Quote Originally Posted by alexd12345 View Post
lololol! its a risk/reward decision. The reward is far greater as a funder! Which is why there are funders at all. I am a broker not an underwriter. Please do not make me responsible for your sub-par underwriting skills. I don't work with any lender whos claw back period exceeds 30 days ( not 30 business days 30 regular old days).We work really hard to get deals submitted and performance on a deal should not be the brokers responsibility( obviously if the broker double funded or took a large PSF that is a different story and deserves to be clawed back) ! In a perfect world there would be no clawbacks for honest,hardworking non-psf charging, non -stacking ISOS!!
Yah I agree that the weight of performance should not really be put on the broker AS LONG AS brokers don't do things to actively ruin performance. Being and acting shady makes a merchant completely second guess what they are getting into and they probably are way more willing to default if the sales rep acts shady. As long as a broker understands to treat merchants right, to not hide fees, to be honest and up front about the entire program, to not promise BS, and to just generally be an all around good sales rep when a merchant needs it then I don't care if a mistake happens and the merchant defaults.

the problem I notice is that a lot of brokers dont treat MCA like a sales job they treat it like a numbers job. Call 300 merchants and hope that they want money. Force the program down their throat and on to the next. Force another program down their throat and on to the next. 30 days has passed, sweet I dont need to worry. Honestly regardless of bad credit, regardless of negative days, regardless of debt and legal issues if someone called me cluelessly shoving MCA down my throat until I'm desperate enough, I would probably be like **** this guy and this program im out too.