Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2022

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation risk

Except as set forth below, the Company and its subsidiaries are not a party to, and their properties are not the subject of, any material pending legal proceedings.

DCA Litigation

On April 9, 2021, Daiwa Corporate Advisory LLC (formerly known as DCS Advisory LLC) (“DCA”), a financial advisory firm, served Katapult Group, Inc. with a summons and complaint filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. The complaint relates to a March 22, 2018 letter agreement (the “Letter Agreement”) entered into by DCA and Legacy Katapult. Among other things, DCA alleges that the Letter Agreement confers upon DCA (i) a right to

act as the “exclusive financial advisor” with respect to certain transactions defined in the Letter Agreement, (ii) a right to a “Placement Fee” and/or “mutually-agreed upon fees” in connection with such advisory roles, and (iii) a right to a $100 termination fee payable in certain circumstances by Katapult Group, Inc. in the event that Katapult Group, Inc. terminated the Letter Agreement. For its first cause of action, DCA alleges that Katapult Group, Inc. “breached the Letter Agreement by failing and/or refusing to extend to DCA the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal in connection with” certain transactions and the PIPE Investment. DCA seeks “damages in an amount to be determined at trial” with respect to this first cause of action. For its second cause of action, DCA alleges that, assuming Katapult Group, Inc. properly terminated the Letter Agreement in April 2019 (which DCA disputes), Katapult Group, Inc. “also breached the Letter Agreement by failing to pay DCA a termination fee when it terminated the Letter Agreement.” DCA seeks “damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $100,” with respect to this second cause of action. With respect to both causes of action, DCA also seeks attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to the Letter Agreement, an award of pre- and post-judgment interest, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.”

On May 24, 2021, Katapult Group, Inc. filed its answer to the complaint and also asserted counterclaims against DCA for breach of contract and for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. In connection with its counterclaims, Katapult Group, Inc. is seeking damages in the amount of approximately $10,600, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. Katapult Group, Inc. disputes the allegations in DCA’s complaint and intends to vigorously defend against the claims.

On July 29, 2021, the court entered a Preliminary Conference Order, which was subsequently amended on September 13, 2021, October 25, 2021, and June 27, 2022. Pursuant to the October 25, 2021 scheduling order, fact discovery was completed on June 24, 2022. On August 8, 2022, DCA filed its Note of Issue, stating that its damages demand is $18,394, plus attorneys’ fees and costs. On September 12, 2022, DCA filed a motion seeking summary judgment as to both of its claims, and on September 13, 2022, Katapult filed a motion seeking summary judgment as to DCA’s first cause of action. The parties filed opposition briefs on October 7, 2022. Reply briefs have been filed and the Company is awaiting court response.

The Company has not recorded any loss or gain contingencies associated with this matter as it is not probable or estimable at September 30, 2022.

Shareholder Litigation

On August 27, 2021, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Katapult Holdings, Inc., two officers of FinServ, one of whom is a current Company director, and two officers of Legacy Katapult, both of whom are current Company officers. The lawsuit is captioned McIntosh v. Katapult Holdings, Inc., et al. On May 26, 2022, the Court appointed a lead plaintiff, who, on July 29, 2022, filed an amended complaint in the action. The amended complaint asserts violations of Sections 10(b), 14(a), and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and seeks an unspecified amount of damages on behalf of persons and entities that (a) beneficially owned and/or held FinServ common stock as of the close of business on May 11, 2021 and were eligible to vote at FinServ’s June 7, 2021 special meeting (the “FinServ Putative Class”); or (b) purchased or otherwise acquired Katapult securities between June 15, 2021 and August 9, 2021, inclusive (the “Katapult Putative Class”). The amended complaint alleges that certain defendants misled the FinServ Putative Class by failing to disclose that prime lenders could and would reach down the credit waterfall and take Katapult’s customers. The amended complaint further alleges that certain defendants misled the Katapult Putative Class by providing materially false and misleading financial guidance. The Company and the other defendants filed amended complaints on November 4, 2022. The Company and the other defendants intend to vigorously defend against the claims in this action.

The Company has not recorded any loss or gain contingencies associated with this matter as it is not probable or reasonably estimable at September 30, 2022.

In addition, from time to time, the Company may be party to litigation and subject to claims arising in the ordinary course of business. Although these types of matters cannot be predicted with certainty, we currently believe that the final outcome of these ordinary course matters will not have a material adverse effect on our business. The Company is not currently aware of any indemnification or other claims, except as discussed above and has not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations, except as discussed above, in the condensed consolidated financial statements as of September 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021.