Former Employees Sue Sprout Over Unpaid Wages – NMP Skip to main content

Former Employees Sue Sprout Over Unpaid Wages

Jul 12, 2022
Court Justice

Lawsuit seeking class action status names Sprout, CEO, and affiliate Recovco Mortgage Management as defendants.

Two former employees have filed a lawsuit against Sprout Mortgage on behalf of all former staff seeking to recover unpaid wages and other compensation from the mortgage lender that abruptly closed last week.

The lawsuit, which seeks class action status, was filed July 8 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York by the law firm Menken Simpson Rozger LLP on behalf of plaintiffs Nathaniel Agudelo of Florida and Helen Owens of New Jersey. Both are described as former closing disclosure specialists employed by Sprout Mortgage.

The lawsuit names as defendants Recovco Mortgage Management LLC, Sprout Mortgage LLC, and Michael Strauss, Sprout’s CEO. The lawsuit states that both Recovco and Sprout are incorporated in Delaware but have offices at 90 Merrick Ave. in East Meadow, N.Y. 

“Upon information and belief, at all relevant times, Corporate Defendants operated as a single integrated enterprise and held themselves out as Recovco and Sprout interchangeably,” the lawsuit states. “For example, upon information and belief, employees of Corporate Defendants received paychecks and offer letters purporting to be from Sprout, but employees’ ADP benefits accounts are affiliated with Recovco.”

The suit further notes that a filing with the Rhode Island Secretary of State office indicates that Recovco Mortgage LLC “used the fictitious name of ‘Sprout Mortgage’ in that state from September 2018 to April 2020,” and that while “no entity named ‘Sprout Mortgage LLC’ is registered with the New York Secretary of State, ‘Recovco Mortgage LLC’ is registered" and has the same address as Sprout.

The lawsuit also states that Strauss, “directed various other individuals not to pay the outstanding wages owed to the terminated employees,” and “directed the closure of Defendants’ business and the non-payment of all employees’ paychecks from New York.”

Sprout abruptly closed on July 6 following a short, virtual meeting held via Microsoft Teams at 4:30 p.m. Company President Shea Pallante hosted the meeting, informing the company’s more than 300 employees, “So, it’s with heavy heart I come to you to announce that Sprout is closing its doors today. So, effective today everyone is laid off.”

The closing and layoff came just one day before payday, and employees said their pay was not deposited the following day. 

The lawsuit states that paychecks scheduled to be delivered on July 7 would have covered the work period from June 16-30. It adds that employees also are due paychecks for work from July 1 through their termination on July 6, which would have been scheduled to be paid on July 22.

The lawsuit states that the action has been filed on behalf of the two plaintiffs, Agudelo and Ownes, “and all similarly situated current and former employees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and, specifically, the collective action provision of the FLSA, to remedy violations of the wage and hour provisions of the FLSA by Corporate Defendants that have deprived Plaintiffs and others similarly situated of their lawful wages.”

The lawsuit also cites violations of the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN Act), claiming the defendants failed to provide the required notice of a closing or mass layoff. Under New York state’s more strict version of the WARN Act, companies are required to provide 90-days written notice of a closing or mass layoff.

The lawsuit seeks to recover “unpaid wages, back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, and interest.”

Neither company nor Strauss have commented on the lawsuit.

The law firm Menken Simpson Rozger LLC states on its website that any former Sprout employee affected by the company’s closing may contact them via email at [email protected] and should include a name and phone number.

The New York Attorney General’s office said former employees also may filed complaints with its office via its website.

About the author
David Krechevsky was an editor at NMP.
Published
Jul 12, 2022
More from
Non-QM
Investor Homebuying Slows, Small Buyers Claim Biggest Share In 15 Years

Smaller investors accounted for 66.2% of investor purchases in the first half of 2026 and relied on cash much less often than mega-investors

Oct 22, 2026
For The Love Of Mortgage

Nearly four decades in lending have reinforced a veteran’s conviction: lasting success comes from solving borrower problems, adapting, and earning trust

Oct 21, 2026
The Non-QM Opportunity Beyond The Rate Conversation

For business owners and investors, purchase price, negotiating power, and cash flow can create reasons to buy before rates fall

Oct 21, 2026
Carrington, Newfi Stress Non-QM Staying Power

Both lenders point to financial strength and continued investment in broker partnerships amid rising rates, even while Non-QM production grows

Oct 14, 2026
Non-QM Locks Defy September Slowdown, ARM Share Hits Seven-Year High

Non-QM lock volume rose 8% from August while overall activity declined, and adjustable-rate loans captured their largest share since Optimal Blue’s tracking began in 2019

Oct 13, 2026
Conventional Credit Tightens While Non-QM Gains Ground

Lenders pulled back on cash-out refinance and investor loan offerings in September, even as non-agency programs continued to support the jumbo market, and Non-QM lending gained market share

Oct 09, 2026