[Quickfunder]

As some of you may have seen in the last couple of weeks, I had posted regarding a $300,000 deal that was ready to be funded when the lender pulled the plug last-second without explanation. Both we and the merchant were told funding would be taking place that day.

The lender had initially informed us our commission would be capped and, when we confronted them, they retracted that requirement. (Although the underwriter later said that requirement was never communicated - even though it's in emails.) We advised that we'd take the deal to another lender, so the lender made the retraction.

The lender then killed the deal for an unsubstantiated reason re: late payments by the applicant to a trade partner. Trade Partner later told us the borrower had never been late. I petitioned many of the executives via email and was later notified final UW would commence. UW then completed the merchant interview and told us the deal was being funded. They called us later that day to tell us they were backing out and would not even be willing to make any revisions whatsoever to the approval to make them comfortable. Despite the deal looking perfect.

We did some research, made some calls. Merchant was solicited by this lender's back office and another funding party. The merchant never gave out his info to anybody else but was solicited via his cellphone #. Our subsequent approvals for this merchant were essentially sabotaged and undermined by new offers from this lender.

We are considering serious legal action but I wanted to see if this is something any of you had been through before. Obviously it is - seeing the complaints that pop up on any which funder - but when such a high commission is at stake and there is actual cooperation from various sides giving us the information - how would you pursue?

Some of the older dogs in the community have advised we let it go. That won't be happening.

[channin19]

The new offer was from the same lender?

[MCNetwork]

What do you mean the "merchant was solicited by this lender's back office"? If you have proof that this employee of Lender A introduced the merchant to Lender B, then you'll have a case. Otherwise, it's all theory and conjecture.

[Sean Cash]

Is this lender big? It seems weird that they are so willing to permanently lose your future business. Have you done many deals with them in the past?

[Quickfunder]

What do you mean the "merchant was solicited by this lender's back office"? If you have proof that this employee of Lender A introduced the merchant to Lender B, then you'll have a case. Otherwise, it's all theory and conjecture.

We have proof. The Sales Office that contacted the merchant is the internal Sales Office of the lender. The actual contract was made by a 2nd lender... maybe syndicating with the first lender.

[Quickfunder]

Is this lender big? It seems weird that they are so willing to permanently lose your future business. Have you done many deals with them in the past?

Yes. Big lender with horrible reputation for doing this to ISO's. We've submitted a lot of deals but very few have closed.

[Quickfunder]

The new offer was from the same lender?

2nd lender who had OUR APPLICATION when they called the merchant. 2nd Lender also knew the underwriter at the 1st Lender.

I can't discuss all the details but I'll just say MCA is not the smartest group of ppl and there is lots of room for mistakes and oversight on things like this.

You get an overzealous Acct Manager at one of these places and next thing you're embroiled in some BS scandal with some horrible implications on the lender. Nice job.

[Chambo]

As some of you may have seen in the last couple of weeks, I had posted regarding a $300,000 deal that was ready to be funded when the lender pulled the plug last-second without explanation. Both we and the merchant were told funding would be taking place that day.

The lender had initially informed us our commission would be capped and, when we confronted them, they retracted that requirement. (Although the underwriter later said that requirement was never communicated - even though it's in emails.) We advised that we'd take the deal to another lender, so the lender made the retraction.

The lender then killed the deal for an unsubstantiated reason re: late payments by the applicant to a trade partner. Trade Partner later told us the borrower had never been late. I petitioned many of the executives via email and was later notified final UW would commence. UW then completed the merchant interview and told us the deal was being funded. They called us later that day to tell us they were backing out and would not even be willing to make any revisions whatsoever to the approval to make them comfortable. Despite the deal looking perfect.

We did some research, made some calls. Merchant was solicited by this lender's back office and another funding party. The merchant never gave out his info to anybody else but was solicited via his cellphone #. Our subsequent approvals for this merchant were essentially sabotaged and undermined by new offers from this lender.

We are considering serious legal action but I wanted to see if this is something any of you had been through before. Obviously it is - seeing the complaints that pop up on any which funder - but when such a high commission is at stake and there is actual cooperation from various sides giving us the information - how would you pursue?

Some of the older dogs in the community have advised we let it go. That won't be happening.

Seems like every post you make is about some fund out there screwing you out of commissions, or going behind you.

You either have some of the worst luck in the world....or maybe it is time to look in the mirror and stop pointing fingers.

[Quickfunder]

Seems like every post you make is about some fund out there screwing you out of commissions, or going behind you.

You either have some of the worst luck in the world....or maybe it is time to look in the mirror and stop pointing fingers.

If you bothered to read you'd see I am actually referencing the same thread.

You work for Yellowstone which is infamous for trying to screw over ISO's. I'll look in the mirror when you stop throwing rocks in a glass house.

[LoanShark714]

If you bothered to read you'd see I am actually referencing the same thread.

You work for Yellowstone which is infamous for trying to screw over ISO's. I'll look in the mirror when you stop throwing rocks in a glass house.

So Yellow Stone did this your saying?

[Zach]

Who are you referring to?

[isaacdstern]

Quickfunder-we actively work with 125 isos and do our absolute best to keep them happy. Last month alone we paid isos $1.125 million in commissions. So instead on lobbing baseless accusations out there...maybe you should get your facts in order.

[JSL23]

That's a rough break man. I would only pursue legal action if I was 110% positive and had real proof, not circumstantial. You don't want to burn bridges, you know?

I am surprised though, I cant see one of the larger Lenders doing something like that; granted, they can be shady with their renewal policies but to outright steal a deal?! Wow, that's insane. I can only see some fly-by-night operation declining it and then funding it through someone else, but someone like OnDeck, MCC, BFS, CAN, etc. I'd be shocked if they ever did that....although I guess we can rule them out because they don't do anything over $250,000... When you say "their Sales office called" what do you mean by that? Do they have separate offices for Operations and one for Sales?

[AliCat]

You started your post by asking for recommendations. I would say you should stop beating around the bush say who it is so they can address it.

[Quickfunder]

Quickfunder-we actively work with 125 isos and do our absolute best to keep them happy. Last month alone we paid isos $1.125 million in commissions. So instead on lobbing baseless accusations out there...maybe you should get your facts in order.

Respectfully, Isaac - they're not baseless and I've addressed the complaints in this forum as have others. Everyone knows I'm not the only one to throw YS out there. I'm not saying it's official policy - but there are guys over there who try and getting away with deals that simply aren't theirs.

[Quickfunder]

That's a rough break man. I would only pursue legal action if I was 110% positive and had real proof, not circumstantial. You don't want to burn bridges, you know?

I am surprised though, I cant see one of the larger Lenders doing something like that; granted, they can be shady with their renewal policies but to outright steal a deal?! Wow, that's insane. I can only see some fly-by-night operation declining it and then funding it through someone else, but someone like OnDeck, MCC, BFS, CAN, etc. I'd be shocked if they ever did that....although I guess we can rule them out because they don't do anything over $250,000... When you say "their Sales office called" what do you mean by that? Do they have separate offices for Operations and one for Sales?

I agree. But everyone has to understand this is not necessarily a policy of any of those lenders as much as someone trying to get away with something. It doesn't take much for someone at these places to send the file over to the Sales Office and suggest sending it out to whom ever. Given the reputation, though, you have to question the actual "unspoken" policy. One of the major lenders openly and admittedly will help you subvert another party, not saying who at this point but have dealt w/ them on multiple occasions.

[Quickfunder]

You started your post by asking for recommendations. I would say you should stop beating around the bush say who it is so they can address it.

I would usually agree but instead of naming them I am going to pursue it the right way. Already started a hornet's nest there. Don't really care about naming them publicly until we resolve what happened. Or don't resolve. We'll see.

[isaacdstern]

Quickfunder- here is my cell number, call me if you would like to discuss any of yellowstones policies or procedures. 917-743-8369

[isaacdstern]

And if there are reps circumventing my rules they will be dealt with harshly

[Jared_Weitz]

I would usually agree but instead of naming them I am going to pursue it the right way. Already started a hornet's nest there. Don't really care about naming them publicly until we resolve what happened. Or don't resolve. We'll see.

We've all dealt with this unfortunately, and with many offices out there on the funding side. That is why I personally don't just sign any ISO Agreement, mine are heavily negotiated for this reason (among others). I would 110% pursue this legally IF you have read the agreement and there is in fact a clear breach. If there is any grey area and this is a big lender then you'll end up wasting money. Just my 2 cents. Also if you need a lawyer with some teeth PM me. The law firm I use has some real sharks.

[funding pro]

I'm not 100% certain I understand what you are saying took place here, but in my many years of experience doing this, I have been in what I thought was a similar position. At times I lined all the pieces up making perfect sense of it but in the end was being misled by someone (most of the time the merchant). Often the time and energy spent chasing this would be better suited getting your deal done elsewhere. The thing that really doesnt make sense, especially for the big funders, is that no matter how important you may think that deal is (and it probably is important to you and any sales rep in that position) it just isnt worth it for them to do something like this.

[MCNetwork]

I agree. I think the lost commission (and it's quite significant!) is definitely making you see red and leap to conclusions.

[channin19]

A merchant being misleading? Never.

[Quickfunder]

We've all dealt with this unfortunately, and with many offices out there on the funding side. That is why I personally don't just sign any ISO Agreement, mine are heavily negotiated for this reason (among others). I would 110% pursue this legally IF you have read the agreement and there is in fact a clear breach. If there is any grey area and this is a big lender then you'll end up wasting money. Just my 2 cents. Also if you need a lawyer with some teeth PM me. The law firm I use has some real sharks.

Thanks, Jared. For some reason, some on this forum seem to think there's no level of deception in the MCA world. The industry is based on taking dumb risks and yet we have members here disputing that. I'll PM you on the ISO Agreements and referral.

[Quickfunder]

I was hoping for suggestions from ISO's who had previous experiences but these other replies aren't unexpected. This one was a pretty obvious reveal for us luckily. A 2nd Lender called us regarding our approval and meant to call the 1st lender. Why did they call us? Because they were looking at our application. You query that against who ran credit other than your 1st lender and do some double-checking with people on both sides and there you go. Not to mention the merchant doesn't even know what a Cash Advance is at this point and wouldn't blindly double submit - let alone admitting that he was getting unauthorized phone calls citing our approval to his cellphone.

I appreciate the questioning and obviously someone has to back up what they say. But it's laughable to see some would say a lender would never do this. Let me put it this way: this particular Lender/Sales Office will openly help you steal some deal and process an application that is not yours. Some of you know who and what I am talking about.