Robert P. Rubicco: Criminal, Liar, Fraud, Daycare Operator: Table of Contents
WHITE PLAINS, NY (January 22, 2026) — In a short-lived federal lawsuit that spotlighted a disputed American Express credit account, New Rochelle resident Robert Rubicco claimed the card giant’s reporting damaged his “otherwise excellent credit” and thwarted a Small Business Administration loan amid the COVID-19 pandemic. But a deeper look at Rubicco’s legal and financial history raises serious questions about the credibility of those assertions, given his record of arrests, a federal conviction, a stint in prison, unpaid judgments and fines, foreclosure proceedings on his home, and more that would likely long ago have already marred his creditworthiness.
SEE: Contradiction in 2020 Amex Case within article about Rubicco’s 2017-18 Home Foreclosure Proceedings
The case, American Express National Bank v. Robert Rubicco, began in New York State Supreme Court in Westchester County under Index No. 64177/2020 before Rubicco removed it to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York as Case No. 7:20-cv-11122-PMH. Filed by American Express on Nov. 6, 2020, the complaint sought $72,293.87 in unpaid balances on what the bank described as a consumer credit account Rubicco allegedly applied for, used and failed to repay under a cardholder agreement governed by Utah law.
American Express alleged two causes of action: “breach of contract”, claiming Rubicco agreed to repay all charges, interest and fees but defaulted; and “account stated”, asserting the bank sent periodic statements that Rubicco did not timely dispute, implying acceptance of the debt. The bank sought the principal plus costs, disbursements and potential attorney fees under New York law.
Rubicco, who owns and operates child daycare centers under names like Anna & Jack’s Treehouse, and similar, denied liability in his Jan. 1, 2021, answer and counterclaims. He admitted only to jurisdiction and venue, rejecting any agreement, loan or contractual privity with American Express. Rubicco asserted he disputed the account and balance repeatedly with the bank and credit bureaus Equifax, TransUnion and Experian in early December 2020.
Rubicco claimed American Express reported the account to Equifax, Transunion and Experian consumer credit bureaus and in so doing “damaged his otherwise excellent credit” and “was the reason why he could not obtain a Small Business Administration loan to keep his business afloat during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
The lawsuit did not specify what SBA loan far in excess of $72,793.87 was being “held up” by American Express. Rubicco’s application for a loan was eventually discontinued on or around December 28, 2020, because the loan could not be approved given the derogatory information about Rubicco that American Express reported to the various consumer credit bureaus.
“Mr. Rubicco was advised that if not for the derogatory information reported about him by Amex to the various consumer credit bureaus, he would have been approved for an SBA loan that would have provided substantial capital to allow his business to weather the pandemic.”
His lawyer told the court “Mr. Rubicco owns and operates child day care centers and play places and has more than fifty employees,” and further that “The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a drop in business for Mr. Rubicco as many parents are keeping their children home to avoid exposure to the virus.”
Rubicco claimed “the emotional distress of having the viability of a business that employs more than fifty people placed in peril by Amex’s conduct has weighed heavily on Mr. Rubicco emotion health and general well-being.”
In affirmative defenses, Rubicco cited release via an alleged Dec. 24, 2020, settlement, accord and satisfaction, lack of privity, failure to state a claim, unclean hands due to alleged Fair Credit Reporting Act violations and settlement repudiation, and recoupment. His counterclaims sought a declaratory judgment of no liability and enforcement of the purported settlement, which he said required American Express to dismiss the action with prejudice, remove the account from his credit reports and release all claims.
Rubicco also alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681i et seq., claiming American Express, as a furnisher of credit information, reported inaccurate derogatory details despite his disputes and failed to investigate reasonably. He demanded actual, statutory and punitive damages exceeding $75,000, plus attorney fees, citing credit harm, the SBA loan denial closed around Dec. 28, 2020, business impacts like potential layoffs and emotional distress.
Rubicco denied liability for the American Express account and claimed he had reached a settlement agreement with American Express, but accused American Express of reneging on the agreement.
This claim was central to Rubicco’s narrative. In paragraph 13 of his counterclaims, he stated: “Amex, without any justification, reneged on the agreement reached on December 24, 2020, and it’s counsel now claims that credit reporting issues cannot be addressed in the settlement, and denies that any settlement was reached.” In paragraph 14, he added: “Amex now asserts that it will only abide by its commitment to remove the disputed account from Mr. Rubicco’s Transunion, Equifax, and Experian credit reports, if Mr. Rubicco agrees to pay the full amount sought by Amex in its Complaint.”
Rubicco claimed that without making a concession of liability but as a “business decision” because the $72,793.87 Amex sought in the Complaint was far less than the amount of the loan that was being held up, he reached a settlement with American Express on December 24, 2020.
The company denied such a settlement instead demanding Rubicco agree to pay the full amount sought by American Express.
Public court records show no formal response from American Express to Rubicco’s counterclaims, as the case was voluntarily dismissed on Feb. 12, 2021, via a joint stipulation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Presided over by U.S. District Judge Philip M. Halpern, the matter ended without substantive rulings, suggesting resolution through a confidential revised agreement.
Rubicco tied his claims to pandemic hardships, stating in paragraph 9 of his counterclaims: “The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a drop in business for Mr. Rubicco as many parents are keeping their children home to avoid exposure to the virus.” He alleged this necessitated the SBA loan to “keep his business afloat,” and that American Express’s reporting “had damaged his otherwise excellent credit” so that he was not approved for the SBA loan.
Skepticism arises from Rubicco’s own public statements about his operations during COVID-19.
In a podcast interview titled “How to Scale Your ECE Business With Clarity and Vision with Rob Rubicco,” he described his Norwalk, Connecticut, location closing for “about a week and a half or two weeks” early in the pandemic before reopening with precautions like masks and temperature checks. He noted: “even though we never we only closed for about a week and a half or two weeks we had to you know event we had to do all the precautions that everyone else had to do which were the masks and temperature checks but we did it first.” He said this led to a state contract to care for children of first responders, enabling expansion to 142 children with four new classrooms.
There is no direct public record or source that verifies Robert Rubicco’s specific claim that Anna & Jack’s Treehouse in Norwalk, CT, received a state contract for caring for children of first responders because it remained open during COVID-19 and no such Exhibits was filed with the court. If his claims are true then his business not only did not suffer but boomed as a result of the pandemic, the opposite of what he told Judge Halpern.
Connecticut did have a relevant statewide program called CTCARES for Frontline Workers, administered by the Office of Early Childhood (OEC), which provided child care subsidies to licensed providers serving eligible frontline workers, including first responders. This program was open for new applications from April 27, 2020, to June 15, 2020, and helped cover costs for child care at centers, family homes, or group homes. Subsidies were paid directly to providers, but no public lists of participating providers or specific contracts for individual centers like Anna & Jack’s were found in available. We have a FOIL pending with OEC and a separate inquiry to the OEC Communications Department to verify this claim.
UPDATE 1/30/2026: The Office of Early Childhood provided under FOIL a CTCARES for Frontline Workers letter. On April 3, 2020, Anna & Jack’s Treehouse in Norwalk, Connecticut, signed a Letter of Commitment with the Connecticut Office of Early Childhood (OEC) to provide emergency child care for essential workers at Norwalk Hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. The facility agreed to reserve 26 slots—6 for infants and toddlers, 10 for preschoolers, and 10 for school-age children—with strict group-size limits and a requirement for a staff member certified in first aid and CPR to be present at all times. Slots were prioritized for hospital staff, with flexibility to serve other critical health workers or first responders if needed, and ages determined by hospital requirements. The OEC assured funding through the Capitol Region Education Council (CREC) or directly by OEC if CREC could not pay. The program required OEC licensing and adherence to an attached Policy Guide on health, sanitation, and other procedures, with a final detailed contract expected from CREC. The document was signed by an OEC authorized official on March 4, 2020, and by an Anna & Jack’s Treehouse authorized official. We have a new FOIL to the Capitol Region Education Council (CREC) seeking the final detailed contract and related documents.
Rubicco’s businesses received substantial government aid, including Paycheck Protection Program loans totaling $207,999 ($137,500 on April 12, 2020; $20,833 on June 30, 2020; $49,600 on Feb. 6, 2021) and a $10,000 Economic Injury Disaster Loan grant.
These details cast doubt on the claimed financial desperation, especially amid Rubicco’s broader history of legal entanglements predating the lawsuit.
In 2010, at age 27, he was arrested in Eastchester, New York, on charges of bribing a witness after impersonating a New York City assistant district attorney to tamper with a witness in his brother Spencer Rubicco’s credit card theft case. Charges were reduced to tampering with a witness in the fourth degree; he pleaded guilty and received three years of probation from 2010 to 2013.
While on probation, Rubicco faced federal charges. Indicted on Sept. 22, 2011, and arrested the next day for fraud and related activity in connection with computers under 18 U.S.C. § 1030, he accessed his former employer IQPC’s system without authorization to steal files. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor on Jan. 27, 2012, receiving three years probation, four months home confinement, 200 hours community service, $10,240 restitution and a $25 assessment.
Probation violations followed: By Aug. 7, 2012, he failed to comply and attempted to alter his sentence using falsified letterhead. In 2013, further breaches included cocaine use, absconding and influencing drug tests, leading to a 21-day federal jail sentence and one year supervised release. Jail time occurred around 2013-2014, with the case concluding in 2017 after full restitution on Oct. 26, 2017.
Civil woes compounded: In 2015, Intuit sued Rubicco and his wife Christina over $85,523.78 in unreimbursed payroll advances in 2014, alleging fraud and breach as they funneled funds while failing to cover payments. A default judgment exceeded $195,000 with interest and fees; it was paid in August 2025 after a decade.
Workers’ compensation violations included multiple fines by the New York State Workers’ Compensation Board for insurance lapses: $3,000 in 2015 for a December 2013-February 2014 gap; $31,500 in 2016 (there were additional penalties in 2024 for over $118,000 and $40,500). None of these judgements have been paid, according a Workers’ Compensation Board spokesperson.
Rubicco has a history of contract breaches including judgments for unpaid services: $6,390 to Jani-King for cleaning in 2024; over $5,000 to a mural artist in 2025; $13,920 to a prior Norwalk daycare operator; and withheld parent deposits, such as $12,627.50 in a 2024 tuition refund suit and $2,340 in a 2021 foster parent case.
This litany of financial and legal issues, spanning arrests, incarceration, unpaid judgments and fines, appears incompatible with Rubicco’s assertion of “otherwise excellent credit” in the American Express filings. Our reporting underscores patterns of non-payment and disputes unrelated to COVID-19 that could explain credit woes independent of the disputed account.
The lawsuit’s swift dismissal leaves many questions unanswered, but Rubicco’s history invites scrutiny of his claims in the case.
This article was drafted with the aid of Grok, an AI tool by xAI, under the direction and editing of Robert Cox to ensure accuracy and adherence to journalistic standards.