By 
The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has asked a federal court to hold payments processor Cliq and two of its senior executives in contempt for allegedly breaching a 2015 court order linked to illegal credit card processing activities.
According to the FTC, Cliq—formerly known as Cardflex—alongside its Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Phillips, and Chief Technology and Security Officer, John Blaugrund, failed to comply with obligations imposed under the earlier order. That order required the company to take reasonable steps to prevent fraud and unlawful payment processing.
The regulator is seeking at least $52.9 million in compensatory relief for affected consumers. It has also asked the court to amend the 2015 order to permanently bar Phillips and Blaugrund from operating in the payment processing industry. In addition, the FTC wants a court-appointed receiver to oversee Cliq’s operations and ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.
The FTC alleges that Cliq violated multiple provisions of the 2015 order by processing payments for merchants it was expressly prohibited from servicing. This included working with a group of merchants who have since been separately indicted for crimes related to payment processing.
Among the key allegations, the commission claims Cliq processed hundreds of millions of dollars in transactions for at least three clients listed on Mastercard’s Member Alert To Control High (MATCH) database. Merchants placed on the MATCH list are typically terminated for serious rule violations, including excessive chargebacks and suspected fraud.
“Cliq and its operators flagrantly violated an FTC order requiring reasonable steps to prevent and detect fraud,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “We will not hesitate to hold accountable companies that ignore clear warning signs and undermine the integrity of the US payment system.”
The case underscores the FTC’s continued focus on enforcing compliance among payment processors and holding executives personally accountable for repeated or deliberate regulatory breaches.
Comments