflicts of interest.

  

If we cannot compete against competitors that enter our market, demand for our services will be limited, which would likely result in our inability to continue our business.

 

We are aware of several companies that have software offerings that are competitive with our solutions and which compete with us for market share. Two early competitors, Incurrent Solutions, Inc., a division of Online Resources Corp., and Apollo Enterprises Solutions, LLC continue to provide an online collection offering. Additional competitors have emerged in the online defaulted consumer debt market. These and other possible new competitors may have substantially greater financial, personnel and other resources, greater adaptability to changing market needs, longer operating histories and more established relationships in the banking or collection industries than we currently have. In the future, we may not have the resources or ability to compete. As there are few significant barriers for entry to new providers of defaulted consumer debt services, there can be no assurance that additional competitors with greater resources than ours will not enter our market. Moreover, there can be no assurance that our existing or potential creditor clients will continue to use our services on an increasing basis, or at all. If we are unable to develop and expand our business or adapt to changing market needs as well as our competitors are able to do, now or in the future, we may not be able to continue our business.

 

We are dependent upon maintaining and expanding our computer and communications systems. Failure to do so could result in interruptions and failures of our services. This could have an adverse effect on our operations which would make our services less attractive to consumers, and therefore subject us to a loss of revenue as a result of a possible loss of creditor clients.

 

Our ability to provide high-quality client support largely depends on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of our computer and communications systems to accommodate our creditor clients and the consumers who use our system. In the terms and conditions of our standard form of licensing agreement with our clients, we agree to make commercially reasonable efforts to maintain uninterrupted operation of our solutions 99.99% of the time, except for scheduled system maintenance. In the normal course of our business, we must record and process significant amounts of data quickly and accurately to access, maintain and expand our offerings.

 

The temporary or permanent loss of our computer and telecommunications equipment and software systems, through casualty, operating malfunction, software virus, or service provider failure, could disrupt our operations. Any failure of our information systems, software or backup systems would interrupt our operations and could cause us to lose clients. We are exposed to the risk of network and Internet failure, both through our own systems and those of our service providers. While our utilization of redundant transmission systems can improve our network’s reliability, we cannot be certain that our network will avoid downtime. Substantially all of our computer and communications hardware systems are hosted in outsourced facilities with Cervalis in New York, and under the terms of our hosting service level agreement with Cervalis, they will provide network connectivity availability 99.9% of the time from the connection off their backbone to our hosted infrastructure.

 

 
16

 

Our disaster recovery plan may not be adequate and our business interruption insurance may not adequately compensate us for losses that could occur as a result of a network-related business interruption. The occurrence of a natural disaster or unanticipated problems at our facilities or those of our service providers could cause interruptions or delays in use of our solutions and loss of data. Additionally, we rely on third parties to facilitate network transmissions and telecommunications.

 

We cannot assure you that these transmissions and telecommunications will remain either reliable or secure. Any transmission or telecommunications problems, including computer viruses and other cyberattacks and simultaneous failure of our information systems and their backup systems, particularly if those problems persist or recur frequently, could result in lost business from creditor clients and consumers. Network failures of any sort could seriously affect our client relations, potentially causing clients to cancel or not renew contracts with us.

 

We may continue to be unable to timely file periodic reports with the SEC.

 

We did not timely file with the SEC our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, 2013, June 30, 2013 and September 30, 2013, which were all filed in February 2015. We also have yet to file our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, 2014, June 30, 2014 and September 30, 2014, and annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, all of which we expect to file prior to April 15, 2015. If we are not able to file these periodic reports in the next several weeks, or file any future periodic reports in the time specified by the Exchange Act, stockholders and potential investors will not have current public information about us which will likely have a negative effect on obtaining future capital. Failure to make timely filings also impairs our ability to conduct certain kinds of public offerings on short form registration statements that provide more efficient automatic forward incorporation of future SEC filings. Our inability to timely file periodic reports could materially and adversely affect our future business growth and financial condition.

 

Stanley E. Freimuth possesses specialized knowledge about our business strategy, and we would be adversely impacted if he was to become unavailable to us.

 

We believe that our ability to execute our business strategy will depend to a significant extent upon the efforts and abilities of Stanley E. Freimuth, our Chief Executive Officer. His corporate leadership experiences and successes leading small companies to profitability would be difficult to replace. If he were to become unavailable to us, our operations would be adversely affected. We have no insurance to compensate us for the loss of his services.

 

We have issued “blank check” preferred stock without stockholder approval with the effect of diluting then current stockholder interests and impairing their voting rights, and provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider favorable.

 

Our certificate of incorporation authorizes the issuance of up to 10,000,000 shares of “blank check” preferred stock with designations, rights and preferences as may be determined from time to time by our board of directors. Accordingly, our board of directors is empowered, without stockholder approval, to issue a series of preferred stock with dividend, liquidation, conversion, voting or other rights which could dilute the interest of, or impair the voting power of, our common stockholders.

 

On May 2, 2014, our board of directors designated 5,000,000 shares of its preferred stock as Series A Convertible Stock (“Series A”) with a $0.001 par value. The Series A preferred stock with rank senior to common and all other preferred stock of the corporation, and equal or junior to any preferred stock that may be issued in regard to liquidation; not entitled to dividends and is convertible, at the holders’ option, at 10 shares of common stock for each share of Series A preferred stock.

 

On July 10, 2014, we issued an aggregate of 595,000 shares of its Series A preferred stock for services rendered, including 500,000 shares issued to a board member.

 

In 2014, we issued an aggregate of 414,500 warrants to purchase Series A preferred stock for services rendered and a debt obligation, with exercise prices ranging from $0.50 to $1.50 per share, expiring three years from the date of issuance.

 

In connection with entering into the Progress Advocates LLC joint venture with LSH, LLC, we issued to LSH, LLC two five-year warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,500,000 shares of series A convertible preferred stock of Debt Resolve at an exercise price of $0.50 per preferred share. The first warrant for 1,000,000 shares of Debt Resolve preferred stock vests and becomes exercisable 25% upon issuance and the balance upon the achievement by Progress Advocates of specific increasing revenue goals. The second warrant for 500,000 shares of Debt Resolve preferred stock vests and becomes exercisable when Progress Advocates achieves at least $1,000,000 in cumulative “operating income.”

 

 
17

 

The issuance of a series of preferred stock could be used as a method of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change in control. For example, it would be possible for our board of directors to issue preferred stock with voting or other rights or preferences that could impede the success of any attempt to change control of our company. In addition, advanced notice is required prior to stockholder proposals.

 

Delaware law also could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us. Specifically, Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law may have an anti-takeover effect with respect to transactions not approved in advance by our board of directors, including discouraging attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for the shares of common stock held by our stockholders.

 

Risks Related to Our Industry

 

The ability of our solution’s clients to recover and enforce defaulted consumer debt may be limited under federal, state, local and foreign laws, which would negatively impact our revenues.

 

Federal, state, local and foreign laws may limit our creditor clients’ ability to recover and enforce defaulted consumer debt. Additional consumer protection and privacy protection laws may be enacted that would impose additional requirements on the enforcement and collection of consumer debt. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is actively looking at the debt collection industry for new regulation. Any new laws, rules or regulations that may be adopted, as well as existing consumer protection and privacy protection laws, may adversely affect our ability to settle defaulted consumer debt accounts on behalf of our clients and could result in decreased revenues to us. We cannot predict if or how any future legislation would impact our business or our clients. In addition, we cannot predict how foreign laws will impact our ability to expand our business internationally or the cost of such expansion. Our failure to comply with any current or future applicable laws or regulations could limit our ability to settle defaulted consumer debt claims on behalf of our clients, which could adversely affect our revenues.

 

For all of our businesses, government regulation and legal uncertainties regarding consumer credit and debt collection practices may require us to incur significant expenses in complying with any new regulations.

 

A number of our existing and potential creditor clients, such as banks and credit card issuers, operate in highly regulated industries. We are impacted by consumer credit and debt collection practices laws, both in the United States and abroad. The relationship of a consumer and a creditor is extensively regulated by federal, state, local and foreign consumer credit and protection laws and regulations. Governing laws include consumer plain English and disclosure laws, the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Federal Truth in Lending Act (including the Fair Credit Billing Act amendments), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and state law counterparts, the Federal Reserve Board’s implementation of Regulation Z, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, and state unfair and deceptive acts and practices laws. Failure of these parties to comply with applicable federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations could have a negative impact on us. For example, applicable laws and regulations may limit our ability to collect amounts owing with respect to defaulted consumer debt accounts, regardless of any act or omission on our part. We cannot assure you that any indemnities received from the financial institutions which originated the consumer debt account will be adequate to protect us from liability to consumers. Any new laws or rulings that may be adopted, and existing consumer credit and protection laws, may adversely affect our ability to collect and settle defaulted consumer debt accounts. In addition, any failure on our part to comply with such requirements could adversely affect our ability to settle defaulted consumer debt accounts and result in liability. In addition, state or foreign regulators may take the position that our solutions effectively constitute the collection of debts that is subject to licensing and other laws regulating the activities of collection agencies. If so, we may need to obtain licenses from such states, or such foreign countries where we may engage in our solutions business. Until licensed, we will not be able to lawfully deal with consumers in such states or foreign countries. Obtaining such licenses would be expensive.

 

We face potential liability that arises from our handling and storage of personal consumer information concerning disputed claims and other privacy concerns.

 

Any penetration of our network security or other misappropriation of consumers’ personal information could subject us to liability. Other potential misuses of personal information, such as for unauthorized marketing purposes, could also result in claims against us. These claims could result in litigation. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission and several states have investigated the use by certain Internet companies of personal information. We could incur unanticipated expenses, especially in connection with our settlement database, if and when new regulations regarding the use of personal information are enacted.

 

 
18

 

In addition, pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, our financial institution clients are required to include in their contracts with us that we have appropriate data security standards in place. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act stipulates that we must protect against unauthorized access to, or use of, consumer debtor information that could be detrimentally used against or result in substantial inconvenience to any consumer debtor. Detrimental use or substantial inconvenience is most likely to result from improper access to sensitive consumer debtor information because this type of information is most likely to be misused, as in the commission of identity theft. We believe we have adequate policies and procedures in place to protect this information; however, if we experience a data security breach that results in any penetration of our network security or other misappropriation of consumers’ personal information, or if we have an inadequate data security program in place, our financial institution clients may consider us to be in breach of our agreements with them.

 

Also, as we move into the healthcare space, our healthcare clients must require us to include in their contracts with us that we meet the data protection provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. This law is designed to ensure that patient care data is not personally identifiable in the event of a breach of our solutions. Again, this type of information is very susceptible to misuse in the commission of identity theft. We believe we have adequate policies and procedures in place to protect this information; however, if we experience a data security breach that results in any penetration of our network security or other misappropriation of consumers’ personal information, or if we have an inadequate data security program in place, our healthcare clients may also consider us to be in breach of our agreements with them, and we may be subject to litigation.

 

Government regulation and legal uncertainties regarding the Internet may require us to incur significant expenses in complying with any new regulations.

 

The laws and regulations applicable to the Internet and our services are evolving and unclear and could damage our business. Due to the increasing popularity and use of the Internet, it is possible that laws and regulations may be adopted, covering issues such as user privacy, pricing, taxation, content regulation, quality of products and services, and intellectual property ownership and infringement. This legislation could expose us to substantial liability or require us to incur significant expenses in complying with any new regulations. Increased regulation or the imposition of access fees could substantially increase the costs of communicating on the Internet, potentially decreasing the demand for our services. A number of proposals have been made at the federal, state and local level and in foreign countries that would impose additional taxes on the sale of goods and services over the Internet. Such proposals, if adopted, could adversely affect us. Moreover, the applicability to the Internet of existing laws governing issues such as personal privacy is uncertain. We may be subject to claims that our services violate such laws. Any new legislation or regulation in the United States or abroad or the application of existing laws and regulations to the Internet could adversely affect our business.

 

Compliance with changing regulation of corporate governance and public disclosure may result in additional expenses, which as a smaller public company may be disproportionately high.

 

Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure are creating uncertainty for small capitalization companies like us. These new and changing laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies, which could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. As a result, our efforts to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards will likely result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities.

 

 
19

 

Our industry is highly competitive, and we may be unable to continue to compete successfully with businesses that may have greater resources than we have.

 

We face competition from a wide range of collection and financial services companies that may have substantially greater financial, personnel and other resources, greater adaptability to changing market needs and more established relationships in our industry than we currently have. We also compete with traditional contingency collection agencies and in-house recovery departments. Competitive pressures adversely affect the availability and cost of qualified recovery personnel. If we are unable to develop and expand our business or adapt to changing market needs as well as our current or future competitors, we may experience reduced profitability.

 

We are subject to ongoing risks of litigation, including individual and class actions under consumer credit, collections, employment, securities and other laws.

 

We operate in an extremely litigious climate, and we are currently and may in the future be named as defendants in litigation, including individual and class actions under consumer credit, collections, employment, securities and other laws.

 

In the past, securities class-action litigation has often been filed against a company after a period of volatility in the market price of its stock. Defending a lawsuit, regardless of its merit, could be costly and divert management’s attention from the operation of our business. The use of certain collection strategies could be restricted if class-action plaintiffs were to prevail in their claims. In addition, insurance costs continue to increase significantly and policy deductibles also have increased. All of these factors could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

We may not be able to successfully anticipate, invest in or adopt technological advances within our industry.

 

Our business relies on computer and telecommunications technologies, and our ability to integrate new technologies into our business is essential to our competitive position and our success. We may not be successful in anticipating, managing, or adopting technological changes on a timely basis. Computer and telecommunications technologies are evolving rapidly and are characterized by short product life cycles.

 

While we believe that our existing information systems are sufficient to meet our current and foreseeable demands and continued expansion, our future growth may require additional investment in these systems. We depend on having the capital resources necessary to invest in new technologies to service receivables. We cannot assure you that we will have adequate capital resources available.

  

We may not be able to anticipate, manage or adopt technological advances within our industry, which could result in our services becoming obsolete and no longer in demand.

 

Our business relies on computer and telecommunications technologies. Our ability to integrate these technologies into our business is essential to our competitive position and our ability to execute our business strategy. Computer and telecommunications technologies are evolving rapidly and are characterized by short product life cycles. We may not be able to anticipate, manage or adopt technological changes on a timely basis. We depend on having the capital resources necessary to invest in new technologies for our business. We cannot be certain that adequate capital resources will be available to us at the appropriate time to effectively compete against our competition.

 

 
20

 

A poor performance by the economy may adversely impact our business.

 

When economic conditions deteriorated, more borrowers became delinquent on their consumer debt. However, while volumes of debt to settle have risen, borrowers have less ability in a downturn to make payment arrangements to pay their delinquent or defaulted debt. As a result, our revenues may decline, or it may be more costly to generate the same revenue levels, resulting in reduced earnings. A poor economy may also slow borrowing or may curb lenders willingness to provide credit, which results in lower business levels.

 

Risks Related to our Common Stock

 

Our stock is thinly traded.

 

The daily volume in our stock varies widely and is often limited. At this time, it is not possible to liquidate a significant position in a relatively short time period. In addition, because we are not traded on a national exchange, there are additional restrictions on the purchase or sale of our common stock. It has become increasingly difficult to find a brokerage firm willing to accept over-the-counter stock certificates due to new Financial Industry Regulatory Authority regulations.

 

Conversion of our outstanding debt to equity results in significant dilution.

 

The conversion of our debt to equity has resulted in significant dilution to our existing shareholders. In addition, some of these conversions have resulted in concentrated large illiquid blocks of our shares which overhang our trading for extensive periods of time.

 

Issuance of preferred stock results in significant dilution.

 

The issuance of preferred stock with its 10 to 1 conversion ratio into common stock will significantly dilute our common shareholders. We have significant amounts, 2,490,500 shares, of preferred stock still eligible to be issued in the future.

 

Our stock price may exhibit a high degree of volatility.

 

Because our stock is traded with relatively low volume, the price can move significantly on small trading volumes. The release of positive news would be expected to move our stock price up, but we have large illiquid blocks discussed above that sell into any upward momentum. These blocks exert a downward influence or may place a temporary or long-term cap on our stock price appreciation. Over time, we would expect these blocks to be broadly sold into the market, increasing our shareholder base and trading volume and mitigating the effect of these blocks over time. While we currently do not provide sales or earnings guidance as some larger companies do, we may do so in the future, and our stock price reaction may be volatile depending on our revenue and earnings performance relative to the guidance.

  

All of our assets are subject to liens as security for delinquent federal payroll taxes and indebtedness under our series D convertible notes. 

 

All of our assets now owned or hereafter acquired, and all proceeds therefrom, including accounts receivable and technology, are subject to liens in favor of the Internal Revenue Service for delinquent payroll taxes from 2011-2013 (see Note 13 to our Notes to Financial Statements), and certain investors who purchased our series D convertible notes (see Note 9 to our Notes to Financial Statements). While we are not currently in default under either of these obligations, our failure to comply with the terms of these obligations (which, for example, require monthly payments to the IRS) could entitle the IRS to declare all obligations to be immediately due and payable. If we were unable to service the obligations, the lien holders could foreclose on the assets that serve as collateral. As a result, following an event of default under these obligations and enforcement against the collateral, the lien holders will be entitled to be repaid in full from the proceeds of all the pledged assets owned by us now or hereafter acquired securing the obligations owed to them before any payment is made to the holders of our common stock from the proceeds of that collateral. Additionally, the holders of the liens will receive all proceeds from any realization on the collateral or from the collateral or proceeds thereof in any insolvency proceeding, until the obligations secured by the liens are paid in full. 

 

 

 
21

 

ITEM 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

 

Not applicable

 

ITEM 2. Properties

 

We currently occupy office space at 1133 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-223, White Plains, NY 10604, under a short term lease with an unaffiliated third party at a monthly rate of $3,500.

 

ITEM 3. Legal Proceedings

 

Lawsuits from vendors

 

Dreier LLP, a law firm, filed a complaint in the Supreme Court of New York, County of New York, seeking damages of $311,023 plus interest for legal services allegedly rendered to us. The complaint was answered on August 14, 2008 raising various affirmative defenses. On December 16, 2008, Dreier LLP filed for bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. A settlement was reached on September 30, 2014 requiring the Company to pay $22,500 of installment payments. The first installment of $10,000 was paid on October 10, 2014. The second, third and fourth installments of $2,500 were paid on November 10, 2014, December 11, 2014, January 12, 2015, and February 11, 2015, respectively, with a remaining unpaid balance of $2,500. The full amount in dispute was included in the Company’s accounts payable at December 31, 2013.

 

Mathew L. Johnson & Associates, P. C. ("MLJ"), the plaintiff, filed a complaint on or about July 27, 2012 related to a claim for breach of contract for failure to pay for services. On or about August 23, 2010, MLJ performed certain legal services on behalf of the Company. The Company entered into an agreement with MLJ, which provided for, among other things, a payment for all rendered services. In December 2012, we entered into a payment arrangement with the plaintiff for a down payment of $3,500 and monthly payments of $3,000 against the balance due. At December 31, 2013, the remaining balance due was $1,955 and included in accounts payable. Subsequently, the entire balance due has been paid.

 

From time to time, we are involved in various litigation matters in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

 

ITEM 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

 

Not applicable

 

 
22

  

PART II.

 

ITEM 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

Market Information

 

Our shares of common stock are quoted on the OTC Pink marketplace under the symbol DRSV.

 

The following table sets forth the high and low closing prices for our common stock for the periods indicated as reported on the OTC Pink marketplace from January 1, 2012 to present:

 

    Year ended December 31,  
 

2013

   

2012

 
Quarter  

High

   

Low

   

High

   

Low

 

First

 

$

0.07

   

$

0.05

   

$

0.12

   

$

0.07

 

Second

 

$

0.05

   

$

0.04

   

$

0.13

   

$

0.04

 

Third

 

$

0.05

   

$

0.02

   

$

0.08

   

$

0.04

 

Fourth

 

$

0.03

   

$

0.01

   

$

0.06

   

$

0.02

 

 

As of February 15, 2015, there were approximately 2,000 record holders of our common stock. We believe that a significant number of beneficial owners of our common stock hold shares in “nominee” or “street” name.

 

Dividends

 

We have not paid to date, nor do we expect to pay in the future, a dividend on our common stock. The payment of dividends on our common stock is within the discretion of our board of directors, subject to our certificate of incorporation. We intend to retain any earnings for use in our operations and the expansion of our business. Payment of dividends in the future will depend on our future earnings, future capital needs and our operating and financial condition, among other factors.

 

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

 

For the year ended December 31, 2013, we sold 8,000,000 shares of common stock to a board member for cash proceeds of $400,000. In connection with the sale, warrants to purchase 24,000,000 shares of our common stock were issued with a five year exercise period and exercise price of $0.10 per share. The warrants are cashless at exercise, if elected.

 

Purchases of Equity Securities

 

We did not repurchase any shares of our common stock in the fourth quarter of the year ended December 31, 2013.

 

ITEM 6. Selected Financial Data

 

Not applicable

 

 
23

 

ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and related notes included in this report. This discussion includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. As a result of many factors, our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements.

 

Overview

 

Our primary business is providing software solutions to consumer lenders or those collecting on those consumer loans using a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model. These solutions facilitate web-based payments or the resolution of delinquent or defaulted consumer debt. We have marketed our services primarily to consumer banks, collection agencies, collection law firms and the buyers of defaulted debt in the United States, Europe and Asia. Other opportunities exist for marketing our software to hospitals and large physician groups. In addition, client results show that our solution is attractive for the collection of low balance debt, such as that held by utility companies and online service providers, where the cost of traditionally labor intensive collection efforts may exceed the value collected. We will pursue these markets as well as our traditional markets. We do not anticipate any material incremental costs associated with developing our capabilities and marketing to these creditors, as our existing Debt Resolve solutions can already handle most types of debt, and we make contact with these creditors in our normal course of business. However, we are continually upgrading our solutions to address specific client needs or to open new markets for our web solutions with our existing staff.

 

As past experience has shown, effective utilization of our system will require a change in thinking on the part of the collection industry, but we believe the effort will result in new collection benchmarks. We intend to provide detailed advice and hands-on assistance to clients to help them make the transition to our system and to document the performance of our solutions in each market to provide strong return-on-investment data to these prospective clients. Our recent clients tell us that they are happy with the results that they are getting. However, there is still an extensive sales process to get prospective clients comfortable with using web-based collection technology. 

 

For the years ending December 31, 2013 and 2012, we had significantly inadequate revenues and incurred a net loss from operations of $474,882 and $1,568,341, respectively. Cash used in operating activities was $471,859 for the year ended December 31, 2013. Cash used in operating activities was $446,982 for the year ended December 31, 2012. Based upon projected operating expenses, we believed that our working capital as of December 31, 2013 was not sufficient to fund our plan of operations for the next twelve months.

 

However, in 2013 and 2014, we have raised capital for our day-to-day operations from accredited investors, though no assurance can be provided that we will continue to be able to do so. There is also no assurance that any funds secured will be sufficient to enable us to attain profitable operations. To the extent that we are unsuccessful, we may need to curtail our operations and implement a plan to extend payables and reduce overhead until sufficient additional capital is raised to support further operations. At any time until substantial capital is raised or positive cash flow is generated from operations, there is also a risk of bankruptcy. There can be no assurance that any plan to raise additional funding will be successful. These financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

 

Importantly, however, during the course of 2014, a new strategy was developed to diversify revenue sources through the use of our core competencies in e-commerce based debt collection and internet based product development. In December 2014, Progress Advocates LLC, a Debt Resolve joint venture (see Note 16, Financial Options Group LLC), was launched to provide services to holders of student loans. Its early success is supportive of current forecasts for both revenue and profitability, significant to our business viability. A second initiative to support our new strategy was also started in 2014. This initiative has resulted in the development of a new on-line consumer to consumer debt negotiation service, named Settl.it, which will charge a fee per transaction. Anticipated launch of this application is March 2015. Both business initiatives have a very low cost basis for Debt Resolve. Each will increase its respective revenue and profit based on the rate of marketing investment. This will allow Debt Resolve to manage its growth in line with available financial resources. It is anticipated that both new businesses will be accretive to our 2015 financial results.

 

 
24

 

Utilizing the financial resources provided by these new initiatives, a plan has been developed for 2015 to re-purpose the traditional Debt Resolve Solution into a more fully featured Accounts Receivable Management solution for the healthcare industry. When completed, hospitals and medical groups will look to Debt Resolve for the low cost collection and management of patient pay receivables, the fastest growing debt in their industry, from billing to charge offs.

 

Results of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012

 

Revenues

 

Revenues totaled $144,300 and $176,187 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. We earned revenue during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 as a percent of debt collected, on a fee per settlement and on a flat monthly fee basis.

 

Costs and Expenses

 

Payroll and related expenses. Payroll and related expenses amounted to $372,651 for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $594,384 for the year ended December 31, 2012, a decrease of $221,733. The decrease mainly resulted from the stock based compensation expense in 2013 for $10,000 compared to $95,000 in 2012, and reduction in personnel. Salaries were $285,763 and $506,468 in the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Employee benefits were $86,888 and $87,916 in the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

 

General and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses amounted to $347,659 for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $478,191 for the year ended December 31, 2012, a decrease of $130,532. Service fees were $75,867 and $165,384 for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, the decline being primarily attributable to lower consulting fees. Occupancy expense was $17,178 and $20,857 for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Telecommunications expense was $49,479 and $56,025 for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Accounting expenses decreased to $78,127 for the year ended December 31, 2013 from $114,747 for the year ended December 31, 2012. We had less accounting services and billings received in 2013, whereas in 2012 more accounting services and billings were received in the 2012 year. Travel, marketing, insurance and legal expense were $4,445, $21,914, $94,652 and $4,503 in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared with $5,735, $10,423, $88,464 and $9,882 in the year ended December 31, 2012. Other miscellaneous general and administrative expenses were $1,494 and $6,674 for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

 

Depreciation and amortization expense. For the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, we recorded depreciation expense of $908 and $1,809, respectively. Depreciation expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 is lower due to the full depreciation of some assets after 2012.

 

Gain on change in fair value of derivative liabilities. For the year ended December 31, 2013, we had the possibility of exceeding common shares authorized when considering the number of possible shares that may be issuable to satisfy settlement provisions of these agreements after consideration of all existing instruments that could be settled in shares. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments requires us to reclassify the derivative from equity to a liability at their fair values as of the date possible issuable shares exceeded the authorized level and at fair value as of each subsequent balance sheet date. For the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, we recorded a gain on change in fair value of these derivative liabilities of $421,050 and $-0-, respectively.

 

Gain on settlement of debt. For the year ended December 31, 2013, we settled outstanding accounts payable for less than the recorded liability. As such, we reported a gain of $53,829 and $-0- for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

 

 
25

 

Interest (expense). We recorded interest expense of $298,640 for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to interest expense of $282,932 for the year ended December 31, 2012. Interest expense increased due to the issuance of new notes in the later part of 2013.

  

Amortization of deferred debt discount. Amortization expense of $74,203 and $387,212 was incurred for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, for the amortization of the value of the deferred debt discount associated with certain of our notes payable. Amortization expense decreased due to expiry of the remaining amortizable discounts.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

As of December 31, 2013, we had a working capital deficiency (total current liabilities exceeded total current assets) in the amount of $5,066,230 and cash and cash equivalents totaling $7,212. We reported a net loss of $474,882 for the year ended December 31, 2013. Net cash used in operating activities was $471,859 for the year ended December 31, 2013. Cash flow provided by financing activities was $448,221 for the year ended December 31, 2013. As of December 31, 2012, we had a working capital deficiency (total current liabilities exceeded total current assets) in the amount of $5,139,002 and cash and cash equivalents totaling $30,850.

 

Our working capital as of the date of this report is negative and may not be sufficient to fund our plan of operations for the next year.

 

We have successfully raised capital for our day-to-day operations since our inception through year end 2014; however, no assurance can be provided that we will continue to be able to do so. There is no assurance that any funds secured will be sufficient to enable us to attain profitable operations. To the extent that we are unsuccessful, we may need to curtail our operations and implement a plan to extend payables and reduce overhead until sufficient additional capital is raised to support further operations. At any time until substantial capital is raised or we reach cash flow breakeven, there is also a significant risk of bankruptcy. There can be no assurance that any plan to raise additional funding will be successful. It is quite challenging in the current environment to raise money given our delay in generating meaningful revenue. Unless our revenue grows quickly, it may not be possible to demonstrate the progress investors require to secure additional funding. These consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

 

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

As of February 15, 2015, we have not entered into any transactions with unconsolidated entities in which we have financial guarantees, subordinated retained interests, derivative instruments or other contingent arrangements that expose us to material continuing risks, contingent liabilities or any other obligations under a variable interest in an unconsolidated entity that provides us with financing, liquidity, market risk or credit risk support.

 

Impact of Inflation

 

We believe that inflation has not had a material impact on our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. We cannot assure you that future inflation will not have an adverse impact on our operating results and financial condition.

 

 
26

 

Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires our management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and the accompanying notes. These estimates and assumptions are based on our management’s judgment and available information and, consequently, actual results could be different from these estimates. The significant accounting policies that we believe are the most critical to aid in fully understanding and evaluating our reported financial results are as follows:

 

Accounts Receivable

 

In the course of doing business, we extend credit to large, mid-size and small companies for collection services. At December 31, 2013, three clients represented receivables of $6,044 (21%), $10,000 (35%) and $10,000 (35%). At December 31, 2012, two clients represented receivables of $10,000 (16%) and $45,000 (72%) . We do not generally require collateral or other security to support customer receivables. Accounts receivable are carried at their estimated collectible amounts. Accounts receivable are periodically evaluated for collectability and the allowance for doubtful accounts is adjusted accordingly. Management determines collectability based on their experience and knowledge of the customers. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, no allowance for doubtful accounts has been booked.

 

Stock-based compensation

 

We follow Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 718-10, Stock-based Compensation ("ASC 718-10"). The standards require the measurement of compensation cost at the grant date, based upon the estimated fair value of the award, and requires amortization of the related expense over the employee’s requisite service period.

 

The Company accounts for equity awards to non-employees at fair value on the date of grant. Equity awards to non-employees are subject to periodic revaluation until the completion of any requisite performance requirements in accordance with ASC 505-50.

 

Fair Values

 

Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 825-10, Financial Instruments (“ASC 825-10”) requires disclosure of the fair value of certain financial instruments. The carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, and short-term borrowings, as reflected in the balance sheets, approximate fair value because of the short-term maturity of these instruments. All other significant financial assets, financial liabilities and equity instruments of the Company are either recognized or disclosed in the financial statements together with other information relevant for making a reasonable assessment of future cash flows, interest rate risk and credit risk. Where practicable the fair values of financial assets and financial liabilities have been determined and disclosed; otherwise only available information pertinent to fair value has been disclosed.

 

We follow Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 820-10, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820-10”) and Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 825-10, Financial Instruments (“ASC 825-10”), which permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value.

 

Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 825-10, Financial Instruments (“ASC 825-10”) requires disclosure of the fair value of certain financial instruments. ASC 825-10 defines fair value as the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities required or permitted to be recorded at fair value, the Company considers the principal or most advantageous market in which it would transact and considers assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability, such as inherent risk, transfer restrictions, and risk of nonperformance. ASC 825-10 establishes a fair value hierarchy that requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. ASC 825-10 establishes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:

 

 Level 1 - Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

 

 
27

 

Level 2 - Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets with insufficient volume or infrequent transactions (less active markets); or model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable or can be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

 

Level 3 - Unobservable inputs to the valuation methodology that are significant to the measurement of fair value of assets or liabilities.

 

To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement is disclosed and is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement.

 

As of December 31, 2013 or 2012, the Company did not have any items that would be classified as level 1 or 2 disclosures. The Company recognizes its derivative liabilities as level 3 and values its derivatives using the methods discussed in note 10. While the Company believes that its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, it recognizes that the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. The primary assumptions that would significantly affect the fair values using the methods discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements are that of volatility and market price of the underlying common stock of the Company.

 

Revenue Recognition

 

To date, we have earned revenue from collection agencies, collection law firms and lenders that implemented our online system. Our current contracts provide for revenue based on a percentage of the amount of debt collected, a fee per settlement or through a flat monthly fee. Although other revenue models have been proposed, most revenue earned to date has been determined using these methods, and such revenue is recognized when the settlement amount of debt is collected by the client or at the beginning of the month for a flat fee. For the early adopters of our product, we have waived set-up fees and other transactional fees that we anticipate charging in the future. While the percent of debt collected will continue to be a revenue recognition method going forward, other payment models are also being offered to clients and may possibly become our preferred revenue model. Dependent upon the structure of future contracts, revenue may be derived from a combination of set up fees or flat monthly or annual fees with transaction fees upon debt settlement, fees per account loaded or fees per settlement. We are currently marketing our system to three primary markets. The first and second are financial institutions and collection agencies or law firms, our traditional markets. We are also expanding into healthcare, particularly hospitals, which is our third market.

 

In recognition of the principles expressed in Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 605-10, Revenue Recognition ("ASC 605-10") that revenue should not be recognized until it is realized or realizable and earned, and given the element of doubt associated with collectability of an agreed settlement on past due debt, we postpone recognition of all contingent revenue until the client receives payment from the debtor. As is required by SAB 104, revenues are considered to have been earned when we have substantially accomplished the agreed-upon deliverables to be entitled to payment by the client. For most current active clients, these deliverables consist of the successful collection of past due debts using our system and/or, for clients under a flat fee arrangement, the successful availability of our system to its customers.

 

In addition, in accordance with ASC 605-10, revenue is recognized and identified according to the deliverable provided. Set-up fees, percentage contingent collection fees, fixed settlement fees, monthly fees, etc. are identified separately.

 

Recently-Issued Accounting Pronouncements

 

There were various updates recently issued, most of which represented technical corrections to the accounting literature or application to specific industries and are not expected to a have a material impact on the Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Refer to F-11 in the Financial Statement for details regarding recent accounting pronouncements.

 

 
28

 

ITEM 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

 

Not applicable

 

ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

 

Our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2013 are included as a separate section of this report beginning on page F-1.

 

ITEM 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

 

None

 

ITEM 9A. Controls and Procedures

 

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that material information required to be disclosed in our periodic reports filed under the Exchange Act, as amended, or 1934 Act, is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and to ensure that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. During the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2013, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer), of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rule 13(a)-15(e) under the Exchange Act. Based on this evaluation, because of the Company’s limited resources and limited number of employees, management concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were ineffective as of December 31, 2013.

 

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

 

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Our internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurances regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of our financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree or compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

With the participation of our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, currently the same person, our management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as defined under Rule 13a-15, as of December 31, 2013 based on the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, or COSO. Based on our evaluation and the material weaknesses described below, management concluded that the Company did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on the COSO framework criteria. Management has identified the major control deficiencies as the lack of segregation of duties and limited accounting knowledge of Company debt and equity transactions. Our management believes that these material weaknesses are due to the small size of our accounting staff. The small size of our accounting staff may prevent adequate controls in the future, such as segregation of duties, due to the high cost of such remediation relative the benefit expected to be derived thereby.

 

 
29

 

To mitigate the current limited resources and limited employees, we rely heavily on direct management oversight of transactions, along with the use of external legal and accounting professionals. As we grow, we expect to increase our number of employees, which will enable us to implement adequate segregation of duties within the internal control framework. These control deficiencies could result in a misstatement of account balances that would result in a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement to our consolidated financial statements may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Accordingly, we have determined that these control deficiencies as described above together constitute a material weakness.

 

In light of this material weakness, we performed additional analyses and procedures in order to conclude that our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2013 included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K were fairly stated in accordance with US GAAP. Accordingly, management believes that despite our material weaknesses, our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2013 are fairly stated, in all material respects, in accordance with U.S. GAAP.

 

This report does not include an attestation report of our registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not required to attestation by our registered public accounting firm under section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

 

Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls and Procedures

 

Our management, including our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal controls will prevent all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include, but are not limited to, the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control. The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions.

 

Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

 

Changes in Internal Controls

 

During the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2013, there have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal controls over financial reporting.

 

ITEM 9B. Other Information

 

None

 

 
30

  

PART III.

 

ITEM 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

 

The following table shows the positions held by our board of directors and executive officers, as well as a key employee, and their ages, as of February 15, 2015:

 

Name

 

Age

 

Position

         

Stanley E. Freimuth

 

68

 

Chief Executive Officer, Acting Chief Financial Officer and Director

William M. Mooney

 

75

 

Chairman of Board

James G. Brakke

 

72

 

Director

Gary T. Martin

 

69

 

Director

Raymond A. Conta

 

44

 

Director

Rene A. Samson

 

36

 

Vice President -Technology

 

The principal occupations for the past five years (and, in some instances, for prior years) of each of our directors and executive officers are as follows:

 

Stanley E. Freimuth has been our Chief Executive Officer, Acting Chief Financial Officer and Director since March 2014. Mr. Freimuth has a long and successful track record of growing and transforming both B2B and B2C companies. Mr. Freimuth was Chairman, President and CEO of Presstek, Inc., a publically traded digital printing equipment manufacturer, bringing the company back to financial stability and negotiating its sale to a private equity buyer. Before Presstek, Mr. Freimuth was Chairman and Executive Director of Tracer Imaging, a specialty B2B and B2C lenticular and 3D printing company where he helped launch an innovative consumer-facing product. Until 2007, Mr. Freimuth was the senior U.S. executive at Fujifilm USA, Inc., which he led to record revenues through a period of major technological transition in most of its core businesses.

 

William M. Mooney, Jr. has been a member of our board of directors since April 2003 and our Chairman since April 1, 2014. Mr. Mooney is currently CEO of The Westchester County Association. Mr. Mooney has been involved in the banking sector in an executive capacity for more than 30 years. Prior to joining Independence Community Bank, he served for four years as an Executive Vice President and member of the management committee of Union State Bank, responsible for retail banking, branch banking and all marketing activity. Mr. Mooney also spent 23 years at Chemical Bank and, following its merger with Chase Manhattan Bank, he was a Senior Vice President with responsibilities including oversight of all retail business. He also held the position of Chairman for the Westchester County Association, past Chairman of the United Way Westchester and Chairman of St. Thomas Aquinas College. He has served on the board of trustees for New York Medical College, St. Agnes Hospital, the Board of Dominican Sisters and the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Mooney received a B.A. degree in business administration from Manhattan College. He also attended the Harvard Management Program and the Darden Graduate School at the University of Virginia. Mr. Mooney's background in banking and finance qualifies him to be a director.

 

James G. Brakke has been a member of our board of directors since October 2009. Mr. Brakke was our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from April 2010 through June 2012 and remained as Chairman through March 31, 2014. Mr. Brakke is a Vice Chairman of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation Advisory Council, Director at First Foundation Bank, First Foundation Advisors, Mission Hospital Foundation and Maury Microwave Corp. and Chairman of Life Vessel & Advanced Wellness. Mr. Brakke was Founder and President until 2009 of Brakke-Schafnitz Insurance Brokers, a multi-line commercial brokerage and consulting firm he co-founded in 1971 managing in excess of $250 million of insurance premiums with both domestic and international insurers. He is a former member of the board of advisors for Pepperdine University's Graziadio School of Business, Orange County Sheriffs and the Orange County YMCA and has served as director on the boards of Denticare, Pacific National Bank, Commercial Capital Bank, The Busch Firm, National Health Care Services and E-Funds. Mr. Brakke is a graduate of Colorado State University with a B.S. degree in Business and Finance. Mr. Brakke's background in insurance and corporate governance qualifies him to be a director.

 

 
31

  

Gary T. Martin has been a member of our board of directors since June 2012. Mr. Martin has been the Chief Executive Officer of Encore Supply Strategies since 2010. Encore provides consulting services to customers of Procter & Gamble who license Procter & Gamble’s proprietary supply chain intellectual property. Mr. Martin is also President of Adventure Leisure Properties Ltd., a Florida-based company operating a recreational investment property in New Zealand since 2002. Mr. Martin is also President of a small startup company, LYNX Technology Limited, located in Ontario, Canada, which has been developing proprietary exploratory mining equipment since 2010. Previously, Mr. Martin was an executive with Procter & Gamble for 33 years. Mr. Martin was President of Procter & Gamble’s worldwide family care business from 1999 until his retirement in 2001. Previously, from 1991 to 1999, he was Senior Vice President of the company’s supply system with responsibility for worldwide purchasing, engineering, manufacturing and customer service/distribution. In this capacity, Mr. Martin was responsible for managing the company’s capital spending, the production of all its products and 65,000 employees. Additionally, for a time, he was also the Chief Information Officer of the company. Mr. Martin’s executive experience qualifies him to be a director.

 

Raymond A. Conta has been a member of our board of directors since 2014. Mr. Conta is an entrepreneur in Westchester County, NY. He owns Advanced Billing Services, Inc., a business that he started in 1999. He also owns other affiliated businesses. Mr. Conta serves on the board of The Children’s Hospital Research Foundation located in Westchester County. Mr. Conta has a B.A. degree from Hamilton College in 1992 and a J.D. from Pace University in 1995. Mr. Conta’s experience in the debt buying and debt collection industries qualifies him to be a director.

 

All directors hold office until the next annual meeting of stockholders (when scheduled) and the election and qualification of their successors. Officers are elected annually by our board of directors and serve at the discretion of the board, subject to their contracts.

 

Key Employee

 

René A. Samson has been our Vice President of Technology since July 2009. Mr. Samson has worked as a software developer for more than 10 years. He has experience working on projects for multinationals as well as startup companies. Mr. Samson joined Debt Resolve as a senior software developer in 2005, and was an integral part of the team that developed the original Debt Resolve solutions. As Vice President of Technology, Mr. Samson is now responsible for the entire IT department of Debt Resolve.

 

Additional Information about our Board and its Committees

 

We continue to monitor the rules and regulations of the SEC regarding “independent” directors. William M. Mooney, Jr., Gary T. Martin, and Raymond A. Conta are “independent” as defined by New York Stock Exchange rules.

 

During 2013, all of our directors attended at least 75% of all meetings during the periods for which they served on our board, and all of the meetings held by committees of the board on which they serve. The board of directors has formed an audit committee, compensation committee and a nominations and governance committee, all of which operate under written charters. The charters for the audit committee, the compensation committee, and the nominations and governance committee were included as exhibits to our registration statement filed with the SEC on September 30, 2005.

 

Committees of the Board

 

Audit Committee. In September 2004, we established an audit committee of the board of directors which, as of December 31, 2013, consisted of only William M. Mooney, Jr., an independent director. The audit committee’s duties, which are specified in our Audit Committee Charter, include, but are not limited to:

 

 

·

reviewing and discussing with management and the independent accountants our annual and quarterly financial statements,

     
 

·

directly appointing, compensating, retaining, and overseeing the work of the independent auditor,

 

 
32

 

     
 

·

approving, in advance, the provision by the independent auditor of all audit and permissible non-audit services,

     
 

·

establishing procedures for the receipt, retention, and treatment of complaints received by us regarding accounting, internal accounting controls, or auditing matters and the confidential, anonymous submissions by our employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters,

     
 

·

the right to engage and obtain assistance from outside legal and other advisors as the audit committee deems necessary to carry out its duties,

     
 

·

the right to receive appropriate funding, as needed, from the company to compensate the independent auditor and any outside advisors engaged by the committee and to pay the ordinary administrative expenses of the audit committee that are necessary or appropriate to carrying out its duties, and

     
 

·

reviewing and approving all related party transactions unless the task is assigned to a comparable committee or group of independent directors.

 

Compensation Committee. In May 2004, we established a compensation committee of the board of directors which, as of December 31, 2013, consisted of only Mr. Mooney, an independent director. The compensation committee reviews and approves our salary and benefits policies, including compensation of executive officers. The compensation committee also administers our incentive compensation plan, and recommends and approves grants of stock options and restricted stock grants under that plan.

 

Nominations and Governance Committee. In June 2005, we established a nominations and governance committee of the board of directors which, as of December 31, 2013, consisted of only Mr. Mooney, an independent director. This committee meets at least once annually. The purpose of the nominations and governance committee is to select, or recommend for our entire board’s selection, the individuals to stand for election as directors at the annual meeting of stockholders and to oversee the selection and composition of committees of our board. The nominations and governance committee’s duties, which are specified in our Nominations and Governance Committee Charter, include, but are not limited to:

 

 

·

establishing criteria for the selection of new directors,

     
 

·

considering stockholder proposals of director nominations,

     
 

·

committee selection and composition,

     
 

·

considering the adequacy of our corporate governance,

     
 

·

overseeing and approving management continuity planning process, and

     
 

·

reporting regularly to the board with respect to the committee’s duties.

 

 
33

 

Financial Experts on Audit Committee

 

The audit committee will at all times be composed exclusively of “independent directors” who are “financially literate.” “Financially literate” is defined as being able to read and understand fundamental financial statements, including a company’s balance sheet, income statement and cash flow statement.

 

The committee has, and will continue to have, at least one member who has past employment experience in finance or accounting, requisite professional certification in accounting, or other comparable experience or background that results in the individual’s financial sophistication. The board of directors believes that Mr. Mooney satisfies the definition of financial sophistication and also qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined under rules and regulations of the SEC.

 

Indebtedness of Directors and Executive Officers

 

None of our directors or executive officers or their respective associates or affiliates is indebted to us.

 

Family Relationships

 

There are no family relationships among our directors and executive officers.

  

Legal Proceedings

 

As of February 15, 2015, there was no material proceeding to which any of our directors, executive officers, affiliates or stockholders is a party adverse to us.

 

Code of Ethics

 

In May 2003, we adopted a Code of Ethics and Business Conduct that applies to all of our executive officers, directors and employees. The Code of Ethics and Business Conduct codifies the business and ethical principles that govern all aspects of our business. Our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct is posted on our website at http://www.debtresolve.com and we will provide a copy without charge to any stockholder who makes a written request for a copy.

 

Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

 

Only Mr. Freimuth, our CEO, is a board member employed by our Company.

 

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

 

Rules adopted by the SEC under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, require our officers and directors, and persons who own more than 10% of the issued and outstanding shares of our equity securities, to file reports of their ownership, and changes in ownership, of such securities with the SEC on Forms 3, 4 or 5, as appropriate. Such persons are required by the regulations of the SEC to furnish us with copies of all forms they file pursuant to Section 16(a).

 

Based solely upon a review of Forms 3, 4 and 5 and amendments thereto furnished to us during our most recent fiscal year, and any written representations provided to us, we believe that all of the officers, directors, and owners of more than 10% of the outstanding shares of our common stock did comply with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act for the year ended December 31, 2013.

 

 
34

 

ITEM 11. Executive Compensation

 

Summary Compensation Table

 

The following table sets forth, for the most recent fiscal year, all cash compensation paid, distributed or accrued, including salary and bonus amounts, for services rendered to us by our Chief Executive Officer and one other executive officer in such year who received or are entitled to receive remuneration in excess of $100,000 during the stated period and any individuals for whom disclosure would have been made in this table but for the fact that the individual was not serving as an executive officer as at December 31, 2013:

 

Name and Principal Position

 

Year

  Salary
($)
    Bonus
($)
    Stock Awards
($)
    Option Awards
($)
    Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)     Non-qualified Deferred Compensation Earnings
($)
    All Other Compensation ($)     Total
($)
 

Stanley E. Freimuth

 

2013

           

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

35,000

     

35,000

 

CEO (1)

 

2012

   

-

             

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael J. Cassella

 

2013

   

112,500

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

112,500

 

Former CEO (2)

 

2012

   

160,850

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

160,850

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

David Rainey

 

2013

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

 

Former President, CFO (3)

 

2012

   

62,500

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

62,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rene A. Samson

 

2013

   

136,804

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

136,804

 

VP -Technology (4)

 

2012

   

135,000

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

135,000

 

_________________

(1)

Mr. Freimuth joined our company as a consultant and interim CEO in November, 2013. On March 1, 2014, he became an employee and CEO.

 

(2)

Mr. Cassella joined our company and became our Chief Operating Officer in June 2011. In July 2012, Mr. Cassella became the Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Cassella resigned from the Company effective September 30, 2013.

 

 

(3) 

Mr. Rainey joined our company and became Chief financial Officer and Treasurer in May 2007. He became Secretary in November 2007 and President in January 2008. From July 2009 to April 2010, he served as Interim Chief Executive Officer. In 2012, Mr. Rainey resigned from all positions with our company.

 

 

(4) Mr. Samson joined our company as a senior programmer in 2005. In July 2009, he became our VP-Technology in charge of the technology department of the company.

 

(5)

Significant amounts of the executive salaries listed were accrued but not paid during 2012 due to severe cash flow limitations. For 2012, all payroll was net paid by manual check except for Mr. Brakke, who was not paid. The payroll taxes for 2012 are accrued on the books of the company.

 

 
35

 

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

 

The following table summarizes equity awards outstanding at December 31, 2013 for each of the executive officers named in the Summary Compensation Table above:

 

    Option Awards   Stock Awards  

Name

  Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable     Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable     Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned Options (#)     Option Exercise Price ($)  

Option Expiration Date

  Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#)     Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)     Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#)     Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested ($)  

(a)

  (b)     (c)     (d)     (e)  

(f)

  (g)     (h)     (i)     (j)  

Michael J. Cassella

Former CEO (1)

   

1,500,000

     

--

     

--

   

$

0.06

 

6/1/2018

   

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

 
                                                               

--

 

David M. Rainey

Former President, CFO (2)

   

4,055,000

     

--

     

--

   

$

0.06-1.50

 

4/27/14-6/1/18

   

--

     

--

     

--

 

     

--

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rene A. Samson VP-Technology (3)

   

520,000

     

--

     

--

   

$

1.63

 

6/16/2015

   

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

 

 

(1)

Mr. Cassella holds stock options to purchase 1,500,000 shares of our common stock, one third of which vested on June 1, 2011 and one third of which vested on June 1, 2012, one third of which vested on June 1, 2013, all of which expire on June 1, 2018.

 

(2)

Mr. Rainey holds stock options to purchase 75,000 shares of our common stock, all of which have vested and expired on April 27, 2014. Mr. Rainey also holds stock options to purchase 150,000 shares of our common stock, all of which are vested and expired on February 8, 2015. Mr. Rainey also holds stock options to purchase 350,000 shares of common stock, all of which are vested and expire on June 12, 2015. Mr. Rainey also holds options to purchase 1,000,000 shares of or common stock, all of which are vested and expire on August 7, 2016. Mr. Rainey also holds options to purchase 1,000,000 shares of our common stock, all of which are vested and expire on April 8, 2017. Mr. Rainey also holds options to purchase 1,500,000 shares of our common stock, all of which are vested and expire on June 1, 2018.

   

3)

Mr. Samson holds stock options to purchase 20,000 shares of our common stock, one half of which vested on December 16, 2008 and one half of which vested on June 16, 2009, all of which expire on June 16, 2015. Mr. Samson also holds options to purchase 500,000 shares of our common stock, all of which are vested and expire on January 17, 2019.

 

 
36

 

Employment Agreements

 

On June 1, 2011, Michael J. Cassella joined our company as Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Cassella had a one year contract that renewed automatically unless 90 days’ notice of intention not to renew was given by the Company. A six month period allowed us to terminate the contract for any or no reason but expired on December 1, 2011. Mr. Cassella’s base salary was $150,000. Mr. Cassella also received a grant of 2,000,000 options to purchase our common stock, one fourth of which vested immediately and one fourth of which vested on each of the first, second and third anniversaries of the start of employment with the Company. Mr. Cassella resigned effective September 30, 2013, and forfeited 500,000 unvested options.

 

On November 1, 2013, Stanley E. Freimuth as a principal and consultant for Claremont Ventures, was appointed as interim Chief Executive Officer. Details of this appointment can be found in the Company’s 8K filing, dated November 15, 2013. On March 1, 2014, Mr. Freimuth was subsequently, hired as the Company’s permanent CEO. Details of this agreement can be found in the Company’s 8K filing, dated March 6, 2014.

 

The employment agreements also contained covenants (a) restricting the employee from engaging in any activities competitive with our business during the term of the employment agreement, (b) prohibiting the employee from disclosure of our confidential information and (c) confirming that all intellectual property developed by the employee and relating to our business constitutes our sole property. In addition, the agreement provides for a non-compete during the term of the employee’s severance.

 

Director Compensation

 

Non-employee Director Compensation. Non-employee directors currently receive no cash compensation for serving on our board of directors other than reimbursement of all reasonable expenses for attendance at board and board committee meetings. Under our 2005 Incentive Compensation Plan, non-employee directors are entitled to receive stock options to purchase shares of common stock or restricted stock grants. The Board received no grants for 2013 service on the Board.

 

Employee Director Compensation. Directors who are employees of ours receive no compensation for services provided in that capacity, but are reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses in connection with attendance at meetings of our board and its committees.

 

The table below summarizes the compensation we paid to non-employee directors for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013.

 

Director Compensation

 

Name

  Fees Earned or Paid in Cash
($)
    Stock Awards
($)
    Option Awards
($)
    Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)     Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings
($)
    All Other Compensation ($)     Total
($)
 

(a)

  (b)     (e)     (f)     (g)     (h)     (i)     (j)  

Gary T. Martin

   

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

 

William M. Mooney, Jr.

   

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

 

James G. Brakke

   

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

     

--

 

 

ITEM 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

 

The table below sets forth the beneficial ownership of our common stock, as of February 15, 2015, by:

 

 

·

all of our directors and executive officers, individually,

     
 

·

all of our directors and executive officers, as a group, and

     
 

·

all persons who beneficially owned more than 5% of our outstanding common stock.

 

 
37

 

The beneficial ownership of each person was calculated based on 98,187,082 outstanding shares of common stock as of February 15, 2015. The SEC has defined “beneficial ownership” to mean more than ownership in the usual sense. For example, a person has beneficial ownership of a share not only if he owns it in the usual sense, but also if he has the power to vote, sell or otherwise dispose of the share. Beneficial ownership also includes the number of shares that a person has the right to acquire within 60 days of February 15, 2015 pursuant to the exercise of options or warrants or the conversion of notes, debentures or other indebtedness, but excludes stock appreciation rights. Two or more persons might count as beneficial owners of the same share. Unless otherwise noted, the address of the following persons listed below is c/o Debt Resolve, Inc., 1133 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-223, White Plains, New York 10604.

 

Unless otherwise indicated, we believe that all persons named in the table below have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common stock beneficially owned by them.

 

Name

 

Position

 

Shares of stock

beneficially owned

 

 

Percent of

common stock beneficially owned

 

William M. Mooney, Jr.

 

Chairman of the Board

   

6,684,855

(1)

 

 

6.6

%

James G. Brakke

 

Director

   

3,514,500

(2)

 

 

3.4

%

Gary T. Martin

 

Director

   

62,428,500

(3)

 

 

        44.6

%

Stanley E. Freimuth

 

CEO, Director

   

8,626,685

(4)

 

 

8.6

%

Raymond Conta

 

Director

   

6,750,000

(5)

 

 

6.4

%

                 

All directors and executive officers as a group (5 persons)

   

88,004,540

(6)

   

56.5

%

________________ 

(1)

Includes stock options to purchase 1,872,500 shares of common stock. Also, includes warrants to purchase 1,537,500 shares of common stock. On an outstanding voting basis, Mr. Mooney owns 3,274,855 common shares which represents 3.3% of the total shares.

 

(2)

Includes stock options to purchase 1,700,000 shares of common stock. Also, includes warrants to purchase 1,525,000 shares of common stock. On an outstanding voting basis, Mr. Brakke owns 289,500 common shares which represents .3% of the total shares.

 

(3)

Includes 41,700,500 warrants to purchase shares of common stock. On an outstanding voting basis, Mr. Martin owns 20,728,000 common shares which represents 21.1% of the total shares.

 

(4)

Includes stock options to purchase 2,000,000 shares of common stock. Also, includes warrants to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock. On an outstanding voting basis, Mr. Freimuth owns 6,126,685 common shares which represents 6.2% of the total shares

 

(5)

 

Includes stock options to purchase 4,750,000 shares of common stock. Also includes warrants to purchase 2,000,000 shares of common stock. On an outstanding voting basis, Mr. Conta owns 0 common shares.

 

(6)

On a common stock issued and outstanding voting basis, all directors and executive officers as a group own 30.9% of the total shares.

 

Change in Control

 

There are no arrangements currently in effect which may result in our “change in control,” as that term is defined by the provisions of Item 403(c) of Regulation S-K.

 

Equity Compensation Plan Information

 

The issuance of stock incentive awards for an aggregate of 900,000 shares of common stock is authorized under our 2005 Incentive Compensation Plan. As of December 31, 2013, 324,000 stock options were available for issuance under our 2005 Incentive Compensation Plan, and there were outstanding stock options to purchase 576,000 shares of our common stock.

 

 
38

 

The following table provides information as of December 31, 2013 with respect to the shares of common stock that may be issued under our existing equity compensation plan:

 

Equity Compensation Plan Information

 

Plan category

  Number of shares of common stock to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights (a)     Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights (b)     Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a)) (c)  

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

   

576,000

   

$

2.58

     

324,000

 

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

   

18,229,934

   

$

0.72

   

Unrestricted

 

Total

   

18,805,934

   

$

0.78

     

324,000

 

 

Defined Contribution 401(k) Plan

 

We maintain a defined contribution 401(k) plan for our employees. The plan provides for a company match in the amount of 100% of the first 3% of pre-tax salary contributed and 50% of the next 3% of pre-tax salary contributed. However, due to the severe cash limitations that we have experienced, the match was suspended in 2009 and will only be re-instated when business conditions warrant.

 

ITEM 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

 

Related Party Transactions

  

On January 18, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $5,000 (unsecured) to the Company with a demand due date. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 50,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period.

 

On January 20, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $5,000 (unsecured) to the Company with a demand due date. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 50,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period.

 

On May 21, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $18,000 (unsecured), net with repayments of $3,000, to the Company due May 21, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On May 30, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $20,000 (unsecured) to the Company due March 31, 2013 with interest at 12% per annum. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On July 6, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $10,000 (unsecured) to the Company due July 6, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

 On July 6, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $20,000 (unsecured) to the Company due July 6, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company’s common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder’s option. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On July 10, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $15,000 (unsecured) to the Company due July 10, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

 On September 7, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $43,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 7, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

 
39

 

 On September 14, 2012, a stockholder and board member loaned $6,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 14, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

 On October 4, 2012, a stockholder board member loaned $50,000 (unsecured) to the Company due October 4, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On September 5, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $10,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 5, 2015 with interest at 10% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance.

 

On September 16, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $3,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 16, 2015 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance.

 

On September 17, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $5,221 (unsecured) to the Company due September 17, 2014 with interest at 10% per annum. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On October 24, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $30,000 (unsecured) to the Company due October 24, 2016 with interest at 10% per annum.

 

On November 7, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $40,000 (unsecured) to the Company due November 7, 2017 with interest at 10% per annum.

 

On December 6, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $5,000 (unsecured) to the Company due December 6, 2016 with interest at 12% per annum.

 

On December 18, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $30,000 (unsecured) to the Company due December 18, 2018 with interest at 10% per annum.

 

Total unpaid accrued interest on the notes payable to related parties as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $74,788 and $37,314, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded interest expense of $37,474 and $22,165, respectively, in connection with the notes payable to related parties.

 

Director Independence

 

William M. Mooney, Jr., James G. Brakke, Ramond A. Conta and Gary T. Martin are “independent” directors, as such term is defined in Rule 10A-3(b)(1) under the Exchange Act, and Mr. Mooney serves on each of our Audit, Compensation and Nominations and Governance Committees. See Item 10, “Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance” for more information on the independence of our directors.

 

ITEM 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

 

Audit Fees

 

Audit fees are those fees billed for professional services rendered for the audit of the annual financial statements and review of the financial statements included in Form 10-Q. The aggregate amount of the audit fees billed by Fiondella, Milone & LaSaracina LLP in 2013 was $52,767 and in 2012 was $90,000.

  

Audit-related Fees

 

No audit-related fees were billed by Fiondella, Milone & LaSaracina in 2013 or 2012.

 

 
40

 

Tax Fees

 

Tax fees are those fees billed for professional services rendered for tax compliance, including preparation of corporate federal and state income tax returns and related compliance. The aggregate amount of tax fees billed by Fiondella, Milone & LaSaracina LLP in 2013 was $23,275 and in 2012 was $6,000.

 

All Other Fees

 

None

 

Audit Committee

 

The only member of our audit committee is Mr. Mooney. Our board of directors and audit committee approved the services rendered and fees charged by our independent auditors. The audit committee has reviewed and discussed our audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 with our management. In addition, the audit committee has discussed Fiondella, Milone & LaSaracina LLP for 2013 and 2012, our independent registered public accountants, as required under PCAOB standards.

 

Based on the audit committee’s review of the matters noted above and its discussions with our independent auditors and our management, the audit committee recommended to the board of directors that the audited financial statements be included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.

 

Policy for Pre-Approval of Audit and Non-Audit Services

 

The audit committee’s policy is to pre-approve all audit services and all non-audit services that our independent auditor is permitted to perform for us under applicable federal securities regulations. As permitted by the applicable regulations, the audit committee’s policy utilizes a combination of specific pre-approval on a case-by-case basis of individual engagements of the independent auditor and general pre-approval of certain categories of engagements up to predetermined dollar thresholds that are reviewed annually by the audit committee. Specific pre-approval is mandatory for the annual financial statement audit engagement, among others.

 

The pre-approval policy was implemented effective as of September 2004. All engagements of the independent auditor to perform any audit services and non-audit services since that date have been pre-approved by the audit committee in accordance with the pre-approval policy. The policy has not been waived in any instance. All engagements of the independent auditor to perform any audit services and non-audit services prior to the date the pre-approval policy was implemented were approved by the audit committee in accordance its normal functions.

 

 
41

 

ITEM 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

 

(a) Exhibits

 

Exhibit No.

 

Description

3.1

 

Certificate of Incorporation. (8)

3.2

 

Certificate of Amendment of the Certificate of Incorporation, dated April 17, 2003. (1)

3.3

 

Certificate of Amendment of the Certificate of Incorporation, dated August 16, 2006. (2)

3.4

 

Certificate of Amendment of the Certificate of Incorporation, dated August 25, 2006. (2)

3.5

 

Certificate of Amendment of the Certificate of Incorporation, dated June 3, 2010. (3)

3.6

 

By-laws. (8)

4.1

 

Form of Securities Purchase Agreement to Purchase Convertible Notes and Warrants of Debt Resolve, Inc. for loans during the period June 2009 to August 2010. (5)

4.2

 

Form of Convertible Note of Debt Resolve, Inc. for loans during the period June 2009 to August 2010. (5)

4.3

 

Form of Warrant of Debt Resolve, Inc. for loans during the period June 2009 to August 2010. (5)

4.4

 

Form of Security Agreement of Debt Resolve, Inc. for loans during the period June 2009 to August 2010. (5)

4.5

 

Form of Convertible Note of Debt Resolve, Inc. for January 21, 2010 private placement. (6)

4.6

 

Form of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock of Debt Resolve, Inc. for January 21, 2010 private placement. (6)

4.7

 

Form of Security Agreement of Debt Resolve, Inc. for January 21, 2010 private placement. (6)

4.8

 

Form of Investor Rights Agreement of Debt Resolve, Inc. for January 21, 2010 private placement. (6)

4.9

 

Form of Securities Purchase Agreement to Purchase Common Stock of Debt Resolve, Inc. for August 12, 2010 private placement. (7)

4.10

 

Form of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock of Debt Resolve, Inc. for August 12, 2010 private placement. (7)

4.11

 

Form of Securities Purchase Agreement to Purchase Convertible Notes of Debt Resolve, Inc. for loans during the period February 2011. (5)

4.12

 

Form of Convertible Note of Debt Resolve, Inc. for loans during the period February 2011. (5)

4.13

 

Form of Warrant of Debt Resolve, Inc. for loans during the period February 2011. (5)

4.14

 

Form of Securities Purchase Agreement to Purchase Common Stock of Debt Resolve, Inc. for private placements during the period June to December 2011. (5)

4.15

 

Form of Warrant to Purchase Common Stock of Debt Resolve, Inc. for private placements during the period June to December 2011. (5)

4.16

 

Preferred Stock Purchase Warrant No. 1 issued by Debt Resolve, Inc. to LSH, LLC for 1,000,000 shares. (11)

4.17

 

Preferred Stock Purchase Warrant No. 2 issued by Debt Resolve, Inc. to LSH, LLC for 500,000 shares. (11)

10.1

 

Client contract with Customer A constituting greater than 10% of revenue. (5)

10.2

 

Client contract with Customer B constituting greater than 10% of revenue. (5)

10.3

 

Employment Agreement, effective March 1, 2014, between Debt Resolve, Inc. and Stanley E. Freimuth. (6)

10.4

 

Consulting Agreement, dated March 25, 2014, between Debt Resolve, Inc. and RC Healthcare Consulting, LLC. (7)

14.1

 

Code of Ethics. (9)

21.1

 

Subsidiaries of Debt Resolve, Inc.

31.1

 

Rule 13(a) -14(a) Certifications.

32.1

 

Section 1350 Certifications.

101.INS **

XBRL Instance Document

101.SCH **

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

101.CAL **

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document

101.DEF **

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document

101.LAB **

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document

101.PRE **

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

 

 
42

_________________

(1)

Incorporated herein by reference to Current Report on Form 8-K, filed March 11, 2003.

   

(2)

Incorporated herein by reference to Current Report on Form 8-K, filed August 31, 2006.

 

(3)

Incorporated herein by reference to Information Statement on Schedule 14C, filed June 24, 2010.

 

(4)

Incorporated herein by reference to Current Report on Form 8-K, filed September 5, 2007.

 

(5)

Incorporated herein by reference to Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, filed on April 16, 2012.

 

(6)

Incorporated herein by reference to Current Report on Form 8-K, filed March 6, 2013.

 

(7)

Incorporated herein by reference to Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 27, 2014.

 

(8)

Incorporated herein by reference to Registration Statement on Form SB (File no. 000-29525) of Lombardia Acquisition Corp., filed February 15, 2000.

 

(9)

Incorporated herein by reference to Registration Statement on Form SB-2 (File No. 333-128749), filed September 30, 2005.

 

(10)

Incorporated herein by reference to Current Report on Form 8-K/A, filed January 9, 2012.

   

(11)

Incorporated herein by reference to Current Report on Form 8-K, filed December 19, 2014.

 

** XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language) information is furnished and not filed or a part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, is deemed not filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections.

 

 
43

 

SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

 
       

Dated: March 10, 2015

By:

/s/ Stanley E. Freimuth

 
   

Stanley E. Freimuth

 
   

Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer

 
   

(principal executive officer and principal financial

and accounting officer)

 

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

 

Signature

 

Title

 

Date

         

/s/ Stanley E. Freimuth

 

Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer

 

March 10, 2015

Stanley E. Freimuth

 

(principal executive officer and principal financial and accounting officer) and Director

   
         

/s/ James G. Brakke

 

Director

 

March 10, 2015

James G. Brakke

       
         

/s/ William M. Mooney, Jr.

 

Chairman of the Board

 

March 10, 2015

William M. Mooney, Jr.

       
       

March 10, 2015

/s/ Gary T. Martin

 

Director

   

Gary T. Martin

       
         

/s/ Raymond A. Conta

 

Director

 

March 10, 2015

Raymond A. Conta

       

 

 
44

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

 

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

 

       

Financial Statements for the Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

     
         

Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

   

F-2

 
         

Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2013 and 2012

   

F-3

 
         

Statements of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

   

F-4

 
         

Statements of Shareholders’ Deficiency for the Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

   

F-5

 
         

Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

   

F-6

 
         

Notes to Financial Statements

   

F-7

 

 

 
F-1

 

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

To the Board of Directors and

Stockholders of Debt Resolve, Inc.

 

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Debt Resolve, Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the related statements of operations, shareholders’ deficiency and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2013. The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

 

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

 

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the two year period ended December 31, 2013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

 

/s/ Fiondella, Milone & LaSaracina LLP

Glastonbury, Connecticut

March 10, 2015

  

 

 
F-2

  

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

BALANCE SHEETS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012

 

    2013     2012  

ASSETS

Current assets:

       

Cash

 

$

7,212

   

$

30,850

 

Accounts receivable, net

   

28,564

     

62,922

 

Prepaid expenses

   

48,384

     

30,036

 

Total current assets

   

84,160

     

123,808

 
               

Fixed assets, net

   

-

     

908

 
               

Other assets:

               

Deposits

   

1,000

     

1,000

 
               

Total assets

 

$

85,160

   

$

125,716

 
               

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIENCY

Current liabilities:

               

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities

 

$

3,161,647

   

$

2,869,640

 

Due to shareholders

   

455,329

     

433,332

 

Notes payable, current portion

   

452,867

     

446,617

 

Notes payable-related parties

   

280,221

     

131,000

 

Convertible Short-term notes, net of deferred debt discount of $114 and $70,779 as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively

   

272,386

     

1,231,221

 

Lines of credit, related parties

   

151,000

     

151,000

 

Derivative liabilities

   

376,940

     

-

 

Total current liabilities

   

5,150,390

     

5,262,810

 
               

Long term debt:

               

Bank loan, long term portion

   

50,000

     

131,250

 

Note payable, related party

   

105,000

     

6,000

 

Convertible long-term notes, related parties

   

13,000

     

138,000

 

Convertible long-term notes, net of deferred debt discount of $171 and $3,709 as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively

   

1,054,329

     

21,291

 

Total liabilities

   

6,372,719

     

5,559,351

 
               

Stockholders' deficiency:

               

Preferred stock, $0.001 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and outstanding

   

-

     

-

 

Common stock, $0.001 par value, 200,000,000 shares authorized; 98,137,703 and 90,137,703 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively

   

98,138

     

90,138

 

Additional paid in capital

   

66,834,457

     

67,221,499

 

Accumulated deficit

 

(73,220,154

)

 

(72,745,272

)

Total stockholders' deficiency

 

(6,287,559

)

 

(5,433,635

)

               

Total liabilities and stockholders' deficiency

 

$

85,160

   

$

125,716

 

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements

 

 
F-3

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

 

  Year ended December 31,  
    2013     2012  
         

Revenues:

 

$

144,300

   

$

176,187

 
               

Costs and expenses:

               

Payroll, payroll taxes, penalties and related expenses

   

372,651

     

594,384

 

Selling, general and administrative expenses

   

347,659

     

478,191

 

Depreciation and amortization

   

908

     

1,809

 

Total costs and expenses

   

721,218

     

1,074,384

 
               

Net loss from operations

 

(576,918

)

 

(898,197

)

               

Other income (expense):

               

Gain on change in fair value of derivative liabilities

   

421,050

     

-

 

Gain on settlement of debt

   

53,829

     

-

 

Interest expense

 

(298,640

)

 

(282,932

)

Amortization of debt discounts

 

(74,203

)

 

(387,212

)

Total other income (expense)

   

102,036

   

(670,144

)

               

Net loss before provision for income taxes

 

(474,882

)

 

(1,568,341

)

               

Income tax (benefit)

   

-

     

-

 
               

Net loss

 

$

(474,882

)

 

$

(1,568,341

)

               

Net loss per common share -basic and diluted

 

$

(0.00

)

 

$

(0.02

)

               

Weighted average number of common shares outstanding, basic and diluted

   

95,515,785

     

87,603,004

 

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements

 

 
F-4

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

CONDENSED STATEMENT OF SHAREHOLDERS' DEFICIENCY

TWO YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013

 

                    Additional          
    Preferred stock     Common stock     Paid In     Accumulated      
    Shares     Amount     Shares     Amount     Capital     Deficit     Total  

Balance, December 31, 2011

 

-

   

$

-

   

85,587,703

   

$

85,588

   

$

66,726,119

   

$

(71,176,931

)

 

$

(4,365,224

)

Sale of common stock

   

-

     

-

     

4,300,000

     

4,300

     

375,700

     

-

     

380,000

 

Common stock issued for services rendered

   

-

     

-

     

250,000

     

250

     

19,750

     

-

     

20,000

 

Fair value of vesting options issued to employees for services

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

95,000

     

-

     

95,000

 

Beneficial conversion feature related to convertible notes

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

4,930

     

-

     

4,930

 

Net loss

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

   

(1,568,341

)

 

(1,568,341

)

Balance, December 31, 2012

   

-

     

-

     

90,137,703

     

90,138

     

67,221,499

   

(72,745,272

)

 

(5,433,635

)

Sale of common stock and warrants

   

-

     

-

     

8,000,000

     

8,000

     

392,000

     

-

     

400,000

 

Fair value of warrants issued to consultants for services

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

8,948

     

-

     

8,948

 

Fair value of vesting options issued to employees for services

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

10,000

     

-

     

10,000

 

Net reclassification of common stock equivalents issued in excess of aggregate authorized availability

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

   

(797,990

)

   

-

   

(797,990

)

Net loss

   

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

     

-

   

(474,882

)

 

(474,882

)

Balance, December 31, 2013

   

-

   

$

-

     

98,137,703

   

$

98,138

   

$

66,834,457

   

$

(73,220,154

)

 

$

(6,287,559

)

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements

 

 
F-5

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

 

  Year ended December 31,  
    2013     2012  

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:

       

Net loss

 

$

(474,882

)

 

$

(1,568,341

)

Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:

               

Depreciation and amortization

   

908

     

1,809

 

Amortization of debt discounts

   

74,203

     

387,212

 

Stock based compensation

   

18,948

     

115,000

 

Gain on settlement of debt

 

(53,829

)

   

-

 

Gain on change in fair value of derivative liability

 

(421,050

)

   

-

 

Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

               

Accounts receivable

   

34,358

   

(36,145

)

Prepaid expenses

 

(18,348

)

   

47,702

 

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities

   

345,836

     

539,612

 

Due to shareholders

   

21,997

     

66,169

 

Net cash used in operating activities

 

(471,859

)

 

(446,982

)

               

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:

   

-

     

-

 
               

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:

               

Proceeds from sale of common stock

   

400,000

     

380,000

 

Proceeds from issuance of short term notes-related party

   

110,221

     

45,000

 

Repayment of short term notes

 

(75,000

)

 

(75,000

)

Proceeds from long term notes

   

-

     

70,000

 

Proceeds from long term notes, related party

   

13,000

     

31,000

 

Net cash provided by financing activities

   

448,221

     

451,000

 
               

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents

 

(23,638

)

   

4,018

 

Cash at beginning of period

   

30,850

     

26,832

 
               

Cash at end of period

 

$

7,212

   

$

30,850

 
               

Supplemental Disclosures of Cash Flow Information:

               

Cash paid during period for interest

 

$

10,386

   

$

-

 

Cash paid during period for taxes

 

$

-

   

$

-

 
               

Non-cash financing and investing transactions:

               

Beneficial conversion feature on convertible notes

 

$

-

   

$

4,930

 

Note payable issued for accrued liability

 

$

-

   

$

43,000

 

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements

 

 
F-6

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

NOTE 1 – BASIS AND BUSINESS PRESENTATION

 

Debt Resolve, Inc. (the “Company”) was incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware on April 21, 1997. The Company offers its service as a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model, enabling clients to introduce this collection or payment software option with no modifications to their existing collections computer systems. Its products capitalize on using the Internet as a tool for communication, resolution, settlement and payment of delinquent or defaulted consumer debt and as part of a complete accounts receivable management solution for consumer creditors. In December 2014, Progress Advocates LLC began operations in the student loan document preparation industry (see Note 16).

 

NOTE 2 – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

 

A summary of the significant accounting policies applied in the presentation of the accompanying financial statements follows:

 

Estimates

 

The preparation of the financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.

 

Reclassification

 

Certain reclassifications have been made to prior period’s data to conform to the current period's presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on reported income or losses.

 

Revenue Recognition

 

To date, the Company has earned revenue from collection agencies, collection law firms and lenders that implemented our online system. The Company's current contracts provide for revenue based on a percentage of the amount of debt collected, a fee per settlement or through a flat monthly fee. Although other revenue models have been proposed, most revenue earned to date has been determined using these methods, and such revenue is recognized when the settlement amount of debt is collected by the client or at the beginning of the month for a flat fee. While the percent of debt collected will continue to be a revenue recognition method going forward, other payment models are also being offered to clients. Dependent upon the structure of future contracts, revenue may be derived from a combination of set up fees or flat monthly or annual fees with transaction fees upon debt settlement, fees per account loaded or fees per settlement. The Company is currently marketing its system to three primary markets. The first and second are financial institutions and collection agencies or law firms, its traditional markets. The Company is also expanding into healthcare, particularly hospitals, which is its third market.

 

In recognition of the principles expressed in Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 605-10, Revenue Recognition ("ASC 605-10") that revenue should not be recognized until it is realized or realizable and earned, and given the element of doubt associated with collectability of an agreed settlement on past due debt, the Company postpones recognition of all contingent revenue until the client receives payment from the debtor. As is required by SAB 104, revenues are considered to have been earned when the Company has substantially accomplished the agreed-upon deliverables to be entitled to payment by the client. For most current active clients, these deliverables consist of the successful collection of past due debts using the Company's system and/or, for clients under a flat fee arrangement, the successful availability of the Company's system to its customers.

 

 
F-7

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Revenues for set-up fees, percentage contingent collection fees, fixed settlement fees, monthly fees, etc. are accounted for as Multiple-Element Arrangements under ASC 605-10 which incorporates Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 605-25, Multiple-Element Arrangements (“ASC 605-25”). ASC 605-25 addresses accounting for arrangements that may involve the delivery or performance of multiple products, services and/or rights to use assets.

 

Concentrations of Credit Risk

 

The Company’s financial instruments that are exposed to a concentration of credit risk are cash and accounts receivable. Generally, the Company’s cash and cash equivalents in interest-bearing accounts does not exceed FDIC insurance limits. The financial stability of these institutions is periodically reviewed by senior management.

 

Accounts Receivable and Sales Concentration

 

The Company extends credit to large, mid-size and small companies for collection services. At December 31, 2013, three clients represented receivables of $6,044 (21%), $10,000 (35%) and $10,000 (35%). At December 31, 2012, two clients represented receivables of $10,000 (16%) and $45,000 (72%). The Company does not generally require collateral or other security to support customer receivables. Accounts receivable are carried at their estimated collectible amounts. Accounts receivable are periodically evaluated for collectability and the allowance for doubtful accounts is adjusted accordingly. Management determines collectability based on their experience and knowledge of the customers. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, no allowance for doubtful accounts has been recorded.

 

The Company had two clients accounting for 42% and 42% of total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2013 and three clients accounting for 34%, 34% and 18% of total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2012.

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents

 

For purposes of the Statements of Cash Flows, the Company considers all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with a maturity date of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

 

Fair Values

 

Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 825-10, Financial Instruments (“ASC 825-10”) requires disclosure of the fair value of certain financial instruments. ASC 825-10 defines fair value as the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities required or permitted to be recorded at fair value, the Company considers the principal or most advantageous market in which it would transact and considers assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability, such as inherent risk, transfer restrictions, and risk of nonperformance. ASC 825-10 establishes a fair value hierarchy that requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. ASC 825-10 establishes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:

 

Level 1 - Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

 

Level 2 - Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets with insufficient volume or infrequent transactions (less active markets); or model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable or can be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

 

Level 3 - Unobservable inputs to the valuation methodology that are significant to the measurement of fair value of assets or liabilities.

 

 
F-8

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement is disclosed and is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement.

 

The carrying value of the Company’s cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable, short-term borrowings (including convertible notes payable), and other current assets and liabilities approximate fair value because of their short-term maturity.

 

As of December 31, 2013 or 2012, the Company did not have any items that would be classified as level 1 or 2 disclosures.

 

The Company recognizes its derivative liabilities as level 3 and values its derivatives using the methods discussed in note 10. While the Company believes that its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, it recognizes that the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. The primary assumptions that would significantly affect the fair values using the methods discussed in Note10 are that of volatility and market price of the underlying common stock of the Company.

 

Property and Equipment

 

Property and equipment are stated at cost. When retired or otherwise disposed, the related carrying value and accumulated depreciation are removed from the respective accounts and the net difference less any amount realized from disposition, is reflected in earnings. For financial statement purposes, property and equipment are recorded at cost and depreciated using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives of 3 to 5 years.

 

Net Loss per Share

 

The Company follows Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 260-10, Earnings Per Share (“ASC 260-10”) specifying the computation, presentation and disclosure requirements of earnings per share information. Basic loss per share has been calculated based upon the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. Stock options and warrants have been excluded as common stock equivalents in the diluted loss per share because their effect is anti-dilutive on the computation. Fully diluted shares outstanding were 109,704,119 and 104,280,006 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

 

Long-Lived Assets

 

The Company follows Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 360-10, Property, Plant and Equipment ("ASC 360-10"). ASC 360-10 requires that long-lived assets and certain identifiable intangibles held and used by the Company be reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Events relating to recoverability may include significant unfavorable changes in business conditions, recurring losses, or a forecasted inability to achieve break-even operating results over an extended period. The Company evaluates the recoverability of long-lived assets based upon forecasted undiscounted cash flows. Should impairment in value be indicated, the carrying value of intangible assets will be adjusted, based on estimates of future discounted cash flows resulting from the use and ultimate disposition of the asset. ASC 360-10 also requires assets to be disposed of be reported at the lower of the carrying amount or the fair value less costs to sell.

 

 
F-9

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Income Taxes

 

The Company recognizes deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of items that have been included or excluded in the financial statements or tax returns. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined on the basis of the difference between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their respective financial reporting amounts (“temporary differences”) at enacted tax rates in effect for the years in which the temporary differences are expected to reverse.

 

The Company adopted the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 740-10, which prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement process for financial statements recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.

 

The Company complies with the provisions of FASB ASC 740-10 in accounting for its uncertain tax positions. ASC 740-10 addresses the determination of whether tax benefits claimed or expected to be claimed on a tax return should be recorded in the financial statements. Under ASC 740-10, the Company may recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. Management has determined that the Company has no significant uncertain tax positions requiring recognition under ASC 740-10 requiring recognition in the Company’s financial statements as of December 31, 2013 and 2012. The Company does not expect any significant changes in its unrecognized tax benefits within twelve months of the reporting date.

 

The Company’s policy is to classify assessments, if any, for tax related interest as interest expense and penalties as general and administrative expenses in the statements of operations.

 

Stock-based compensation

 

The Company measures the cost of services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the fair value of the award. For employees and directors, the fair value of the award is measured on the grant date and for non-employees, the fair value of the award is generally re-measured on vesting dates and interim financial reporting dates until the service period is complete. The fair value amount is then recognized over the period during which services are required to be provided in exchange for the award, usually the vesting period. Stock-based compensation expense is recorded by the Company in the same expense classifications in the statements of operations, as if such amounts were paid in cash. Total stock-based compensation expense for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 amounted to $18,948 and $115,000, respectively.

 

Defined Contribution (401k) Plan

 

The Company maintains a defined contribution (401k) plan for its employees. The plan provides for a company match in the amount of 100% of the first 3% of pre-tax salary contributed and 50% of the next 3% of pre-tax salary contributed. Due to the severe cash limitations that the Company has experienced, the match was suspended from mid-2008 to the present and will only be re-instated when business conditions warrant.

 

 
F-10

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Derivative Liability

 

The Company accounts for derivatives in accordance with ASC 815, which establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other financial instruments or contracts and requires recognition of all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value, regardless of hedging relationship designation. Accounting for changes in fair value of the derivative instruments depends on whether the derivatives qualify as hedge relationships and the types of relationships designated are based on the exposures hedged. At December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company did not have any derivative instruments that were designated as hedges.

 

At December 31, 2013, the Company had the possibility of exceeding their common shares authorized when considering the number of possible shares that may be issuable to satisfy settlement provisions for all existing instruments that could be settled in shares.

 

Recent accounting pronouncements

 

In July 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2013-11, Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists. The guidance requires an entity to net its liability for unrecognized tax positions against a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss or a tax credit carryforward when settlement in this manner is available under the tax law. The guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2013. The Company adopted this guidance effective December 31, 2013 and it had no impact on the financial statements of the Company.

 

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). The standard outlines a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition guidance. The accounting standard is effective for annual reporting periods (including interim reporting periods within those periods) beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is not permitted. The impact on the Company’s financial statements of adopting ASU 2014-09 is being assessed by management.

 

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-12 Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period. The amendments clarify the proper method of accounting for share-based payments when the terms of an award provide that a performance target could be achieved after the requisite service period. The Update requires that a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. The performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant-date fair value of the award. Compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service has already been rendered. The amendments in this ASU are effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. Earlier adoption is permitted. The adoption of ASU 2014-12 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.

 

 
F-11

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40). The new guidance addresses management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. Management’s evaluation should be based on relevant conditions and events that are known and reasonably knowable at the date that the financial statements are issued. The standard will be effective for the first interim period within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect to early adopt this guidance and is still assessing the impact on the financial statements.

 

There were various other updates recently issued, most of which represented technical corrections to the accounting literature or application to specific industries and are not expected to a have a material impact on the Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

 

NOTE 3 - LIQUIDITY

 

The Company incurred a net loss of $474,882 and $1,568,341 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Additionally, the Company has negative working capital (total current liabilities exceeded total current assets) of $5,066,230 as of December 31, 2013 and had used net cash in operations of $471,859 for the year then ended.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company raised $1,025,000 in cash through the issuance of notes payable and related party notes payable (Note 16).

 

The Company intends to raise additional capital through private debt and equity investors, but there can be no assurance that these funds will be available on terms acceptable to the Company, or will be sufficient to enable the Company to fully complete its development activities or sustain operations. If the Company is unable to raise sufficient additional funds, it will have to develop and implement a plan to further extend payables, reduce overhead, or scale back its current business plan until sufficient additional capital is raised to support further operations. There can be no assurance that such a plan will be successful.

 

NOTE 4 – PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT

 

Property and equipment at December 31, 2013 and 2012 are comprised of the following:

 

    2013     2012  

Computer equipment

 

$

110,548

   

$

110,548

 

Software

   

42,170

     

42,170

 

Telecommunication equipment

   

3,165

     

3,165

 

Office equipment

   

3,067

     

3,067

 

Furniture and fixtures

   

106,436

     

106,436

 

Total

   

265,386

     

265,386

 

Less accumulated depreciation

   

(265,386

)

   

(264,478

)

Total

 

$

-

   

$

908

 

 

The Company uses the straight line method of depreciation over 3 to 5 years.

 

 
F-12

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

NOTE 5 – ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED LIABILITIES

 

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 are comprised of the following:

 

    2013     2012  

Accounts payable

 

$

1,133,422

   

$

1,130,438

 

Accrued interest

   

1,121,942

     

835,175

 

Payroll and related accruals, net of advance to employees

   

906,283

     

904,027

 

Total

 

$

3,161,647

   

$

2,869,640

 

 

During the year ended December 31, 2013 the Company settled an accounts payable of $63,829 for $10,000 resulting in a gain on settlement of debt of $53,829.

 

NOTE 6 – NOTES PAYABLE

 

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, short term notes are as follows:

 

    2013     2012  

Bank loans

 

$

125,000

   

$

200,000

 

Investor notes payable, 12% per annum, currently in default

   

377,867

     

377,867

 

Total

   

502,867

     

577,867

 

Less current portion

   

452,867

     

446,617

 

Long term portion (only bank loan)

 

$

50,000

   

$

131,250

 

 

Bank loans

 

On October 7, 2011, a bank loan was issued in the amount of $237,500 at a 6.25% interest rate, with monthly payments of $6,250 maturing on December 1, 2014, and guaranteed by a director. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company repaid $75,000, and $75,000, respectively. The outstanding balance on the bank loan as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 is $125,000 and $200,000, respectively.

 

Investor notes payable

 

Investor Note 1

 

On December 21, 2007, an unaffiliated investor loaned the Company $125,000 on an unsecured 18-month note with a maturity date of June 21, 2009. The note has a provision requiring repayment once the Company has raised an aggregate of $500,000 following issuance of this note. As a result, this note is currently in default as it has not been repaid and the Company reached the $500,000 threshold in September, 2008. The note carries interest at a rate of 12% per annum, with interest accruing and payable at maturity. In conjunction with the note, the Company granted to the investor a warrant to purchase 37,500 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.07 and an expiration date of December 21, 2012, which has passed. This note is guaranteed by a stockholder.

 

On April 10, 2008, this investor loaned the Company an additional $198,000 on an amendment of the prior unsecured note with a maturity date of June 21, 2009 for payment of the entire balance of the first note plus the amendment ($323,000 total). In February 2010, the Company converted $65,133 principal and $74,867 accrued interest on the note to common stock. In August 2010, the Company repaid $80,000 principal through partial sale of the note. As a result, the remaining balance of the amended note is $177,867. The note carries interest at a rate of 12% per annum, with interest accruing and payable at maturity.

 

 
F-13

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

In conjunction with the note, the Company also issued a warrant to purchase 99,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $2.45 and an expiration date of April 10, 2013. This warrant has a cashless exercise feature. The Company also issued 50,000 shares of common stock valued at $122,130 in order to induce the investor to forbear on the note. This note is guaranteed by a stockholder of the Company. The note was amended and maintains the provision requiring repayment of the note upon raising gross proceeds of $500,000 subsequent the issuance of the note. At September 30, 2008, the Company had raised in excess of $500,000 subsequent to this amended note, and as a result, this note is in default.

 

Investor Note 2

 

On December 30, 2007, an unaffiliated investor loaned the Company $200,000 on an unsecured 18-month note with a maturity date of June 30, 2009. The note carries interest at a rate of 12% per annum, with interest accruing and payable at maturity. In conjunction with this note, the Company also issued a warrant to purchase 100,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 and an expiration date of December 30, 2012, which has passed. This note is guaranteed by a stockholder. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, this note is in default.

 

NOTE 7 – NOTES PAYABLE, RELATED PARTIES

 

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, notes payable, related parties are as follows:

 

    2013     2012  

Note payable dated January 14, 2011, in default

 

$

6,000

   

$

6,000

 

Note payable dated April 14, 2011, in default

   

25,000

     

25,000

 

Note payable dated April 15, 2011, in default

   

25,000

     

25,000

 

Note payable dated May 27, 2011, in default

   

10,000

     

10,000

 

Note payable dated January 18, 2012

   

5,000

     

5,000

 

Note payable dated January 20, 2012

   

5,000

     

5,000

 

Note payable dated May 21, 2012, in default

   

15,000

     

15,000

 

Note payable dated May 30, 2012

   

20,000

     

20,000

 

Series A Convertible note, in default

   

20,000

     

20,000

 

Convertible notes payable, dated July 6, 2012

   

30,000

     

30,000

 

Convertible note payable, dated July 10, 2012

   

15,000

     

15,000

 

Convertible note payable, dated September 7, 2012

   

6,000

     

6,000

 

Note payable, dated September 14, 2012

   

43,000

     

43,000

 

Convertible note payable, dated October 4, 2012

   

50,000

     

50,000

 

Convertible note payable, dated September 5, 2013

   

10,000

     

-

 

Convertible note payable, dated September 16, 2013

   

3,000

     

-

 

Note payable dated September 17, 2013

   

5,221

     

-

 

Note payable, dated October 24, 2013

   

30,000

     

-

 

Note payable, dated November 7, 2013

   

40,000

     

-

 

Note payable, dated December 6, 2013

   

5,000

     

-

 

Note payable, dated December 18, 2013

   

30,000

     

-

 

Total

   

398,221

     

275,000

 

Less current portion

   

280,221

     

131,000

 

Long term portion

 

$

118,000

   

$

144,000

 

 

 
F-14

  

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

On January 14, 2011, a stockholder loaned $6,000 (unsecured) to the Company with a due date of June 30, 2011. The loan had been extended to December 31, 2011. The Company is currently in default. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 60,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period. The note was recorded net of a deferred debt discount of $2,220, based on the relative fair value of the warrant. Such discount was amortized over the original term of the note.

 

On April 14, 2011, a stockholder and Board member loaned $25,000 (unsecured) to the Company with a due date of July 31, 2011. The loan had been extended to December 31, 2011. The Company is currently in default. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 250,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period. The Company had recorded a deferred debt discount of $8,850 that was amortized over the original term of the debt.

 

On April 15, 2011, a stockholder and Board member loaned $25,000 (unsecured) to the Company with a due date of July 31, 2011. The note had been extended to December 31, 2011. The Company is currently in default. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 250,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period. The Company had recorded a deferred debt discount of $8,850 that was amortized over the original term of the debt. 

 

On May 27, 2011, a stockholder and Board member loaned an additional $15,000 (unsecured) (of which $5,000 has been repaid in 2011) to the Company with a due date of September 30, 2011. The note had been extended to December 31, 2011. The Company is currently in default. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 150,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period. The Company had recorded a deferred debt discount of $5,610 that was amortized over the original term of the debt. 

 

On January 18, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $5,000 (unsecured) to the Company with a demand due date. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 50,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period. The note was recorded net of a deferred debt discount of $2,495, based on the relative fair value of the warrant. Such discount was charged to operations at issuance.

 

On January 20, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $5,000 (unsecured) to the Company with a demand due date. The loan carries interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The lender received a warrant to purchase 50,000 shares of the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.25 per share. The warrant has a five year exercise period. The note was recorded net of a deferred debt discount of $2,435, based on the relative fair value of the warrant. Such discount was charged to operations at issuance date.

 

On May 21, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $18,000 (unsecured) (of which $3,000 has been repaid in 2012) to the Company. The loan was due May 21, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum, and is currently in default.

 

On May 30, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $20,000 (unsecured) to the Company due March 31, 2013 with interest at 12% per annum, and is currently in default.

 

 
F-15

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

As described in Note 9 below, from June 2009 to March 2010, investors loaned the Company an aggregate of $1,237,459 on three year Series A Convertible Notes with an interest rate of 14%, of which $20,000 was a related party note. See Note 9 for full description. During the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company amortized the debt discount and charged $-0- and $5,000, respectively, to amortization of debt discount in the statement of operations.

 

On July 6, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $10,000 (unsecured) to the Company due July 6, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On July 6, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $20,000 (unsecured) to the Company due July 6, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On July 10, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $15,000 (unsecured) to the Company due July 10, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On September 7, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $43,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 7, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On September 14, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $6,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 14, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On October 4, 2012, a stockholder and Board member loaned $50,000 (unsecured) to the Company due October 4, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance. The Company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On September 5, 2013, a stockholder and Board member loaned $10,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 5, 2015 with interest at 10% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance.

 

On September 16, 2013, a stockholder and Board member loaned $3,000 (unsecured) to the Company due September 16, 2015 with interest at 12% per annum and convertible into the Company's common stock at $0.10 per share at the holder's option. The Company determined there was no beneficial conversion feature at the time of issuance.

 

On September 17, 2013, a stockholder and Board member loaned $5,221 (unsecured) to the Company due September 17, 2014 with interest at 12% per annum. The company did not make payment on the maturity date, therefore the note is currently in default.

 

On October 24, 2013, a stockholder and Board member loaned $30,000 (unsecured) to the Company due October 24, 2016 with interest at 10% per annum.

 

 
F-16

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

On November 7, 2013, a stockholder and board member loaned $40,000 (unsecured) to the Company due November 7, 2017 with interest at 10% per annum.

 

On December 6, 2013, a stockholder and Board member loaned $5,000 (unsecured) to the Company due December 6, 2016 with interest at 12% per annum.

 

On December 18, 2013, a stockholder and Board member loaned $30,000 (unsecured) to the Company due December 18, 2018 with interest at 10% per annum.

 

Total unpaid accrued interest on the notes payable to related parties as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $74,788 and $37,314, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded interest expense of $37,474 and $22,165, respectively, in connection with the notes payable to related parties.

 

Aggregate maturities of long-term debt as of December 31:

 

    Amount  

Year ended December 31, 2014

 

$

280,221

 

Year ended December 31, 2015

   

13,000

 

Year ended December 31, 2016

   

35,000

 

Year ended December 31, 2017 and thereafter

   

70,000

 

Total

 

$

398,221

 

 

NOTE 8 – LINE OF CREDIT- RELATED PARTY

 

On September 24, 2009, the Company entered into an unsecured short term loan with a stockholder for $150,000 to be used to discharge the bridge loans of another investor. Borrowings under the loan bear interest at 12% per annum, with interest accrued and payable on maturity. The Note was due on November 24, 2009 and is still outstanding. In conjunction with this line of credit, the Company also issued a warrant to purchase 150,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.15 per share with an expiration date of September 24, 2014. On April 6, 2010, a partial repayment of $25,000 of principal was paid. Also, as a result of the delinquent repayment of the note, a penalty of $69,000 was incurred on April 15, 2010. On August 17, 2010, a partial payment of $50,000 of principal was made on the line of credit. Unpaid accrued interest on this loan as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $82,999 and $64,879, respectively. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the outstanding balance on this loan was $151,000. Since the loan matured on November 24, 2009, it is currently in default. During the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded $18,120 and $18,169, respectively, as interest expense.

 

 
F-17

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

NOTE 9 – CONVERTIBLE NOTES

 

Convertible notes of non-related party investors are comprised of the following: 

 

    2013     2012  

Series A Convertible Notes, net of unamortized debt discount of $-0- and $18,958, respectively

 

$

817,000

   

$

798,042

 

Series B Convertible Notes, net of unamortized debt discount of $-0- and $14,798, respectively

   

225,000

     

210,202

 

Series C Convertible Notes, net of unamortized debt discount of $-0- and $37,023, respectively

   

260,000

     

222,977

 

Series D Convertible Notes, net of unamortized debt discount of $285 and $3,709 respectively

   

24,715

     

21,291

 

Total

   

1,326,715

     

1,252,512

 

Less: Current portion

   

(272,386

)

   

(1,231,221

)

Long term portion

 

$

1,054,329

   

$

21,291

 

 

Series A Convertible Notes

 

From June 2009 to March 2010, unaffiliated investors loaned the Company an aggregate of $1,217,459 (excluding $20,000 related party, see Note 7) on three-year Series A Convertible Notes with an interest rate of 14%. The interest accrues and is payable at maturity, which range in dates from August 2012 to March 2013. The conversion price is set at $0.15 per share. The Notes carry a first lien security interest in all of the assets of the Company. In addition, the investors received 12,174,590 warrants to purchase the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $1.00. On January 21, 2010, the exercise price was reduced to $0.40 due to certain provisions of the warrants. The exercise period of the warrants is five years. The notes were recorded net of a deferred debt discount of $1,143,268, based on the relative fair value of the warrants under the Black-Scholes pricing model. Such discount is being amortized over the term of the notes. During the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded amortization of the debt discount related to these notes of $18,958 and $227,792, respectively.

 

Certain convertible note holders, representing an aggregate of $734,500 of these notes entered, into an agreement in December 2014 through February 2015 whereby their obligations were extended for a period of 18 months from the date of execution of the agreement. The terms of the agreement included a payment of accrued interest of $500 for every $25,000 of outstanding principal. All other terms (including any amendments or earlier extensions) of the notes remain the same. The remaining convertible note holders representing an aggregate balance of $82,500 are in default.

 

Series B Convertible Notes

 

During year ended December 31, 2010, unaffiliated investors loaned the Company an aggregate of $275,000 on three-year Series B Convertible Notes with an interest rate of 14%. During the year ended December 31, 2010, $50,000 was repaid in cash, leaving a balance of $225,000 on these notes at December 31, 2011 and 2010. The interest accrues and is payable at maturity. The conversion price is set at $0.15 per share. The Notes carry a first lien security interest in all of the assets of the Company with the Series A notes above. In addition, at conversion, the investors will receive 900,000 warrants to purchase the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.40 per share. The warrants are callable when the Company's stock trades above $0.75 per share for 10 consecutive trading days.

 

 
F-18

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

The notes were recorded net of a deferred debt discount of $264,324, based on the relative fair value of the warrants under the Black-Scholes pricing model. Such discount is being amortized over the term of the notes. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded amortization of the debt discount related to these notes of $14,798 and $74,086, respectively.

 

Certain convertible note holders, representing an aggregate of $150,000 of these notes entered, into an agreement in December 2014 through February 2015 whereby their obligations were extended for a period of 18 months from the date of execution of the agreement. The terms of the agreement included a payment of accrued interest of $500 for every $25,000 of outstanding principal. All other terms (including any amendments or earlier extensions) of the notes remain the same. The remaining convertible note holders representing an aggregate balance of $75,000 are in default.

 

Series C Convertible Notes

 

During the year ended December 31, 2010, unaffiliated investors loaned the Company an aggregate of $260,000 on three-year Series C Convertible Notes with an interest rate of 14%. The interest accrues and is payable at maturity. The conversion price was set at $0.15 per share. The notes carry a first lien security interest with the Series A and B notes above in all of the assets of the Company. In addition, the investors received 2,641,670 warrants to purchase the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.40 per share. The series C notes have a “ratchet” provision resetting the conversion price to $0.10 and the warrant exercise price to $0.25 on the first closing of a subsequent offering with those terms. This “ratchet” was triggered on August 12, 2010 with the completion of the minimum closing of $1,500,000 on a $3,000,000 private placement. Additionally, as a result of the delay in filing a registration statement on the aforementioned private placement”, the Series C Warrants have become “cashless”, along with the warrants from the aforementioned private placement. There is no further effect from this “ratchet” event. The notes were recorded net of a deferred debt discount of $215,940, based on the relative fair value of the warrants under the Black-Scholes pricing model. Such discount is being amortized over the term of the notes. For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded amortization of the debt discount related to these notes of $37,023 and $71,980, respectively.

 

Certain convertible note holders, representing an aggregate of $155,000 of these notes entered, into an agreement in December 2014 through February 2015 whereby their obligations were extended for a period of 18 months from the date of execution of the agreement. The terms of the agreement included a payment of accrued interest of $500 for every $25,000 of outstanding principal. All other terms (including any amendments or earlier extensions) of the notes remain the same. The remaining convertible note holders representing an aggregate balance of $105,000 are in default.

 

Series D Convertible Notes

 

During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company issued an aggregate of $25,000 of Series D Convertible Notes with an interest rate of 14% due three years from the date of issuance. The interest accrues and is payable at maturity. The conversion price is set at $0.12 per share. The investors have a second lien position behind the Series A, B and C notes. In addition, the investors received 250,000 warrants to purchase the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.30 per share over five years. The notes were recorded net of deferred debt discount of $10,271 based on the relative fair value of the warrants under the Black-Scholes pricing model. Such discount is being amortized over the term of the notes. During the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded amortization of the debt discount relating to these notes of $3,424 and $3,424, respectively.

 

 
F-19

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Certain convertible note holders, representing an aggregate of $15,000 of these notes entered, into an agreement in December 2014 whereby their obligations were extended for a period of 18 months from the date of execution of the agreement. The terms of the agreement included a payment of accrued interest of $500 for every $25,000 of outstanding principal. All other terms (including any amendments or earlier extensions) of the notes remain the same. The remaining convertible note holders representing an aggregate balance of $10,000 are in default. Additionally, one note holder has filed liens against the Company on his behalf and two of his affiliates to secure payment of the obligations.

 

In addition to the above non-related party convertible notes, there was $171,000 of related party long-term convertible notes outstanding as of December 31, 2013. Please see Note 7 – Notes Payable, Related Parties for a discussion of those convertible notes.

 

Aggregate maturities of long-term debt as of December 31:

 

    Amount  

Year ended December 31, 2014

 

$

272,500

 

Year ended December 31, 2015

   

-

 

Year ended December 31, 2016

   

1,054,500

 

Year ended December 31, 2017 and thereafter

   

-

 

Total

 

$

1,327,000

 

 

NOTE 10 — DERIVATIVE LIABILITIES

 

Excessive committed shares

 

On April 11, 2013, in connection with the previously issued stock options and warrants, the Company had the possibility of exceeding their common shares authorized when considering the number of possible shares that may be issuable to satisfy settlement provisions of these agreements after consideration of all existing instruments that could be settled in shares. The accounting treatment of derivative financial instruments required that the Company reclassify the derivative from equity to a liability at their fair values as of the date possible issuable shares exceeded the authorized level and at fair value as of each subsequent balance sheet date.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2013, the fair value of the net derivative liabilities reclassified from equity of $797,990 was determined using the Black Scholes Option Pricing model with the following assumptions: dividend yield: 0%; volatility: 179.66% to 303.52%; risk free rate: 0.74% to 1.85%; and expected life: 4.41 to 5.00 years.

 

At December 31, 2013, the fair value of the derivative liabilities of $376,940 was determined using the Black Scholes Option Pricing model with the following assumptions: dividend yield: 0%; volatility: 251.07%; risk free rate: 1.75%; and expected life: 4.41 years.

 

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company did not have any derivative instruments that were designated as hedges.

 

The derivative liability as of December 31, 2013, in the amount of $376,940 has a level 3 classification.

 

 
F-20

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

The following table provides a summary of changes in fair value of the Company’s Level 3 financial liabilities as of December 31, 2013:

  

    Excess Share
Derivative

Balance, December 31, 2012

 

$

-

 

Transfers in of Level 3 upon exceeding in authorized shares

   

804,860

 

Transfers out of Level 3 upon reduction in excess shares

   

(6,870

)

Mark-to-market at December 31, 2013:

   

(421,050

)

Balance, December 31, 2013

 

$

376,940

 

Net Gain for the period included in earnings relating to the liabilities held at December 31, 2013

 

$

421,050

 

 

Fluctuations in the Company’s stock price are a primary driver for the changes in the derivative valuations during each reporting period. The Company’s stock price decreased by 53% from April 11, 2013 (date of exceeding authorized level) to December 31, 2013. As the stock price decreases for each of the related derivative instruments, the value to the holder of the instrument generally decreases, therefore decreasing the liability on the Company’s balance sheet. Additionally, stock price volatility is one of the significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of each of the Company’s derivative instruments.

 

NOTE 11 — STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

 

Preferred Stock

 

At December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company has authorized 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001, of which none are issued and outstanding.

 

Common stock

 

At December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company has authorized 200,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.001, of which 98,137,703 and 90,137,703 are issued and outstanding, respectively.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company sold 8,000,000 shares of stock to a Board member for net proceeds of $400,000. The Board member also received 24,000,000 warrants to purchase the common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.10 per share. The warrants have a cashless exercise provision and have a five year exercise period.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company issued 250,000 shares of its common stock in exchange for services of $20,000.

 

NOTE 12 – WARRANTS AND OPTIONS

 

Option and warrant valuation models require the input of highly subjective assumptions. The fair value of stock-based payment awards was estimated using the Black-Scholes option model with a volatility figure derived from an index using the Company’s own historical stock prices. The risk-free interest rate was determined from the implied yields of U.S. Treasury zero-coupon bonds with a remaining life consistent with the expected term of the options. The fair value of stock-based payment awards during the year ended December 31, 2013 was estimated using the Black-Scholes pricing model.

 

 
F-21

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

In addition, the Company is required to estimate the expected forfeiture rate and only recognize expense for those shares expected to vest. In estimating the Company’s forfeiture rate, the Company analyzed its historical forfeiture rate, the remaining lives of unvested options, and the number of vested options as a percentage of total options outstanding. If the Company’s actual forfeiture rate is materially different from its estimate, or if the Company reevaluates the forfeiture rate in the future, the stock-based compensation expense could be significantly different from what the Company has recorded in the current period. The Company estimated forfeitures related to option grants at a weighted average annual rate of 0% per year, as the Company does not yet have adequate historical data, for options granted during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

 

Warrants

 

The following table summarizes warrants outstanding and related prices for the shares of the Company's common stock issued to shareholders at December 31, 2013:

 

Exercise Price

   

Number

Outstanding

   

Warrants Outstanding

Weighted Average

Remaining

Contractual

Life (years)

   

Weighted

Average

Exercise price

   

Number

Exercisable

   

Warrants

Exercisable

Weighted

Average

Exercise Price

 

$

0.10

     

28,771,600

     

3.14

   

$

0.10

     

28,771,600

   

$

0.10

 
 

0.15

     

4,283,334

     

1.33

     

0.15

     

4,283,334

     

0.15

 
 

0.25

     

45,456,750

     

1.96

     

0.25

     

45,456,750

     

0.25

 
 

0.30

     

250,000

     

2.11

     

0.30

     

250,000

     

0.30

 
 

0.40

     

12,974,590

     

0.84

     

0.40

     

12,974,590

     

0.40

 

Total

     

91,736,274

     

2.14

   

$

0.22

     

91,736,274

   

$

0.22

 

 

Transactions involving the Company's warrant issuance are summarized as follows:

 

    Number of
Shares
    Weighted
Average Price
Per Share
 

Outstanding at December 31, 2011

   

59,413,274

   

$

0.30

 

Issued

   

9,700,000

     

0.20

 

Exercised

   

-

         

Expired

   

(903,000

)

   

(1.00

)

Outstanding at December 31, 2012

   

68,210,274

     

0.29

 

Issued

   

24,100,000

     

0.10

 

Exercised

   

-

     

-

 

Expired

   

(574,000

)

   

(1.40

)

Outstanding at December 31, 2013

   

91,736,274

   

$

0.22

 

 

In conjunction with the sale of common stock, during the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company issued an aggregate of warrants to purchase 24,000,000 shares of common stock with an exercise price of $0.10 per share expiring five years from the date of issuance and are cashless at exercise, if elected.

 

 
F-22

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company issued a consultant a warrant to purchase 100,000 shares of its common stock at $0.15 per share for five years. The warrant was valued using the Black-Scholes model and had a value of $8,948 and was charged to operation. The fair value of the options was determined using the Black-Scholes option pricing method with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 254.08%; and Risk Free rate: 0.76%.

 

In conjunction with the sale of the Company's common stock during 2012, the Company issued warrants to purchase an aggregate of 9,600,000 shares of common stock with an exercise prices of $0.10 to $0.25 per share expiring five years from the date of issuance.

 

In conjunction with issuance of short term notes to related parties during 2012, the Company issued warrants to purchase an aggregate of 100,000 shares of common stock with an exercise price of $0.25 per share expiring five years from the date of issuance. The fair value of the warrants was determined using the Black-Scholes option pricing method with the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 280.93% to 282.20%; and Risk free rate: 0.82% to 0.91% and was amortized and charged to interest expense-amortization of debt discount over the term of the related notes (see Note 7).

 

Non-Employee Options

 

The following table summarizes non-employee options outstanding and related prices for the shares of the Company's common stock issued to shareholders at December 31, 2013:

 

Exercise Price

   

Number

Outstanding

   

Option Outstanding

Options Average

Remaining

Contractual

Life (years)

   

Weighted

Average

Exercise price

   

Number

Exercisable

   

Options

Exercisable

Weighted

Average

Exercise Price

 

$

0.10

     

650,000

     

4.32

   

$

0.10

     

650,000

   

$

0.10

 
 

0.13

     

500,000

     

3.33

     

0.13

     

500,000

     

0.13

 
 

0.22

     

175,000

     

3.25

     

0.22

     

175,000

     

0.22

 
 

0.70

     

75,000

     

1.69

     

0.70

     

75,000

     

0.70

 
 

1.84

     

25,000

     

1.42

     

1.84

     

25,000

     

1.84

 

Total

     

1,425,000

     

3.66

   

$

0.19

     

1,425,000

   

$

0.19

 

 

Transactions involving the Company's non-employee option issuance are summarized as follows:

 

    Number of
Shares
    Weighted
Average Price
Per Share
 

Outstanding at December 31, 2011

   

4,850,000

   

$

0.12

 

Issued

   

--

     

--

 

Exercised

   

--

     

--

 

Canceled or expired

   

--

     

--

 

Outstanding at December 31, 2012

   

4,850,000

   

$

0.12

 

Transfer status from employee to non-employee status

   

175,000

     

0.22

 

Exercised

   

-

     

-

 

Canceled or expired

   

(3,600,000

   

0.10

 

Outstanding at December 31, 2013

   

1,425,000

   

$

0.19

 

 

 
F-23

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Employee Options

 

The following table summarizes employee options outstanding and related prices for the shares of the Company's common stock issued to shareholders at December 31, 2013:

 

Exercise Price

   

Number

Outstanding

   

Option Outstanding

Options Average

Remaining

Contractual

Life (years)

   

Weighted

Average

Exercise price

   

Number

Exercisable

   

Options

Exercisable

Weighted

Average

Exercise price

 

$

0.06

     

3,000,000

     

4.42

   

$

0.06

     

3,000,000

   

$

0.06

 
 

0.09

     

250,000

     

4.93

     

0.09

     

250,000

     

0.09

 
 

0.095

     

500,000

     

5.05

     

0.095

     

500,000

     

0.095

 
 

0.17

     

4,500,000

     

3.27

     

0.17

     

4,500,000

     

0.17

 
 

0.19

     

1,000,000

     

2.60

     

0.19

     

1,000,000

     

0.19

 
 

0.80

     

350,000

     

1.07

     

0.80

     

350,000

     

0.80

 
 

1.00

     

350,000

     

1.54

     

1.00

     

350,000

     

1.00

 
 

1.25

     

523,000

     

1.11

     

1.25

     

523,000

     

1.25

 
 

1.40

     

350,000

     

1.45

     

1.40

     

350,000

     

1.40

 
 

1.50

     

200,000

     

0.32

     

1.50

     

200,000

     

1.50

 
 

1.63

     

20,000

     

1.45

     

1.63

     

20,000

     

1.63

 
 

1.84

     

10,000

     

1.42

     

1.84

     

10,000

     

1.84

 
 

4.75

     

203,000

     

0.32

     

4.75

     

203,000

     

4.75

 
 

5.00

     

1,517,434

     

2.85

     

5.00

     

1,517,434

     

5.00

 

Total

     

12,773,434

     

3.20

   

$

0.93

     

12,773,434

   

$

0.93

 

 

Transactions involving the Company's employee option issuance are summarized as follows:

 

    Number of
Shares
    Weighted
Average Price
Per Share
 

Outstanding at December 31, 2011

   

13,955,934

   

$

0.99

 

Issued

   

500,000

     

0.095

 

Exercised

   

--

     

--

 

Expired

   

(20,000

)

   

1.50

 

Outstanding at December 31, 2012

   

14,435,934

     

0.97

 

Transfer status from employee to non-employee status

   

(175,000

   

0.22

 

Exercised

   

--

     

--

 

Expired

   

(1,487,500

)

   

(1.37

Outstanding at December 31, 2013

   

12,773,434

   

$

0.93

 

 

During the year ended December 31, 2012, the Board granted stock options to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock of the Company at exercise price of $0.095 with exercise period of seven years to an existing employee, fully vested. The grant was valued using the Black-Scholes option pricing model and had a value of $45,000 and was charged to operations for the year ended December 31, 2012.

 

The Black-Scholes option pricing model used the following assumptions: Dividend yield: 0%; Volatility: 282.58%; and Risk Free rate: 1.31%.

 

 
F-24

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Total stock-based compensation expense for employee options for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 amounted to $10,000 and $95,000, respectively.

 

NOTE 13 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 

Litigation:

 

Dreier LLP

 

On July 17, 2008, Dreier LLP, a law firm, filed a complaint in the Supreme Court of New York, County of New York, seeking damages of $311,023 plus interest for legal services allegedly rendered to us. The complaint was answered on August 14, 2008 raising various affirmative defenses. On December 16, 2008, Dreier LLP filed for bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. A settlement was reached on September 30, 2014 requiring the Company to pay $22,500 of installment payments. The first installment of $10,000 was paid on October 10, 2014. The second, third and fourth installments of $2,500 were paid on November 10, 2014, December 11, 2014, January 12, 2015, and February 11, 2015, respectively, with a remaining unpaid balance of $2,500. The full amount in dispute was included in the Company’s accounts payable at December 31, 2013.

 

Mathew L Johnson & Associates, P.C. v. Debt Resolve, Inc. (District Court, Clark County, of the State of Nevada Case No.A-12-665900-C):

 

Mathew L. Johnson & Associates, P. C. ("MLJ"), the plaintiff, filed a complaint on or about July 27, 2012 related to a claim for breach of contract for failure to pay for services. On or about August 23, 2010, MLJ preformed certain legal services on behalf of the Company. The Company entered into an agreement with MLJ, which provided for, among other things, a payment for services. In December 2012, we entered into a payment arrangement with the plaintiff for a down payment of $3,500 and monthly payments of $3,000 against the balance due. At December 31, 2013, the remaining balance due is $1,955 and included in accounts payable. Subsequently, the entire balance due has been paid.

 

From time to time, the Company is involved in various litigation matters in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position or results of operations.

 

Other:

 

Payroll taxes

 

Due to a lack of capital, the Company has been unable to pay all of the compensation owed to its employees. In addition, in 2011, 2012 and the second quarter of 2013, the Company did not pay certain federal and state payroll tax obligations due for employees' compensation, and they have become delinquent. The amounts of accrued employees' compensation included $203,428 unpaid payroll taxes. As a result, the Company has included in accrued expenses an amount of approximately $258,000 that represents an estimate of federal and state interest and penalties that could be expected upon settlement of payment of these payroll taxes with the respective taxing authorities. The Company is currently in discussions with the IRS about the federal portion of the liability about a workout plan. Upon agreement with the IRS, the Company will then initiate a discussion with the states involved.

 

On October 7, 2014 and November 17, 2014, the IRS filed feder tax liens to secure payment of the deliquent payroll. On February 4, 2015, the Company proposed settlement with the IRS Collections Officer. The Company has begun to make payments under this payment plan. The Collections Officer has indicated that the Company’s proposed payment plan will be accepted and formalized in April 2015.

 

 
F-25

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Employment agreements

 

As of December 31, 2013, the Company did not have any employment contracts for officers or employees.

 

On November 5, 2013, the Company announced that Claremont Ventures LLC, through its Managing Member Stanley E. Freimuth, would act as Interim Chief Executive Officer effective November 1, 2013 through at least December 31, 2013.

 

On March 1, 2014, the Company appointed Stanley E. Freimuth as Chief Executive Officer of the Company with an initial term of three years. See Note 16.

 

Operating leases

 

The company currently occupy office space at 1133 Westchester Avenue, Suite S-223, White Plains, NY 10604, under a short term lease with an unaffiliated third party. The monthly rent is $3,500 and can be terminated with a sixty day notice. The lease expires June 30, 2015 and has lease commitments of $33,500 and $21,000 in 2014 and 2015, respectively.

 

NOTE 14 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

 

During the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, certain Company directors personally guarantee the Company's notes payable and its' bank loan (Note 6). Also, certain directors and officers made short-term or longer term loans as discussed in Note 7. Total interest expense in connection with notes payable to related parties and related party line of credits amounted $55,594 and $40,334 for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively (Note 7 and Note 8). During the year ended December 31, 2013, a director purchased $400,000 of stock, receiving 8,000,000 shares and 24,000,000 warrants for the investment.

 

NOTE 15 – INCOME TAXES

 

The Company follows Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 740, Income Taxes (“ASC 740”) which requires the recognition of deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns. Under such method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse.

 

The difference between income tax expense computed by applying the federal statutory corporate tax rate and actual income tax expense is as follows:

 

    2013     2012  

Income taxes using U.S. federal statutory rate

 

34.0

%

 

34.0

%

State income taxes, net of federal benefit

   

3.4

%

   

.05

Prior period provision

   

0

%

 

 

-24.5

%

Stock costs

   

-5.31

%

    -  

Other

   

-3.86

%

   

-5.7

%

Change in Valuation Allowance

   

-28.2

%

   

-4.2

%

 

 
F-26

 

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

The significant components of the deferred tax assets (liabilities) at December 31, 2013 and 2012, are summarized as follows:

 

 

  2013     2012  

Deferred tax assets:

       

Stock Based Compensation

 

1,677,885

   

1,730,717

 

Net Operating Losses

   

11,835,167

     

11,529,315

 

Accrued payroll

   

440,374

     

450,610

 

Intangibles

   

2,766,549

     

2,780,683

 

Other

   

306

     

245

 

Total deferred tax assets

   

16,866,105

     

16,491,570

 
               

Deferred tax liabilities:

               

Total deferred tax liabilities

               
               

Valuation allowance

 

(16,866,105

)

 

(16,491,570

)

Net deferred tax assets

 

$

-

   

$

-

 

 

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had U.S. federal and state net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $30.59 million and $29.80 million, respectively, which expire at various dates from 2023 through 2033. These net operating loss carryforwards may be used to offset future taxable income and thereby reduce the Company’s U.S. federal income taxes. Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”) imposes an annual limit on the ability of a corporation that undergoes a greater than 50% ownership change to use its net operating loss carry forwards to reduce its tax liability. The Company may be subject to a limitation as a result of the Company’s initial public offering in 2006 and other transactions related to its stock ownership. These potential limitations could affect the utilization of the carryforwards prior to their expiration.

 

The Company has provided a full valuation allowance against its net deferred tax assets, since in the opinion of management based upon the earnings history of the Company; it is more likely than not that the benefits of these assets will not be realized.

 

The Company complies with the provisions of FASB ASC 740-10 in accounting for its uncertain tax positions. ASC 740-10 addresses the determination of whether tax benefits claimed or expected to be claimed on a tax return should be recorded in the financial statements. Under ASC 740-10, the Company may recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely that not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. Management has determined that the Company has no significant uncertain tax positions requiring recognition under ASC 740-10.

 

The Company is subject to income tax in the U.S., and certain state jurisdictions. The Company has not been audited by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, or any states in connection with income taxes. The periods from December 31, 2011 to December 31, 2013 remain open to examination by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, and state tax authorities. The periods from December 31, 2003 to December 31, 2010 are subject to examination up to the net operating loss.

 

The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits, if incurred, as a component of income tax expense.

 

 
F-27

  

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

NOTE 16 — SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

 

Equity:

 

Common stock:

 

In March 2014, the Company issued an aggregate of 3,250,000 shares of common stock options to Board members. The options have exercise prices ranging from $0.015 to $0.02 per share, have a cashless option and expire seven years from the date of issuance.

 

On July 21, 2014, the Company issued 49,379 shares of its common stock in settlement of $4,000 note payable and related accrued interest of $1,925.

 

Preferred stock:

 

On May 2, 2014, the Company’s board of directors designated 5,000,000 shares of its preferred stock as Series A Convertible Stock (“Series A”) with a $0.001 par value. The Series A preferred stock with rank senior to common and all other preferred stock of the corporation and equal or junior to any preferred stock that may be issued in regard to liquidation; not entitled to dividends and is convertible, at the holders’ option, at 10 shares of common stock for each share of Series A preferred stock.

 

On July 10, 2014, the Company issued an aggregate of 595,000 shares of its Series A preferred stock for services rendered, including 500,000 shares issued to a Board member.

 

In 2014, the Company issued an aggregate of 414,500 warrants to purchase Series A preferred stock for services rendered and a debt obligation, with exercise prices ranging from $0.50 to $1.50 per share, expiring three years from the date of issuance.

 

In connection with entering into the Progress Advocates LLC joint venture with LSH, LLC, (see below), the Company issued to LSH, LLC two five-year warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,500,000 shares of series A convertible preferred stock of Debt Resolve at an exercise price of $0.50 per preferred share. The first warrant for 1,000,000 shares of Debt Resolve preferred stock vests and becomes exercisable 25% upon issuance and the balance upon the achievement by Progress Advocates of specific increasing revenue goals. The second warrant for 500,000 shares of Debt Resolve preferred stock vests and becomes exercisable when Progress Advocates achieves at least $1,000,000 in cumulative “operating income.”

 

Debt:

 

In December 2014 and February 2015, the Company executed maturity date extension agreements with unaffiliated holders of Series A Convertible Notes extending the original maturity date 18 months to June through August 2016 for $1,054,500 of outstanding principle.

 

In 2014, the Company issued an aggregate of $1,025,000 convertible notes due two years from the date of issuance with interest, due at maturity, of 10% per annum. The notes are convertible into common stock at $0.05 per share, at the holders’ election 6 months after issuance. In connection with the issuance, the Company issued warrants to purchase 10,250,000 shares of common stock with an exercise price of $0.15 per share expiring three years from the date of issuance. Board members were issued $250,000 in notes and 2,500,000 common stock warrants.

 

 
F-28

  

DEBT RESOLVE, INC.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

DECEMBER 31, 2013 and 2012

 

Financial Options Group, LLC

 

In October 2014, the Company formed an LLC initially called Financial Options Group, LLC, subsequently changed to Progress Advocates LLC with LSH, LLC to focus on the student loan market with ownership of 51% owned by the Company and 49% owned by LSH, LLC.

 

In connection with entering into the Progress Advocates LLC joint venture with LSH, LLC, (see above), the Company issued to LSH, LLC two five-year warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,500,000 shares of series A convertible preferred stock of the Company with vesting of the majority of these shares conditional upon meeting performance objectives.

 

Employment:

 

On March 1, 2014, the Company appointed Stanley E. Freimuth as Chief Executive Officer of the Company with an initial term of three years and monthly compensation of $17,500. In addition, Mr. Freimuth received 5,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock for which 500,000 shares of series A convertible preferred stock was issued in exchange per board resolution, options to purchase 3,000,000 shares of the common stock exercisable at $0.015 per share for 7 years, vesting over three years on anniversary, and a $25,000 sign on bonus.

 

 

F-29