Close sidebar
  • Google
Kent Recovery Services
  • Our Team
  • Current Cases
    • ATM ISOs Litigation
    • Dental Supplies Antitrust Litigation
    • Syringes & Catheters Antitrust Litigation
    • Navistar Liability Litigation
    • Intel Corp. Liability Litigation
    • Isocyanates Antitrust Litigation
    • Liquid Alum (Aluminum Sulfate) Antitrust Litigation
    • Syngenta Corn Seed Litigation
  • FAQs
  • Contact
  • Menu

A SMALL FIRM

DOING BIG BUSINESS

Kent Recovery Services is a full service recovery firm based in Harrison, New York.

Follow a manual added link

914.306.7340
Send an E-Mail to: mailto:info@kentrecoveryservices.com

info@kentrecoveryservices.com

914.630.1250

What We Do

Our Practice Areas

Kent Recovery Services provides settlement fund recovery services to businesses of all sizes in class action litigation, with an emphasis on antitrust/anti-competitive actions.

“Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt labore et dolore quis nostrud.”

– Firstname Lastname, Case $$

Link to: Isocyanates Antitrust Litigation

Isocyanates Antitrust Litigation

Deadline: Jan 01, 2020

Liquid Alum (Aluminum Sulfate) Antitrust Litigation

Deadline: Jan 01, 2020
Link to: Syngenta Corn Seed Litigation

Syngenta
Corn Seed Litigation

Deadline: Jan 01, 2020
Link to: Dental Supplies Antitrust Litigation

Dental Supplies Antitrust Litigation

Deadline: Jan 01, 2020
Link to: Syringes & Catheters Antitrust Litigation

Syringes & Catheters Antitrust Litigation

Deadline: Jan 01, 2020
Link to: Navistar Liability Litigation

Navistar Liability Litigation

Deadline: Jan 01, 2020
Link to: Intel Corp. Liability Litigation

Intel Corp. Liability Litigation

Deadline: Jan 01, 2020

Who We Are

We Are Here To Help You At Every Step

Kent Recovery Services, (“KRS”) provides settlement fund recovery services to businesses of all sizes in class action litigation, with an emphasis on antitrust/anti-competitive actions.

MISSION

Kent Recovery Services is dedicated to helping clients achieve their goals by providing high quality, ethically sound legal counsel and strategic advice. We work with clients to understand their objectives, resolve current issues and proactively anticipate and prevent future problems.

VISION

We endeavor to build our Firm’s reputation by satisfying each of our clients’ needs – one client, and one successful outcome, at a time. We will continue to expand the depth of our current cases, as well as add new cases, in order to provide clients with a broad range of quality services.

VALUES

We value RESPONSIBILITY to our clients by managing budgets, reducing extraneous costs, adding value and meeting their needs completely. We value RESPONSIBILITY to each other to reduce unnecessary costs, and at all times uphold the image of the Firm.

What We Do

We Are Here To Help

Difficult Cases, Extraordinary Results

We work diligently to improve class participation rates and believe that all potential class members should be informed about actions for which they may be eligible as soon as new matter is contemplated.

Compassionate & Experienced Team

Kent has worked alongside General Counsel, Financial Officers, Compliance Officers and other C-suite executives from an array of Fortune 500 and mid-sized companies, as well as small firms and entities.

Ensuring Our Clients Get What They’re Owed

Kent Recovery Services specializes in class action research and claims filing services for all types of industries. From handling and processing their claim – to providing updates throughout the case; we can assure you’ll always be informed.

Kent Recovery Services, (“KRS”) provides settlement fund recovery services to businesses of all sizes in class action litigation, with an emphasis on antitrust/anti-competitive actions.

Current Cases

  • Isocyanates Antitrust Litigation
  • Liquid Alum (Aluminum Sulfate) Antitrust Litigation
  • Syngenta Corn Seed Litigation
  • Dental Supplies Antitrust Litigation
  • Syringes & Catheters Antitrust Litigation
  • Navistar Liability Litigation
  • Intel Corp. Liability Litigation
icon914.306.7340
iconinfo@kentrecoveryservices.com
icon914.630.1250
© 2019 KENT RECOVERY SERVICES
Scroll to top

  NATIONAL ATM COUNCIL, INC. v. VISA INC., et al.

United States District Court for the District of Columbia

Case No. 1:11-cv-01803

BACKGROUND:

Plaintiffs allege that Visa and MasterCard have imposed contractual provisions – the “ATM Access Fee Rules” or “the Rules” – that prevent ATM operators from charging a discounted access fee if a customer’s transaction can be processed over an alternative network that is less expensive than Visa or MasterCard networks and they allege that those rules unreasonably restrain trade and therefore violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Read More

DEFENDANTS:

Visa Inc.; MasterCard Incorporated

CLASS DEFINITION:

All ATM Operators that originated an Authorized Surcharged ATM Cash Disbursement at a Qualified ATM at any time between October 1, 2007, and the present. 
“ATM Operator” is any person or entity that owned, operated, or leased a Qualified ATM that was authorized by a MasterCard Member or Visa Member, or by the agent of such Member, to originate an ATM Cash Disbursement through the connection of the Qualifying ATM to the Visa or MasterCard ATM Networks.  ATM Operator includes ATM Independent Sales Organizations (“ISOs”) sponsored by a MasterCard Member of Visa Member and authorized to connect a Qualified ATM to the MasterCard of Visa Networks, together with the affiliates of ATM ISOs authorized by the ATM ISA to connect a Qualified ATM to the MasterCard or Visa ATM Networks.  Persons or entities that make space available to ISOs or affiliates of ISOs to operate a Qualified ATM on property they own or control, armored car firms that provide cash replenishment of Qualified ATMs, and Encryption and Support Organizations that manage encryption keys or service Qualified ATMs are not ATM Operators.Read More

THERE HAVE BEEN NO SETTLEMENTS MADE TO DATE

Continue To Signup

  NATIONAL ATM COUNCIL, INC. v. VISA INC., et al.

United States District Court for the District of Columbia

Case No. 1:11-cv-01803

BACKGROUND:

Plaintiffs allege that Visa and MasterCard have imposed contractual provisions – the “ATM Access Fee Rules” or “the Rules” – that prevent ATM operators from charging a discounted access fee if a customer’s transaction can be processed over an alternative network that is less expensive than Visa or MasterCard networks and they allege that those rules unreasonably restrain trade and therefore violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Read More

DEFENDANTS:

Visa Inc.; MasterCard Incorporated

CLASS DEFINITION:

All ATM Operators that originated an Authorized Surcharged ATM Cash Disbursement at a Qualified ATM at any time between October 1, 2007, and the present. 
“ATM Operator” is any person or entity that owned, operated, or leased a Qualified ATM that was authorized by a MasterCard Member or Visa Member, or by the agent of such Member, to originate an ATM Cash Disbursement through the connection of the Qualifying ATM to the Visa or MasterCard ATM Networks.  ATM Operator includes ATM Independent Sales Organizations (“ISOs”) sponsored by a MasterCard Member of Visa Member and authorized to connect a Qualified ATM to the MasterCard of Visa Networks, together with the affiliates of ATM ISOs authorized by the ATM ISA to connect a Qualified ATM to the MasterCard or Visa ATM Networks.  Persons or entities that make space available to ISOs or affiliates of ISOs to operate a Qualified ATM on property they own or control, armored car firms that provide cash replenishment of Qualified ATMs, and Encryption and Support Organizations that manage encryption keys or service Qualified ATMs are not ATM Operators.Read More

THERE HAVE BEEN NO SETTLEMENTS MADE TO DATE

Continue To Signup