LendingTree CEO and founder Doug Lebda died in an all-terrain vehicle accident over the weekend, the online loaning platform said Monday.

In a company announcement, LendingTree confirmed that Lebda unexpectedly died on Sunday and that its leadership “deeply mourns his passing” while extending condolences to the executive’s loved ones.

“Doug was a visionary leader whose relentless drive, innovation and passion transformed the financial services landscape, touching the lives of millions of consumers,” LendingTree’s board of directors said in a statement. “His passion will continue to inspire us as we move forward together.”

Scott Peyree, LendingTree’s chief operating officer and president, has now been appointed CEO effective immediately. And lead independent director Steve Ozonian will also step into Lebda’s role as chairman of the board, the company said.

Shares of Charlotte, North Carolina-based LendingTree fell more than 2% by early afternoon trading on Monday.

Lebda founded LendingTree in 1996 — to “simplify the loan shopping process” after experiencing his own frustrations when getting his first mortgage, LendingTree’s website notes. The platform launched nationally in 1998 and became a public company in 2000. It was later acquired by internet conglomerate IAC/InterActiveCorp, before spinning off on its own again in 2008.

Today, LendingTree’s central online loaning marketplace helps users find and compare loans for mortgages, credit cards, insurance needs and more. LendingTree, Inc. also owns brands across the financial sector — including CompareCards and Value Penguin.

In addition to his multiple-decade career at LendingTree, Lebda also co-founded a financial services platform for children and families called Tykoon in 2010. He previously worked as an auditor and consultant for PriceWaterhouseCoopers.

“All of my ideas come from my own experiences and problems,” Lebda told The Wall Street Journal in a 2012 interview.

Thousands of U.S.-bound packages shipped by UPS are trapped at hubs across the country, unable to clear the maze of new customs requirements imposed by the Trump administration.

As packages flagged for customs issues pile up in UPS warehouses, the company told NBC News it has begun “disposing of” some shipments.

Frustrated UPS customers describe waiting for weeks and trying to make sense of scores of conflicting tracking updates from the world’s largest courier.

“I’ve never seen anything like this before,” Matthew Wasserbach, brokerage manager of Express Customs Clearance, said of the UPS backlog. “It’s totally unprecedented.”

Wasserbach’s New York City-based shipping services firm helps clients move shipments through customs. He said the company has seen a spike in inquiries for help with UPS customs clearance.

More than two dozen people who are waiting for their UPS packages explained the circumstances of their shipments to NBC News.

They described shipments of tea, telescopes, luxury glassware, musical instruments and more — some worth tens of thousands of dollars — all in limbo or perhaps gone.

Others have deep sentimental value: notebooks, diplomas and even engagement rings.

The frustration has exploded online, with customers sharing horror stories on Reddit of missing skin care products, art and collectibles.

They are confused and angry, and they want answers.

“It’s almost impossible to get through to anybody to figure out what is happening,” said Ashley Freberg, who said she is missing several boxes she shipped via UPS from England in September.

“Are my packages actually being destroyed or not?”

Freberg’s boxes of journals, records and books were shipped on Sept. 18, according to tracking documents she shared with NBC News.

Over the next two weeks, she received two separate notifications from UPS that her personal mementos had not cleared customs and as a result had been “disposed of” by UPS.

Then, on Oct. 1, a UPS tracking update appeared for her packages, saying they were on the way. The tracking updates Freberg showed NBC News for that shipment revealed it was the most recent update she had received.

While sentimental value is impossible to measure, other customers fear they will not be able to recover financially if their goods were destroyed.

Tea importer Lauren Purvis of Portland, Oregon, said five shipments from Japan, mostly containing matcha green tea and collectively worth more than $127,000, were all sent via UPS over the last few weeks and arrived at UPS’ international package processing hub in Louisville, Kentucky. Purvis has yet to receive any of the shipments, only a flurry of conflicting tracking updates from UPS.

A series of notifications for one shipment, which she shared with NBC News, said that the shipment had not cleared customs and that UPS had disposed of it.

But a subsequent tracking update said the shipment had cleared customs and was on the way.

“We know how to properly document and pay for our packages,” Purvis said. “There should be zero reason that a properly documented and paid-for package would be set to be disposed of.”

At least a half-dozen people described an emotional seesaw they were put through by weeks of contradictory UPS tracking updates about their shipments. The updates, they said, compounded the stress of not knowing what had really happened to their possessions.

AJ, a Boston man who asked that NBC News use only his initials to protect his privacy, said he shipped a package from Japan via UPS on Sept. 12 including Japanese language books, a pillow and a backpack.

After it sat in Louisville for nearly two weeks, AJ got a tracking update on Sept. 26, one of several that he shared with NBC News. “We’re sorry, your package did not clear customs and has been removed from the UPS network. Per customs guidelines, it has been destroyed. Please contact the sender for more information,” it read.

Three days later, on Sept. 29, he received another, and this one read: “On the Way. Import Scan, Louisville, KY, United States.” For a moment, it appeared as though AJ’s shipment might have been found.

But less than 24 hours after his hopes were raised, another tracking update arrived: “We’re sorry,” it began. It was the same notice that his package had “been destroyed” that he had received on the 26th.

Two minutes later, he got his final update: “Unable to Deliver. Package cannot clear due to customs delay or missing info. Attempt to contact sender made. Package has been disposed of.”

International shipping was thrown into chaos after the long-standing “de minimis” tariff exemption for low-value packages ended on Aug. 29.

Packages with values of $800 or less, which were previously allowed to enter the United States duty-free, are now subject to a range of tariffs and fees.

They include hundreds of country-specific rates, or President Donald Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs, as well as new levies on certain products and materials.

The result is that international shipping to the United States today is far more complex and costly than it was even two months ago.

The sweeping changes have caught private individuals and veteran exporters alike in a customs conundrum.

It is difficult to know the exact number of the packages that are stuck in UPS customs purgatory. Shipping companies guard their delivery data closely.

UPS reported to investors that in 2023, its international service delivered around 3.2 million packages per day.

This week, the company told NBC News that it is clearing more than 90% of the packages it handles through customs on the first day.

The rest of the packages, or less than 10%, require more time to clear customs and need to be held until they do. That could easily mean that thousands of UPS packages every day are not clearing customs on their first try.

In a statement to NBC News, UPS said it is doing its best to get all packages to their destinations while abiding by the new customs requirements.

“Because of changes to U.S. import regulations, we are seeing many packages that are unable to clear customs due to missing or incomplete information about the shipment required for customs clearance,” it said.

UPS said it makes several attempts to get any missing information and clear delayed shipments, contacting shippers three times.

“In cases where we cannot obtain the necessary information to clear the package, there are two options,” it said.

“First, the package can be returned to the original shipper at their expense. Second, if the customer does not respond and the package cannot be cleared for delivery, disposing of the shipment is in compliance with U.S. customs regulations. We continue to work to bridge the gap of understanding tied to the new requirements and, as always, remain committed to serving our customers.”

NBC News asked UPS precisely what it does with packages when it tells customers their shipments have been unable to clear customs and have been “disposed of.” It would not say.

On Sept. 27, a shipper in Stockholm received a formal notification from UPS that two packages her glassware company sent to the United States — which failed to clear customs — would be destroyed.

“We are sorry, but due to these circumstances and the perishable nature of the contents, we are now required to proceed with destruction of the shipment in accordance with regulatory guidelines,” UPS told Anni Cernea in an email she shared with NBC News.

The email continued, “There is no need to contact our call center for further information or to attempt to clear this shipment.”

Cernea said, “It’s just outrageous that they can dispose of products like this without approval from either the sender or recipient.”

From now on, Cernea said, she plans to ship her products via UPS rival FedEx.

Cernea’s decision to switch carriers hints at the worst-case scenario for UPS, which is that people could abandon the company. It is a potential crisis for the roughly $70 billion company.

The company’s stock price is already down more than 30% this year, which analysts attribute to a mix of tariffs, competition and shifting shopping habits.

As she awaits her missing journals and diplomas from England, Freberg is looking ahead to the biggest shipping months of the year.

“I can’t even imagine how bad the holidays are going to be, because that’s a time where loads of people are shipping stuff overseas,” she said.

“If it doesn’t get solved soon, I can only see it becoming an even bigger issue.”

Isabella Morales contributed reporting.

HONG KONG — China outlined new curbs on exports of rare earths and related technologies on Thursday, extending controls over use of the elements critical for many high-tech and military products ahead of a meeting in about three weeks between President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

The regulations announced by the Ministry of Commerce require foreign companies to get special approval to export items that contain even small traces of rare earths elements sourced from China. These critical minerals are needed in a broad range of products, from jet engines, radar systems and electric vehicles to consumer electronics including laptops and phones.

Beijing will also impose permitting requirements on exports of technologies related to rare earths mining, smelting, recycling and magnet-making, it said.

China accounts for nearly 70% of the world’s rare earths mining. It also controls roughly 90% of global rare earths processing. Access to such materials is a key point of contention in trade talks between Washington and Beijing.

As Trump has raised tariffs on imports of many products from China, Beijing has doubled down on controls on the strategically vital minerals, raising concerns over potential shortages for manufacturers in the U.S. and elsewhere.

It was not immediately clear how China plans to enforce the new policies overseas.

During a cabinet meeting Thursday, Trump said he had yet to be briefed on the new rules but suggested that the U.S. could stop buying Chinese goods. “We import from China massive amounts,” Trump said. “Maybe we’ll have to stop doing that.”

Neha Mukherjee, a rare earths analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, called the new export controls “a strategic move by China that mirror some of Washington’s new chip export rules.

“Most rare earth magnet manufacturers in the U.S., Japan and elsewhere remain heavily dependent on rare earths from China, so these restrictions will force some difficult decisions — especially for any company involved in military uses of rare earths because most of those export licenses are expected to be denied, he said.

“The message is clear: if the U.S. and its allies want supply chain security, they must build independent value chains from mine to magnet,” Mukherjee said.

The new restrictions are to “better safeguard national security” and to stop uses in “sensitive fields such as the military” that stem from rare earths processed or sourced from China or from its related technologies, the Commerce Ministry said.

It said some unnamed “overseas bodies and individuals” had transferred rare earths elements and technologies from China abroad for military or other sensitive uses which caused “significant damage” to its national security.

The new curbs were announced just weeks ahead of an expected meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in South Korea, that begins at the end of this month.

“Rare earths will continue to be a key part of negotiations for Washington and Beijing,” George Chen, a partner at The Asia Group, said in an emailed comment. “Both sides want more stability but there will be still a lot of noises before the two leaders, President Trump and Xi, can make a final deal next year when they meet. Those noises are all negotiation tactics.”

These new restrictions will likely prompt additional government and private investments in developing a mine-to-magnet supply chain outside of China. Mukherjee said that $520 million of investments in the American rare earths industry were announced just in the second quarter with most of that coming from the government.

And there is some progress already being made with American magnet maker Noveon announcing an agreement with Lynas Rare Earths this week to secure a supply of rare earths outside of China from Lynas’ mine in Australia, and MP Materials preparing to begin producing magnets later this year at its new plant in Texas that uses rare earths from the only U.S. mine that it operates in California.

In July, the U.S. Defense Department agreed to invest $400 million in shares of the Las Vegas company, establish a floor for the price of key elements, and ensure that all of the magnets made at a new plant in the first 10 years are purchased.

An MP Materials spokesperson said China’s action “reinforces the need for forward-leaning U.S. industrial policy. Building resilient supply chains is a matter of economic and national security.”

Wade Senti, president of the U.S. permanent magnet company AML, said it’s time to innovate.

“The game of chess that China is playing underscores the importance of developing innovation that changes the game and puts the United States in leading position,” Senti said.

Nazak Nikakhtar, a former Commerce Department undersecretary, said the new restrictions are “a significant development and escalation” by extending controls to related technology and equipment and to sectors like chipmakers. “This should be a wake-up call to the U.S. government that we need to invest in and appropriate more to domestic capabilities. Both are critical to rebuild America’s rare earths industrial base,” she said.

In April, Chinese authorities imposed export curbs on seven rare earth elements shortly after Trump unveiled his steep tariffs on many trading partners including China.

While supplies remain uncertain, China approved some permits for rare earth exports in June and said it was speeding up its approval processes.

Customers of the athletic shoe company On have filed a class action lawsuit alleging that some of the brand’s sneakers squeak embarrassingly loudly when they walk.

The class action suit, filed in the U.S. district court in Portland — where On’s U.S. headquarters is located — on October 9, targets On’s shoes made with ‘CloudTec’ technology. A hallmark of many of the brand’s styles, ‘CloudTec’ is composed of differently shaped holes that cover the external and bottom surfaces of the shoes, according to the lawsuit.

At least 11 of On’s sneaker styles are referenced in the lawsuit, including the Cloud 5 and Cloud 6, CloudMonster, and Cloudrunner, among others.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A representative for On said the company does not comment on ongoing legal matters.

According to the lawsuit, ‘CloudTec’ was created to ‘provide cushioned support when wearers land.’ But according to plaintiffs, the technology ‘rubs together’ when wearers walk or run, ‘causing a noisy and embarrassing squeak with each and every step.’

The lawsuit, however, admits that while the squeaky shoes are ‘seemingly inconsequential,’ the company has allegedly refused to provide refunds to those who are unhappy with their sneakers, leaving customers with ‘no relief after buying almost $200 shoes they can no longer wear without their doing significant DIY modifications to the shoe.’

‘No reasonable consumer would purchase Defendant’s shoes — or pay as much for them as they did — knowing each step creates an audible and noticeable squeak,’ the lawsuit states.

Nurses and those who are on their feet all day ‘bear the brunt of this defect,’ the suit argues, which allegedly causes ‘issues for consumers in their daily lives.’

According to the lawsuit, complaints about the squeaking have been widespread and documented on TikTok and Reddit, where customers share ‘DIY’ remedies for the noisy shoes, including rubbing coconut oil on the soles or sprinkling baby powder inside the sneaker.

The lawsuit alleges the company is aware of its squeaky sneakers, but its warranty does not cover reports of noisy soles as On characterizes them as ‘normal wear and tear,’ and has stated in online comments that ‘squeaking isn’t currently classified as a production defect.’

The lawsuit also alleges that the company can better make its products to avoid squeakiness, but that On has ‘done nothing’ to remedy the issue.

Plaintiffs allege they have suffered an ‘ascertainable loss’ due to fraudulent business practices and a ‘deceptive marketing scheme,’ and are seeking ‘compensatory, statutory, and punitive damages’ as well as refunds on their squeaky sneakers.