Jeffrey Alan Stanley

08/28/2025: The Department of Enforcement alleges: 1. This case involves “banking-as-a-service,” a business model that allows financial technology companies (“fintechs”) to provide online banking services to members of the public (“end users”). 2. The fintechs, which are not banks, partner with licensed banks, which in turn hold end user funds. 3. Non-FINRA member Synapse Financial Technologies, Inc. (“Synapse Fi”) operated a technology platform that connected certain fintechs and their end users to two banking partners, DDA Bank 1 and DDA Bank 2 (collectively, the “DDA Banks”) that held end user funds in omnibus demand deposit accounts.1 4. By September of 2023, fintechs with millions of end users were using Synapse Fi’s platform and had over $2 billion in end user funds held in deposit accounts at the DDA Banks...

05/22/2026: It has been determined that the Offer be accepted and that findings be made as follows: This case involves “banking-as-a-service,” a business model that allows financial technology companies (“fintechs”) to provide online banking services to members of the public (“end users”). The fintechs, which are not banks, partner with licensed banks, which in turn hold end user funds. Non-FINRA member Synapse Financial Technologies, Inc. (“Synapse Fi”) operated a technology platform that connected certain fintechs and their end users to two banking partners, DDA Bank 1 and DDA Bank 2 (collectively, the “DDA Banks”) that held end user funds in omnibus demand deposit accounts. By September of 2023, fintechs with millions of end users were using Synapse Fi’s platform and had over $2 billion in end user funds held in deposit accounts at the DDA Banks. At or about that time, Synapse Fi was unable to reconcile its ledger with the records of DDA Bank 1. According to DDA Bank 1, there was a shortfall in funds....

Reference 2023080111701data-portal.finra.orgdata-portal.finra.orgfinra.org