[Quickfunder]

Just a heads up to anyone considering using Arcarius.

We had a merchant approved for $85,000 who did everything from A to Z and was ready to be funded: contracts, Decision Logic, COJ, tax-lien payment verification, etc. The deal was killed because Sebastian the undertaker accused our merchant of lying when she said she planned to use the remaining $25K after paying off the tax-lien for re-modeling. The merchant is a 60 year-old Asian woman who's been in business for 25 years. He followed up by emailing her for some extra documentation (which the bank already had) and asking for clarity on use of funds. When the merchant responded, "For re-modeling", he wrote her: "I wish you could have been truthful about that from the beginning."

This guy is out there to be difficult and it raises suspicion of how much Arcarius can either fund or what they do with "dead" deals. For the record, this is probably the 5th decline from them -- and we've funded every one of those elsewhere. You think we'd have learned our lesson already.

[Sachip24]

I had every bad experience with them about a year ago. never sent them anything after that.

[Davincinc]

i have had merchants claim use of funds for vacation and never been declined based on use of funds.... Did the client get funded spontaneously 2 day later??

[Quickfunder]

i have had merchants claim use of funds for vacation and never been declined based on use of funds.... Did the client get funded spontaneously 2 day later??

It's ridiculous and I wouldn't doubt it's what they are trying to do. Also sounds like Sebastian uses 2 names, also goes by Jesse.

[Ktolbert85]

First and foremost, I would like to say that I did enjoy working with this broker. He is generally knowledgeable of the industry, his merchants, and their businesses. He always collected the requested documents in a timely manner and did his best to ensure the process was smooth. As far as this specific situation, things went a bit differently than the expected.
The merchant took $200K from another lender about a month ago, which was meant to be used for taxes. The funds from that advance are gone, however, the merchant’s tax liens remained. It is important to emphasize that the previously mentioned MCA was the merchant’s first. Had we funded, they would have two daily payments. With that information, we provided a second position pre-approval for $85K; the merchant accepted, and we received the requested stipulations.
During the merchant interview, the underwriter was told that the $85K would be to remodel. When asked about the cost of the remodel and expected impact on the restaurant, the merchant claimed that she had no idea. Surely, if there was a plan to remodel the business, the owner would know what that would do to their revenue during the time of remodel, needless to say; the expected cost of said remodeling before seeking funds for the project. After the merchant interview, the merchant emailed the underwriter that they are going to hold off on the renovations as they need to pay their taxes. The underwriter took a very logical approach: the merchant wants to use the funds for renovations, but they do not know the cost in any sense of the word. That’s a red flag to me, just as it was to the underwriter.
At this point the broker would not accept the fact that the deal was declined, nor would he accept the reason. He requested that he speak to the underwriter, which, as a standard we do not allow. The decline was explained, multiple times (the broker called us repeatedly). The only reason he would insist on talking to an underwriter is to attempt to sway his decision; which is a big reason why we keep those lines of communication closed and provide ISO Reps to our ISO’s.
The repeated calling, despite multiple explanations, was just the beginning of this broker’s tirade. Twenty to thirty calls later, the merchant sends an e-mail to us threatening legal action. Legal action for what? The underwriter declining the deal and “trying” to back door it. Not only are we a clean funder, but we take accusations, which border on libel, against our employees seriously. Using such extreme tactics to get an underwriter on the phone may have seemed “inventive”. In truth, it is wildly unprofessional; such brash action only makes the broker look foolish.
None of the aforementioned even touches on the lack of professionalism that came next. Beyond non-professionalism at its finest, the broker did us the favor of exposing who they really are. The broker called a last time, using anti-semitic and racist language with one of our ISO reps. This behavior is deplorable and wholly unacceptable.



P.S. Sorry for the long rant, but I feel it was necessary.


Kermit Tolbert
Business Developer
Arcarius
Direct-(201)484-8548
kermit@arcariusfunding.com

[Ktolbert85]

BTW Jesse Guzman is another one of our relationship mangers and Sebastian Sierra is an underwriter. Just to clarify.

[WestCoastFunding]

Arcarius saved themselves from being defaulted on within a two weeks of the advance (after the merchant got a $50K 3rd and stopped payments).

The broker was saved from the clawback.