Which place’s debt rules apply—and who can help?

S_MT PASS-06 — Montana mandatory agreement, disclosure, and execution component

Fresh research session: October 26, 2026, Pacific / October 26, 2026, UTC Actual model/mode: GPT-5.6 Sol Pro, regular Chat Relationship to prior work: Distinct agreement/disclosure/execution pass following the reviewed P1–P3 record. This is not an independent review. The saved P4 funds and P5 security analyses remain unreviewed and are not treated here as accepted authority.

Component status: PARTIAL. Montana’s affirmative Part 20 DMP-document requirements, Part 21 settlement disclosures and minimum contract prerequisites, conditional electronic-execution rules, and material telemarketing/CROA overlays are established. Current official ARM contract text, current regulator-approved forms, actual provider contracts, and several amendment, assignment, cancellation, and enforceability questions remain held.

Core conclusions

1. Part 20 prescribes a detailed DMP document. Before a credit counseling service may charge or accept consideration for providing or offering covered services, the consumer must sign a written, dated DMP and receive a copy. The plan must identify the service and consumer, describe the services, state costs in bold, include a prominent 10-point-bold cancellation statement, list each party’s obligations, state how disputes will be resolved, and state the service’s duty to advocate for the consumer. Hold-harmless clauses, confessions of judgment, and jury-trial waivers are prohibited. Montana Code Annotated+1
2. Part 21 separates precontract warnings from the contract itself. Before the debtor enters the agreement, the provider must give ten written warnings in at least 12-point type. Services require a written contract signed by the debtor, and no fee may be collected until the debtor has executed a contract containing the actual fee schedule and when each fee will be charged. Part 21 does not itself prescribe the extensive identity, service, dispute, copy-delivery, term, or cancellation-notice clauses found in Part 20. Montana Code Annotated+1
3. An electronic click or typed name is not automatically sufficient. Montana UETA applies only when both parties agreed to transact electronically; the signature must be attributable to the signer and adopted with intent to sign. Required written material must be retainable when received, and any type-size, boldface, placement, or delivery requirement survives electronic presentation. Montana Code Annotated+3
4. For interstate electronic consumer transactions, E-SIGN can add affirmative consent and access requirements. The consumer must receive prescribed information about paper copies, withdrawal of consent, hardware/software requirements, and must consent electronically in a manner reasonably demonstrating access. A sales-call recording alone is not an electronic record for that consumer-disclosure rule. U.S. Code
5. Telemarketing and credit-repair representations can add distinct contract regimes. A covered Montana telephone sale may require a separate same-language cancellation notice and cancellation period. If the actual services or representations make the seller a federal credit repair organization, CROA adds a separate precontract rights disclosure, written and dated contract, detailed service and payment terms, a three-business-day service pause and cancellation right, duplicate cancellation forms, copy delivery, antiwaiver rules, and its own advance-payment prohibition. Neither overlay applies merely because the business uses a telephone or uses the noun “debt relief”; actual coverage facts control. Montana Code Annotated+8

A. Substantive findings

1. Scope, definitions, exclusions, education, and precontract suitability

Part 20 custodial DMP

Part 20 applies to any person providing or offering DMPs to Montana residents. A DMP is a written agreement under which the credit counseling service receives consumer money for distribution to creditors. “Person” expressly includes a qualifying nonprofit organization, so nonprofit status does not itself remove the service from Part 20. The attorney and CPA exclusions require Montana licensure and counseling that is incidental rather than the professional’s principal business; the debt-collector exclusion requires that the collector not advertise or hold itself out as a credit counseling service. Montana Code Annotated+1

The statutory “credit counselor” definition says that a counselor designs DMPs and provides budget, basic financial-planning, and consumer-education services. That supports those functions as part of the covered counselor role. It does not, standing alone, prescribe a distinct written pre-enrollment budget, debt-suitability test, creditor-feasibility analysis, or consumer-qualification form that must precede every DMP. Section 30-14-2010 also prevents the provider from requiring a consumer, as a condition of entering the DMP, to purchase a paid counseling session, educational program, or materials. Montana Code Annotated+1

Accordingly, Part 20 establishes:

• A covered professional role that includes budgeting and education.
• Accreditation and counselor-certification prerequisites at the provider level.
• A detailed signed plan requirement.
• No verified universal statutory form or quantified suitability test before execution.

The bounded standalone-counseling conclusion from PASS-02 remains unchanged: a genuine counseling-only business that never provides, offers, or holds itself out as providing DMP services may fall outside the defined Part 20 entry point, but that is not a universal safe harbor for mixed models, affiliates, referral arrangements, or nominally separated services. Montana Code Annotated+1

Part 21 noncustodial settlement

Part 21 applies to a compensated provider that provides or holds itself out as providing settlement services and ordinarily does not hold, receive, or disburse debtor money in connection with those services. Its exclusions are entity- and activity-specific; an attorney connection, nonprofit label, creditor affiliation, remote location, or third-party account does not independently establish exclusion. An entity subject to Part 20 is expressly outside the Part 21 provider definition. Montana Code Annotated

Part 21 does not expressly require a provider to conduct or memorialize a financial suitability analysis before contracting. The DOJ checklist asks for the provider’s qualification standards, budget forms, financial-analysis forms, and other contracting materials, but those are filing-review requests rather than statutory safe harbors or mandatory forms created by the checklist itself. Montana Department of Justice+1

Conditional credit-repair organization overlap

CROA can apply when a person uses interstate commerce or the mails, for consideration, to provide or represent that it will provide a service for the express or implied purpose of improving a consumer’s credit record, history, or rating, or advice concerning such improvement. The statutory exclusions read here include actual §501(c)(3) nonprofits, a creditor restructuring its own debt, and specified depository institutions and credit unions and their affiliates. The statutory definition does not contain a generic attorney exclusion. Actual representations, organization status, activities, and interstate-commerce facts are therefore essential. U.S. Code

A statement that debt settlement may incidentally affect credit is not necessarily the same thing as selling credit improvement. Conversely, repeated claims that the program will repair, rebuild, raise, clean, or remove adverse credit information can create a material CROA inquiry even when the underlying service is called debt settlement.

2. Model-by-clause matrix

“Required” below means expressly required by the identified statute. “Not specified” does not mean forbidden or unnecessary under contracts, consumer-protection, federal, or other law.

The Part 20 requirements come from §§30-14-2003, 2010, and 2013. The Part 21 requirements come from §§30-14-2102 and 2103. Conditional electronic, telemarketing, plain-language, and CROA requirements are separate and cumulative when their own coverage elements are met. Montana Code Annotated+11

3. Execution, assent, delivery, readability, and electronic records

Part 20 execution sequence

Section 30-14-2010 requires a written, dated DMP signed by the consumer and requires the service to provide a copy. It prohibits requiring or accepting consideration for providing or offering the covered services unless that signed plan exists. It separately states that the initial consultation fee may not be charged until the service has complied with the section. Thus, no provider may rely on an unsigned application, recorded oral assent, intake questionnaire, or generic website terms as a substitute for the statutory DMP. Montana Code Annotated

The section does not expressly require:

• The provider’s signature.
• Creditor signatures or prior creditor acceptance.
• A wet-ink signature.
• A specified signing order.
• A particular paper or electronic form.
• A separate acknowledgment of every clause.

Those omissions do not establish that a provider can avoid ordinary mutual-assent, agency, attribution, or delivery requirements.

Part 21 execution sequence

Part 21 creates two distinct gates:

1. The ten-item written disclosure must be supplied before entering into the agreement.
2. No settlement services may be provided without a written contract signed by the debtor, and no fee may be collected until the debtor has executed a contract containing the fee schedule in the actual amount and the charge timing. Montana Code Annotated+1

The disclosure and contract can be part of one coordinated electronic workflow, but the temporal requirement remains: the consumer must receive the disclosure before contract formation. Merely placing the warnings below the signature button, revealing them after assent, or including them only in the post-signature copy does not satisfy the statutory order.

The statute does not expressly require that the disclosure be a separate document. The currently reachable DOJ checklist says that disclosures “in client agreement” must use at least 12-point font, but the statute itself controls: it requires disclosure before the agreement and 12-point type. The checklist wording does not create a safe harbor for simultaneous or post-assent presentation. Montana Code Annotated+1

Electronic agreement under Montana UETA

Montana’s UETA provides that an electronic record or signature cannot be denied effect merely because it is electronic, but only where each party agreed to transact electronically. An electronic signature is a sound, symbol, or process attached or logically associated with the record and executed or adopted with intent to sign. Attribution may be proved in any manner, including a security procedure, and legal effect depends on context and surrounding circumstances. Montana Code Annotated+2

A compliant online workflow should therefore be able to establish:

• Agreement to transact electronically.
• Which final record was presented.
• The consumer’s intent to sign that record.
• Attribution of the signature to that consumer.
• The time and sequence of disclosure, execution, and copy delivery.
• Continued access to or delivery of a retainable final copy.

Where another law requires written information, the electronic record must be capable of retention at receipt. A system that inhibits printing or storage makes the record unenforceable against the recipient. UETA also preserves another law’s required formatting and transmission method; it does not erase Part 20’s boldface/10-point placement or Part 21’s 12-point requirement. Montana Code Annotated

Electronic retention can satisfy a statutory retention requirement if the final information is accurately reflected and remains accessible for later reference. Third-party storage is permitted, but a Montana agency may impose additional retention requirements within its jurisdiction. Montana Code Annotated

Conditional E-SIGN consumer-consent overlay

For a transaction in or affecting interstate commerce, E-SIGN generally validates electronic signatures and contracts but preserves substantive content, timing, and consumer-protection requirements. If a law requires information to be provided to a consumer in writing, electronic delivery ordinarily requires affirmative consent following clear disclosure of:

• The consumer’s paper-copy rights.
• The right and method to withdraw consent.
• Any consequences or fees for withdrawing.
• The scope of the consent.
• How to update electronic-contact information.
• How to obtain paper copies and any fee.
• Hardware and software requirements.

The consumer must consent electronically in a way reasonably demonstrating access to the form that will be used. Material technology changes can require a new notice and renewed consent. An oral communication or recording does not qualify as the required electronic record under this subsection. E-SIGN also preserves required proximity, content, timing, and retainability. U.S. Code

Failure to follow the access-demonstrating-consent step does not, by itself, automatically invalidate the entire consumer contract under §7001(c)(3). It nevertheless leaves the electronic provision of the required written disclosure unsupported by the statutory safe route and may have other consequences.

Conditional Montana plain-language overlay

A substantially preprepared written agreement furnished to a consumer to sign for personal, family, or household services may qualify as a “consumer contract.” If entered into in Montana with a Montana resident and not within an exclusion—including the value-over-$50,000 exclusion—the agreement must be clear and coherent, use common words, be appropriately divided and captioned, use readable type, and use contrasting ink. Specific language required or authorized by law is protected from being treated as a plain-language violation. Montana Code Annotated+2

Application to a remote online contract turns in part on whether it was “entered into in this state,” which was not resolved by a controlling debt-services interpretation in this pass. A plain-language violation can support the statutory remedy, but it does not by itself make an otherwise legal transaction void or voidable; good-faith and other limitations also apply. Rights under the part cannot be waived. Montana Code Annotated+2

4. Cancellation, termination, modifications, assignment, and prohibited terms

Part 20 cancellation

The DMP must state, prominently and in at least 10-point bold type, that either party may cancel without penalty at any time upon 10 days’ notice and that a consumer who cancels is entitled to all unexpended funds paid to the service as of the notice date. Montana Code Annotated

The statute does not specify:

• Whether “10 days” means calendar or business days.
• Whether notice is effective when sent, received, or after the ten days.
• Required delivery medium or destination.
• Treatment of weekends and holidays.
• Whether services or scheduled creditor payments continue during the notice period.
• A separate provider-termination notice form.
• The deadline or delivery method for any resulting refund.

No concrete calendar deadline should therefore be generated without an actual agreement, notice method, receipt date, and any controlling counting rule. The funds and refund disposition questions remain in the separate unreviewed P4 component.

A contract cannot impose a cancellation penalty inconsistent with the mandatory statement. Nor can it require the consumer to surrender Part 20 rights, include a hold-harmless clause, confession of judgment, or jury-trial waiver. Montana Code Annotated+1

Part 21 cancellation

Part 21 does not create a general cooling-off period or prescribe a cancellation notice form or delivery method. It provides a limited consequence when the debtor cancels before completion: on the debtor’s request, the provider must refund 50% of collected but unrefunded service fees, allocated pro rata to accounts that had not received a settlement offer; setup fees are excluded from that state subsection. Montana Code Annotated

That provision does not establish:

• When cancellation becomes effective.
• How cancellation must be communicated.
• A refund-delivery deadline.
• What qualifies as a settlement offer.
• Whether a rejected, expired, conditional, or unaffordable proposal counts.
• How an unallocated contract fee must be apportioned.
• That a prematurely collected federal fee becomes lawful.

The DOJ checklist asks for the provider’s cancellation/refund policy, but it does not supply the missing statutory mechanics. Montana Department of Justice

Fee or debt amendments

Neither Part 20 nor Part 21 supplies a comprehensive amendment procedure.

For Part 21, the executed contract must contain the fee schedule in the actual amount to be charged and state when the fees will be charged. A document stating only “up to the Montana maximum,” or only an uncomputed percentage, presents a material compliance problem because it does not itself state the actual amount. No Montana opinion was located interpreting how this clause applies when debts are added, removed, corrected, disputed, or re-enrolled. Montana Code Annotated

The bounded operational conclusion is:

• The original fee schedule cannot safely support an increased or differently allocated fee after the underlying debt base changes if the schedule no longer states the actual amount to be charged.
• A web-posted fee change or unilateral processor update does not itself establish consumer assent.
• A revised disclosure and newly executed or validly amended agreement is the conservative route, but Montana’s exact amendment formalities remain unresolved.
• No fee is earned merely because an amendment or cancellation occurs.

For Part 20, a material modification affecting costs, services, obligations, dispute resolution, or cancellation can make the signed plan inaccurate. The statute does not say whether every change requires a wholly new DMP, an addendum, or a re-signed schedule. Ordinary assent, the statutory required terms, and the ban on waiving Part 20 rights remain applicable.

Assignment and choice of law

Neither Part 20 nor Part 21 expressly prescribes assignment language. An assignment cannot convert a noncompliant provider into an authorized provider, eliminate mandatory disclosures, or waive nonwaivable rights. Part 20 expressly bars attempts to cause consumers to waive or forgo rights under the Act. Part 21 bars obtaining a release of the provider’s obligations. Montana Code Annotated+1

A foreign choice-of-law clause is not automatically controlling merely because the provider is headquartered elsewhere. In Bluebird Property Rentals, LLC v. World Business Lenders, LLC, the Montana Supreme Court decided only the threshold forum question: the court, rather than an arbitrator, would determine arbitrability on the facts before it. It expressly did not decide whether the challenged arbitration or Nevada choice-of-law provisions were ultimately enforceable. Judicial Document Service+3

Arbitration and jury-waiver boundary

Part 20 expressly prohibits a waiver of the right to jury trial in a DMP and requires the plan to indicate how disputes will be resolved. The read authorities do not resolve whether every mandatory arbitration clause is therefore categorically forbidden, whether a particular arbitration clause necessarily operates as the prohibited waiver, or how the FAA affects that question. No generic “Montana-compliant arbitration clause” is supplied here. Montana Code Annotated

In Global Client Solutions, LLC v. Ossello, a Montana debt-relief consumer electronically signed agreements following a phone presentation. The Montana Supreme Court held that:

• Courts generally determine arbitrability unless delegation is clear and unmistakable.
• A mere reference to AAA administration did not clearly delegate arbitrability in that consumer record.
• The specific arbitration arrangement was unconscionable where the consumer had to arbitrate her claims while the drafter retained a court route for its collection claims.

The case did not adjudicate all pleaded Part 20 or Part 21 statutory claims, approve electronic contracting generally, or establish that all debt-relief arbitration clauses are invalid. Justia Law+5

The later Bluebird decision reaffirmed that a court ordinarily determines arbitrability absent clear and unmistakable delegation, and that a loose or incomplete AAA reference did not overcome that rule on the record before it. Bluebird made no merits ruling on the arbitration or choice-of-law clause itself. Judicial Document Service+5

5. Conditional telemarketing and CROA agreement overlays

Montana telephone-sale branch

The Montana Telemarketing Registration and Fraud Prevention Act defines telemarketing as a telephone plan, program, or campaign to induce purchases involving more than one telephone call to a consumer. A telemarketer can be located inside or outside Montana. The whole part does not apply to specified face-to-face-completion calls or consumer-initiated calls that were not caused by a solicitation. Montana Code Annotated+1

Section 30-14-1405’s listed exemptions are expressly exemptions from registration and bonding under §1404. They do not, by their wording alone, erase the separate conduct and contract duties in §30-14-1410. Thus, a nonprofit, supervised financial organization, or business with an existing customer relationship may still require a separate analysis of the contract provisions unless the transaction is outside the entire part under §1409 or another controlling provision. Montana Code Annotated+1

For a covered telephone sale, the seller or telemarketer must promptly identify itself, the sales purpose, and the nature of the service. Before requesting payment, it must disclose the total cost and all material restrictions, limitations, and conditions. It may not misrepresent material service performance or cancellation/refund terms. Montana Code Annotated

Unless the alternative policy in subsection (6) applies, the sale is not final until the consumer receives a written notice:

• In the same language principally used in the sales presentation.
• In at least 10-point boldface type.
• Providing cancellation until midnight of the third business day after receipt.
• Providing return of payments within ten business days after the seller receives cancellation.
• Identifying the seller/telemarketer, legal company, address, phone, solicitation date, and description.

Written cancellation occurs when given to the seller or telemarketer or when properly addressed, prepaid notice is deposited in the mail; no provider-created form is mandatory if the writing communicates the intent to cancel. Montana Code Annotated

Subsection (6) provides a different route where the seller has at least a seven-day return or service-cancellation policy after delivery, discloses it, and returns payments or issues credits within 30 days after receiving the cancellation. What constitutes “delivery” for an ongoing debt-management or settlement service was not resolved here. That alternative must not be assumed without the actual policy and service facts. Montana Code Annotated

Conditional federal CROA branch

If CROA applies, the organization must provide the prescribed credit-file-rights statement before contract execution as a document separate from the contract and other written material. The organization must retain the consumer’s signed acknowledgment for two years. U.S. Code

No covered credit-repair service may begin unless:

• A written and dated contract satisfying CROA is signed.
• The three-business-day period beginning on the signing date has ended.

The contract must state all payment terms and total payments to the organization or anyone else, fully describe services and guarantees, estimate the completion date or duration, identify the organization and principal address, and place the prescribed bold cancellation statement immediately next to the signature space. U.S. Code

The consumer may cancel without penalty before midnight of the third business day beginning after execution or the date the agreement would otherwise become enforceable. The contract must include the cancellation form in duplicate, and the consumer must receive the completed contract, disclosure, and every other signed document at the time of signing. CROA waivers are void, and a noncompliant contract is statutorily void and unenforceable. U.S. Code+1

CROA also bars charging or receiving money for an agreed service before that service has been fully performed. That rule is separate from Montana’s Part 21 fee ceilings and the conditional TSR debt-relief timing retained from PASS-02. U.S. Code

Because the CROA service-pause language and cancellation language use different formulations involving the signing or execution date and “business days,” no exact calendar is supplied without an actual execution date, time, governing business-day definition, and holiday facts.

B. Clause and event matrices

B1. Execution-event matrix

B2. Mandatory Part 20 document checklist

A compliant statutory DMP must contain all of the following:

These items derive from §§30-14-2010 and 30-14-2013. Montana Code Annotated+1

B3. Required Part 21 precontract disclosures

Before agreement formation, the debtor must receive written disclosure in at least 12-point type that:

1. Fees will be charged, including the type and amount of all fees.
2. Settlement may affect credit history.
3. Settlement may have tax consequences.
4. Collection activity may continue until acceptance.
5. Settlement amounts are estimates based on prior customers and are not guaranteed.
6. A creditor cannot be forced to accept.
7. Savings goals must be met to maximize settlement opportunities.
8. The provider does not provide legal, accounting, tax, or bankruptcy advice or assistance.
9. The provider will not use a debtor payment to pay a creditor.
10. Debt settlement may not be the debtor’s only option. Montana Code Annotated

The contract itself must at minimum be written, signed by the debtor, precede services, and—before any fee collection—contain the fee schedule in actual amounts and state when those amounts will be charged. It may not contain a release of provider obligations or a confession or power to confess judgment or appear for the debtor. Montana Code Annotated

C. Bounded workflow and notice examples

These examples demonstrate sequencing and boundaries only. They do not approve a provider, contract, fee, account, policy, or actual sales presentation.

Example 1 — Part 20 paper DMP execution

Assumptions

• The service is covered by Part 20.
• The consumer is a Montana resident.
• The document contains every §30-14-2010 term.
• The cancellation statement is prominent, at least 10-point, and bold.

Sequence

1. Provider supplies the complete written and dated DMP.
2. Consumer reviews and signs it.
3. Provider supplies the consumer a copy.
4. Only after the section is complied with may the initial fee be charged.
5. Provider later supplies creditor-level reports at least quarterly.

If the consumer signs but receives no copy, the copy requirement remains unsatisfied. If the cost statement is not bold, or the cancellation statement is only 9-point type, the mandatory formatting is not cured by oral explanation.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C002–C009.

Example 2 — Part 20 generic intake form is insufficient

Facts

• Consumer signs an intake page authorizing credit review.
• The page contains the provider name and a monthly-payment estimate.
• It omits the full services, bold costs, cancellation statement, party obligations, dispute method, and advocacy statement.

Result

The form is not the statutory DMP merely because it bears a signature. The provider may not treat it as satisfying §30-14-2010 or use it as the contractual basis for the initial fee.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C002–C009.

Example 3 — Part 21 disclosure then execution

Compliant sequence assumption

1. Consumer receives a retainable document displaying all ten disclosures in at least 12-point type.
2. Consumer has the opportunity to review them before assent.
3. Consumer then signs the written settlement contract.
4. The contract contains the fee schedule in actual amounts and states the timing.
5. Services begin only after execution.
6. Fee collection still waits for every separately applicable state and federal condition.

Risk branch

A mobile flow displays the disclosure for the first time only after the consumer clicks “Sign and Enroll.” That reverses the statutory sequence and is not cured by emailing the same disclosure afterward.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C013–C016, C023–C027.

Example 4 — Percentage-only settlement fee language

Contract language

“Provider may charge up to the maximum percentage permitted by Montana law.”

The clause does not state the actual dollar amount. A second clause says the provider can later determine the fee after accounts are verified.

Boundary

Section 30-14-2103(1)(k) requires the executed contract to contain a schedule of fees in the actual amount and state when they will be charged. No fee should be collected on the premise that the statutory ceiling supplies the missing actual contract amount.

A contract containing an exact principal base, exact calculation, and resulting dollar amount is materially different. Whether a formula plus immediately calculable inputs always qualifies was not resolved by controlling authority.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C015, C034.

Example 5 — Electronic signature with retainable record

Supported branch

1. Consumer is shown a clear electronic-transactions consent.
2. Hardware and software requirements are disclosed.
3. Consumer electronically demonstrates access to the document format.
4. The precontract disclosure is provided as a downloadable or printable final PDF.
5. Consumer signs through an attributable process after reviewing the disclosure.
6. Consumer receives or can retain the final signed record.

Unsupported branch

• Disclosure exists only in a temporary viewer that disables download, printing, and storage.
• Sales representative records verbal assent.
• The consumer’s name is later inserted by the representative.

The unsupported branch does not establish UETA retainability, consumer intent, attribution, or E-SIGN electronic provision of the required written disclosure. A recorded oral call alone is not the E-SIGN electronic record.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C023–C027.

Example 6 — Part 20 cancellation without invented calendar

Facts

• Consumer gives a written notice on “Day 0.”
• The DMP repeats the statutory 10-day notice language.
• The agreement does not define receipt, calendar days, business days, or post-notice performance.

Permissible conclusion

The statutory statement gives a no-penalty cancellation right on 10 days’ notice and fixes the consumer-refund base at unexpended funds as of the notice date.

Held

• Exact effective date.
• Weekend or holiday treatment.
• Whether a creditor payment scheduled during the ten-day period proceeds.
• Exact refund deadline.
• Method of returning funds.

No calendar date is supplied from these incomplete facts.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C005, C017.

Example 7 — Conditional covered telephone sale

Assumptions

• The campaign satisfies Montana’s telemarketing definition.
• No whole-part exclusion in §30-14-1409 applies.
• The seller is using §30-14-1410(5), not the subsection (6) alternative.

Sequence

1. Seller makes the call disclosures.
2. Before payment, seller states total cost and material restrictions.
3. Consumer receives the written cancellation notice in the same principal language and at least 10-point bold type.
4. The third-business-day period begins after receipt of that notice.
5. A written cancellation is given or properly mailed.
6. Payments are due back within ten business days after the seller receives cancellation.

No exact final date is stated because the notice receipt date, mailing facts, applicable holiday calendar, and business-day interpretation are not supplied.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C028–C029.

Example 8 — Conditional CROA transaction

Assumptions

• The provider expressly promises to improve the consumer’s credit rating.
• No statutory CROA exclusion applies.
• Interstate-commerce or mail use is present.

Required sequence

1. Separate federal credit-rights disclosure is given before the contract.
2. Consumer signs the disclosure acknowledgment.
3. Consumer signs the written and dated contract containing every CROA term.
4. Consumer receives the completed contract, disclosure, every signed document, and duplicate cancellation forms at signing.
5. Provider does not perform services before expiration of the statutory three-business-day service period.
6. Provider does not charge for an agreed service before it is fully performed.

No exact cancellation deadline is generated without execution and business-day facts.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C030–C031.

Example 9 — Debt addition and fee amendment

Facts

• A Part 21 contract states an exact fee amount based on the original enrolled debt.
• A new debt is added later.
• The provider’s portal automatically increases the projected fee.
• Consumer never signs an amendment.

Result

The original contract does not state the increased actual amount. The portal change alone does not prove assent or compliance with §30-14-2103(1)(k). A new disclosure and validly executed amendment or replacement contract is the conservative route, but the statute does not prescribe exact amendment mechanics.

No increased fee is assumed earned or collectible.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C015, C023–C025, C034.

Example 10 — One-sided arbitration clause

Facts

• Consumer must arbitrate every claim.
• Provider reserves the right to sue in court for its fees, collection costs, and attorney fees.
• Clause merely says arbitration will be administered under AAA procedures.
• Provider claims the arbitrator alone decides validity.

Boundary

That structure resembles the one-sided features held unconscionable in Ossello. A bare AAA reference was also insufficient there—and again insufficient on the record in Bluebird—to clearly and unmistakably assign arbitrability to the arbitrator. This does not establish that all arbitration clauses are invalid, nor does it resolve the Part 20 jury-waiver/FAA question.

Claims: S_MT-P6-C032–C033.

D. PASS-06 source table

E. PASS-06 claim table

F. Component coverage and gap table

G. Researcher self-check

Freshly and directly read on October 26, 2026

• Complete materially relevant official 2025 MCA text for Part 20 scope, definitions, licensure, DMP terms, and prohibited practices.
• Complete materially relevant official 2025 MCA text for Part 21 definitions, precontract disclosures, contracts, prohibitions, and cancellation consequence.
• Montana Plain Language in Contracts definitions, requirements, scope, remedies, limitations, and antiwaiver provision.
• Montana UETA definitions, bilateral electronic-agreement rule, electronic-signature effect, written-record presentation, attribution, and retention.
• Montana telemarketing definitions, registration/bond exemptions, whole-part exclusions, and contract/cancellation requirements.
• Current official federal U.S. Code text for E-SIGN §7001 and CROA §§1679a–1679f, current through Public Law 119-120 dated October 7, 2026.
• The currently reachable four-page official DOJ OCP-801 PDF, including parsed text and screenshots of printed pages 2–4/PDF indices 1–3.
• The full Ossello opinion PDF and bounded relevant screenshots.
• The official Bluebird opinion PDF, relevant parsed paragraphs, and screenshots.

Reused without changing prior provenance

• P1’s official 2025 reads supporting imported C010 and C013.
• P1–P3 provider classification, fee-boundary, federal-timing, and date-correction findings.
• The qualified PASS-02 standalone-counseling reconciliation.
• Prior checked fee examples and quantities, which were not rerun.
• The eight-page 02/19 OCP-801 history as coordinator-supplied prior context; it was not relabeled as freshly read in PASS-06.

Failed, conflicting, or access-limited routes

• The official current ARM consumer-debt-management body route returned HTTP 405.
• No authenticated current official Montana DMP consumer agreement, settlement sample contract, prescribed cancellation form, electronic-consent form, or amendment form was recovered.
• The fresh official DOJ route returned a four-page OCP-801 marked 09/14, while the preserved prior record identifies an eight-page 02/19 OCP-801. No supersession finding was made.
• Targeted exact-statute and case searches did not locate a controlling Montana opinion interpreting:“actual amount” in §30-14-2103(1)(k).Part 20 ten-day notice counting.The Part 21 settlement-offer cancellation formula.Electronic presentation of the 12-point Part 21 disclosure.DMP amendment, debt-addition, or assignment mechanics.
• Those limited results are not proof that no district-court opinion, unpublished order, agency interpretation, or later authority exists.

Not read or resolved

• An actual provider’s contract, electronic-signature logs, consent record, disclosure screens, fee schedule, sales script, qualification process, amendment, assignment, or cancellation notice.
• Complete current official ARM bodies and all later amendment history.
• A comprehensive post-2025 Montana legislative or special-session audit.
• Full Montana contract-formation, agency, conflict-of-laws, FAA-preemption, or arbitration jurisprudence.
• Full federal CROA and E-SIGN case law.
• Complete TSR definitions and exemptions beyond the preserved P2 work.
• Any named provider’s authorization or operational compliance.
• P4’s funds analysis or P5’s security analysis as accepted authority.
• Full remedies, collections, litigation, limitations, bankruptcy, priority, secured-debt, sector, local, or tribal dimensions.

Exact individual source-fetch timestamps were not exposed and are not invented. No application, filing, provider lookup, regulator contact, account change, purchase, private borrower data, Chrome control, other-chat access, local write, contract approval, operational approval, independent review, component acceptance, Montana acceptance, parent-dossier acceptance, A066 acceptance, or publication-readiness determination occurred.

REPORT PARTIAL — the focused Montana mandatory agreement, disclosure, and execution component is completed to the stated source and currentness limits.

END S_MT PASS-06