Legal	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2020
Legal [Abstract]
Legal	Note 13. Legal On June 12, 2019, the Bank was served with a qui tam lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, New Castle County. The Delaware Department of Justice intervened in the litigation. The case is titled The State of Delaware, Plaintiff, Ex rel. Russell S. Rogers, Plaintiff-Relator, v. The Bancorp Bank, Interactive Communications International, Inc., and InComm Financial Services, Inc., Defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants violated the Delaware False Claims Act by not paying balances on certain open-loop “Vanilla” prepaid cards to the State of Delaware as unclaimed property. The complaint seeks actual and treble damages, statutory penalties, and attorneys’ fees. The Bank has filed an answer denying the allegations and continues to vigorously defend the claims. The Bank and other defendants previously filed a motion to dismiss the action, but the motion was denied and the case is in preliminary stages of discovery. At this time, the Company is unable to determine whether the ultimate resolution of the matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or operations. The Company has received and is responding to two non-public fact-finding inquiries from the SEC, which in each case is seeking to determine if violations of the federal securities laws have occurred. The Company refers to these inquiries collectively as the SEC matters. On October 9, 2019, the Company received a subpoena seeking records related generally to The Bancorp Bank’s debit card issuance activity and gross dollar volume data, among other things. The Company responded to the subpoena and subsequent subpoenas issued to the Company. Unrelated to the first inquiry, on April 10, 2020, the Company received a subpoena in connection with The Bancorp Bank’s CMBS business seeking records related to various offerings as well as CMBS securities held by the Bank. Since inception of these SEC matters to the present, the Company has been cooperating fully with the SEC. The SEC has not made any findings, or alleged any wrongdoings, with respect to the SEC matters. The costs related to responding to and cooperating with the SEC staff may be material, and could continue to be material at least through the completion of the SEC matters. On June 2, 2020, the Bank was served with a complaint filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, titled Cascade Funding, LP – Series 6, Plaintiff v. The Bancorp Bank, Defendant. The lawsuit arises from a Purchase and Sale Agreement between Cascade Funding, LP – Series 6 (“Cascade”) and the Bank, pursuant to which Cascade was to purchase certain mortgage loan assets from the Bank for securitization. Cascade improperly attempted to invoke a market disruption clause in the agreement to avoid the purchase. Cascade’s failure to close the transaction constituted a breach of the agreement and, accordingly, the Bank terminated the agreement, effective April 29, 2020. Pursuant to the agreement, the Bank retained Cascade’s deposit of approximately $12.5 million. The lawsuit asserts three causes of action: (i) breach of contract; (ii) injunction and specific performance; and (iii) declaratory judgment. Cascade seeks the return of its deposit plus interest and attorneys’ fees and costs. The Bank is vigorously defending this matter and the case is in preliminiary stages of discovery. Given the early stages of this matter, the Company is not yet able to determine whether the ultimate resolution of this matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial conditions or operations. In addition, the Company is a party to various routine legal proceedings arising out of the ordinary course of business. The Company believes that none of these actions, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or operations.

Legal

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2020

Note 13. Legal

On June 12, 2019, the Bank was served with a qui tam lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, New Castle County. The Delaware Department of Justice intervened in the litigation. The case is titled The State of Delaware, Plaintiff, Ex rel. Russell S. Rogers, Plaintiff-Relator, v. The Bancorp Bank, Interactive Communications International, Inc., and InComm Financial Services, Inc., Defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants violated the Delaware False Claims Act by not paying balances on certain open-loop “Vanilla” prepaid cards to the State of Delaware as unclaimed property. The complaint seeks actual and treble damages, statutory penalties, and attorneys’ fees. The Bank has filed an answer denying the allegations and continues to vigorously defend the claims. The Bank and other defendants previously filed a motion to dismiss the action, but the motion was denied and the case is in preliminary stages of discovery. At this time, the Company is unable to determine whether the ultimate resolution of the matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or operations.

The Company has received and is responding to two non-public fact-finding inquiries from the SEC, which in each case is seeking to determine if violations of the federal securities laws have occurred. The Company refers to these inquiries collectively as the SEC matters. On October 9, 2019, the Company received a subpoena seeking records related generally to The Bancorp Bank’s debit card issuance activity and gross dollar volume data, among other things. The Company responded to the subpoena and subsequent subpoenas issued to the Company. Unrelated to the first inquiry, on April 10, 2020, the Company received a subpoena in connection with The Bancorp Bank’s CMBS business seeking records related to various offerings as well as CMBS securities held by the Bank. Since inception of these SEC matters to the present, the Company has been cooperating fully with the SEC. The SEC has not made any findings, or alleged any wrongdoings, with respect to the SEC matters. The costs related to responding to and cooperating with the SEC staff may be material, and could continue to be material at least through the completion of the SEC matters.

On June 2, 2020, the Bank was served with a complaint filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, titled Cascade Funding, LP – Series 6, Plaintiff v. The Bancorp Bank, Defendant. The lawsuit arises from a Purchase and Sale Agreement between Cascade Funding, LP – Series 6 (“Cascade”) and the Bank, pursuant to which Cascade was to purchase certain mortgage loan assets from the Bank for securitization. Cascade improperly attempted to invoke a market disruption clause in the agreement to avoid the purchase. Cascade’s failure to close the transaction constituted a breach of the agreement and, accordingly, the Bank terminated the agreement, effective April 29, 2020. Pursuant to the agreement, the Bank retained Cascade’s deposit of approximately $12.5 million. The lawsuit asserts three causes of action: (i) breach of contract; (ii) injunction and specific performance; and (iii) declaratory judgment. Cascade seeks the return of its deposit plus interest and attorneys’ fees and costs. The Bank is vigorously defending this matter and the case is in preliminiary stages of discovery. Given the early stages of this matter, the Company is not yet able to determine whether the ultimate resolution of this matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial conditions or operations.

In addition, the Company is a party to various routine legal proceedings arising out of the ordinary course of business. The Company believes that none of these actions, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or operations.