[fdecelle]

So, I need to ask a very simple question about this blog. Is one of the purposes of this blog to share feedback that I as an ISO have had with a lender to be useful to this community so other ISOs can decide weather they want to work with them or not?

I feel like that is definitely what this whole community is about - not to bash anyone because of personal differences. Business is business right?

I want to see what type of feedback I get here before I share a whole new correspondence with a lender/merchant the lender shouldn’t have been reaching out to in the first place.

This will probably get ugly unfortunately, but just know that is not my intention. Just want my peers/colleagues to know what to lookout for.

[stackcity_4208]

So, I need to ask a very simple question about this blog. Is one of the purposes of this blog to share feedback that I as an ISO have had with a lender to be useful to this community so other ISOs can decide weather they want to work with them or not?

I feel like that is definitely what this whole community is about - not to bash anyone because of personal differences. Business is business right?

I want to see what type of feedback I get here before I share a whole new correspondence with a lender/merchant the lender shouldn’t have been reaching out to in the first place.

This will probably get ugly unfortunately, but just know that is not my intention. Just want my peers/colleagues to know what to lookout for.

well on that note is is up to you

[abfunders]

Call them CLIENT and FUNDER X, see if one of us here can come up with a reason why the lender wasn't a dirt-bag and perhaps a way for you to look at the situation differently.

Also, don't post any judgments. Just facts. Not worth getting yourself into trouble when it could be a big misunderstanding, and "CLIENT" could be lying to you to save face.

I just had a non-MCA new underwriter that I'm trying to help re-fi the advances refer to a debt settlement place to a client! The underwriter obviously doesn't understand anything about the industry, and is NEW, and also doesn't understand the broker-client relationship. My rep (who will remain nameless and I have a good relationship with) and his CEO were upset, the UW overstepped her bounds and was reprimanded.

Am I supposed to ruin my relationship because of a stupid underling not knowing what they were doing? Yes, the company is responsible, but they are dealing with it.

[Michael I]

Call them CLIENT and FUNDER X, see if one of us here can come up with a reason why the lender wasn't a dirt-bag and perhaps a way for you to look at the situation differently.

Also, don't post any judgments. Just facts. Not worth getting yourself into trouble when it could be a big misunderstanding, and "CLIENT" could be lying to you to save face.

I just had a non-MCA new underwriter that I'm trying to help re-fi the advances refer to a debt settlement place to a client! The underwriter obviously doesn't understand anything about the industry, and is NEW, and also doesn't understand the broker-client relationship. My rep (who will remain nameless and I have a good relationship with) and his CEO were upset, the UW overstepped her bounds and was reprimanded.

Am I supposed to ruin my relationship because of a stupid underling not knowing what they were doing? Yes, the company is responsible, but they are dealing with it.

agreed

[JohnT.]

So, I need to ask a very simple question about this blog. Is one of the purposes of this blog to share feedback that I as an ISO have had with a lender to be useful to this community so other ISOs can decide weather they want to work with them or not?

I feel like that is definitely what this whole community is about - not to bash anyone because of personal differences. Business is business right?

I want to see what type of feedback I get here before I share a whole new correspondence with a lender/merchant the lender shouldn’t have been reaching out to in the first place.

This will probably get ugly unfortunately, but just know that is not my intention. Just want my peers/colleagues to know what to lookout for.

Interested to see your scenario specifically regarding communication between merchant & funder and why the funder shouldn't have been in contact. Thats usually a touchy situation in this space especially regarding renewals.

[VeganFunder]

I'm still confused about the purpose of this forum.

Is it "Daily Funder" because we fund deals and debit daily
Is "Daily Funder" ironic because the only people who post daily are ISO's?

Onward...

ABFunder is right-- very often your own views of these situations can be clouded. Best bet is to put the scenario out there and leave names out of it.

[fdecelle]

Call them CLIENT and FUNDER X, see if one of us here can come up with a reason why the lender wasn't a dirt-bag and perhaps a way for you to look at the situation differently.

Also, don't post any judgments. Just facts. Not worth getting yourself into trouble when it could be a big misunderstanding, and "CLIENT" could be lying to you to save face.

I just had a non-MCA new underwriter that I'm trying to help re-fi the advances refer to a debt settlement place to a client! The underwriter obviously doesn't understand anything about the industry, and is NEW, and also doesn't understand the broker-client relationship. My rep (who will remain nameless and I have a good relationship with) and his CEO were upset, the UW overstepped her bounds and was reprimanded.

Am I supposed to ruin my relationship because of a stupid underling not knowing what they were doing? Yes, the company is responsible, but they are dealing with it.

The guy is a dirtbag period. There’s no way around it. There’s never an excuse as to why a lender would tell a merchant what commission the ISO is making right? I mean come on.

[Michael I]

The guy is a dirtbag period. There’s no way around it. There’s never an excuse as to why a lender would tell a merchant what commission the ISO is making right? I mean come on.

in the last 10 years i never had it happen to me beside for qs which is on contract. In the last 2 weeks i had it happen to me 3 times by 3 different lenders

[Kevin Henry-Seacoast]

The guy is a dirtbag period. There’s no way around it. There’s never an excuse as to why a lender would tell a merchant what commission the ISO is making right? I mean come on.

Francis,

A lender would have to disclose the information if asked for a break-down of cost of capital. It happens and you may see more requests for the information.

KH

[abfunders]

The guy is a dirtbag period. There’s no way around it. There’s never an excuse as to why a lender would tell a merchant what commission the ISO is making right? I mean come on.

In a "normal" (read: regulated) broker-client relationship, the fees are all very explicit and transparent. There are fee agreements in place before the transaction. Nobody hides anything. Instead, we live in a world with baked-in "up sells," which means we're more or less selling the product like a hamburger.

"NO" excuse? Transparency is an excuse. However, if the funder wants your business again, that's a pretty bad excuse, since your goal as the broker in this scenario is to... well, sell the loan as-is.

[fdecelle]

Francis,

A lender would have to disclose the information if asked for a break-down of cost of capital. It happens and you may see more requests for the information.

KH

The merchant didn’t ask - he just volunteered it.

[fdecelle]

in the last 10 years i never had it happen to me beside for qs which is on contract. In the last 2 weeks i had it happen to me 3 times by 3 different lenders

Yeah it has never happened to me either besides QS - but this last one was unexpected from a different lender.

[fdecelle]

What about when a lender show a merchant screenshots of an email between the lender and I? Screenshots that were an argument I was having with the lender.

[Kevin Henry-Seacoast]

Francis,

I am not sure what happened between you and the lender or as to why he offered the information.
I know that it is very typical for an institution to request or provide a sources and uses table on transactions that will fully disclose the sources of capital and uses up to and including payments to advisers, broker, attorneys fees, etc. It is common practice.

KH

[Michael I]

What about when a lender show a merchant screenshots of an email between the lender and I? Screenshots that were an argument I was having with the lender.

that is inexcusable

[abfunders]

Agreed with Michael. Disclosing private communications? Seriously? If you're really serious about your "loss of business," speak to the management at the firm.
If that doesn't go far enough, and it's a big enough loss, consult a lawyer. However, it might be difficult to prove that the deal was lost because of disclosure of just the emails, since they can claim it was because of your profit margin.

[fdecelle]

Agreed with Michael. Disclosing private communications? Seriously? If you're really serious about your "loss of business," speak to the management at the firm.
If that doesn't go far enough, and it's a big enough loss, consult a lawyer. However, it might be difficult to prove that the deal was lost because of disclosure of just the emails, since they can claim it was because of your profit margin.

The merchant would be willing to testify as to why he didn’t go through with the deal - the lender scared him off and he’s still scared that he has a previous position with them at this point. He noted erratic behavior from the lender specifically.

[WestCoastFunding]

The merchant would be willing to testify as to why he didn’t go through with the deal - the lender scared him off and he’s still scared that he has a previous position with them at this point. He noted erratic behavior from the lender specifically.

What state is this funder in?

[Sachip24]

What about when a lender show a merchant screenshots of an email between the lender and I? Screenshots that were an argument I was having with the lender.

ohh hell nah this is wayyyyyyyyy out of pocket

[abfunders]

I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, but my Talmud head makes me think that that won't fly very far. Jury won't like the 12 points you were getting, defense attorney might claim that the client is erratic and untrustworthy for being willing to accept a "loan" for a 1.499 factor rate (200% APR!) with 5% of fees. Maybe you are rebating him a portion, there's no way to know.

Eye witnesses are the most unreliable sources of information.
The burden of proof appears to be on your side to somehow prove that the lender was the only one at fault, and your fees weren't at fault. And your intentionally hiding them behind the "sell rate" wasn't at all coloring the client's decision-making process.

[Michael I]

well there was a "lender" the other day who posted her email on this forum , my guess that is who it is .

[fdecelle]

What state is this funder in?

New York according to my attorney who has been doing a little research as of the last couple days to make sure I am protected - the lender has threatened to take legal action against me lol - the whole thing just doesn't make any sense at all - totally erratic behavior.

[fdecelle]

I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one on TV, but my Talmud head makes me think that that won't fly very far. Jury won't like the 12 points you were getting, defense attorney might claim that the client is erratic and untrustworthy for being willing to accept a "loan" for a 1.499 factor rate (200% APR!) with 5% of fees. Maybe you are rebating him a portion, there's no way to know.

Eye witnesses are the most unreliable sources of information.
The burden of proof appears to be on your side to somehow prove that the lender was the only one at fault, and your fees weren't at fault. And your intentionally hiding them behind the "sell rate" wasn't at all coloring the client's decision-making process.

I'm not worried the client knowing how much money I made or would have made - he doesn't give a **** - he knows we all need to make a living. The reason the deal died had nothing to do with that - I just brought that up because I know that is out of the ordinary. But the fact that the lender was sending the merchant screenshots of email exchanges between him and I is totally wrong. I just want everyone to be careful here.

[WhoisKingsley]

Damn did I pick a good day to hop on... the purpose of this "blog" "forum" of the dailyfunder.... had many different purposes and values over the years lmao... depending on who was "present"

[ryan $]

Call them CLIENT and FUNDER X, see if one of us here can come up with a reason why the lender wasn't a dirt-bag and perhaps a way for you to look at the situation differently.

Also, don't post any judgments. Just facts. Not worth getting yourself into trouble when it could be a big misunderstanding, and "CLIENT" could be lying to you to save face.

I just had a non-MCA new underwriter that I'm trying to help re-fi the advances refer to a debt settlement place to a client! The underwriter obviously doesn't understand anything about the industry, and is NEW, and also doesn't understand the broker-client relationship. My rep (who will remain nameless and I have a good relationship with) and his CEO were upset, the UW overstepped her bounds and was reprimanded.

Am I supposed to ruin my relationship because of a stupid underling not knowing what they were doing? Yes, the company is responsible, but they are dealing with it.

She should of been fired.