Everest stealing deals

**fundnow** · 01-07-2016, 07:58 PM

Is anyone else having this issue with everest stealing deals?

**Michael I** · 01-07-2016, 08:07 PM

Nope . What happened . They are first contract in now but I don't even know if they have an inside sales team

**fundnow** · 01-07-2016, 08:17 PM

I had an offer with contracts in and they claimed they couldn't do the deal. The next day I see that Everest funded the merchant. WILL NEVER SEND THEN ANOTHER FILE

**MCABroker** · 01-07-2016, 08:27 PM

Their in house sales team is Price funding

http://www.pricefunding.com/solution...FQMQaQodRwQCLQ

Look up the address... where TF did my deals go... right there.

**FUNd** · 01-07-2016, 08:29 PM

Any screenshots of emails with proof or are you a disgruntled ex employee? Show us proof and you shall receive sympathy, show it not, and I'm sure admin will be along any minute to delete you.

**anonymous** · 01-07-2016, 09:54 PM

ISOs may be under the impression that's the case as there is no exclusivity on clients @ EBF. But they didn't steal the deal, solid funder, someone else just closed you client on the same deal you had...

**fundnow** · 01-07-2016, 10:09 PM

If they give a buy rate at 1.27 and I upsell it at a 1.37 for 10 points. All they gotta do is back door and pay someone 2 points and sell it at a 1.29. And the merchant will def. take it. And that's what happened

**Everest** · 01-07-2016, 10:25 PM

We would not steal a deal from you @fundnow. We have enough business to chew on and we value our ISO relationships. Call me so we can discuss in more detail.

**Michael I** · 01-07-2016, 11:05 PM

Fund now you got 2 different stories above . Did you have contracts in or not ?

**fundnow** · 01-07-2016, 11:07 PM

@Michael are you the one that gets all the the deals from Everest that are backdoored????

**Zach** · 01-07-2016, 11:43 PM

I have had nothing but positive experiences with Everest. One of my favorite funders.

**isaacdstern** · 01-08-2016, 06:41 AM

There is absolutely no way the management of Everest would ever be involved in actively stealing deals. The owners Tracy and Scott are both great guys and would never be involved in anything like this. With that said a lot of companies have rogue employees that have access to submitted files and my guess is that is how backdooring happens. In this case though there is a 0% chance the management of Everest has anything to do with it

**sigmundpannu** · 01-08-2016, 07:17 AM

I have never had that issue with Everest

**SteveFinServe** · 01-08-2016, 07:19 AM

Isos fear getting back doored? Call me and I'll help you prevent it 517.775.9991

**Michael I** · 01-08-2016, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by fundnow

@Michael are you the one that gets all the the deals from Everest that are backdoored????

You didn't answer my question. You have 2 different stories. And no I do not get any deals from Everest

**AndyYSCISOdept** · 01-08-2016, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by isaacdstern

There is absolutely no way the management of Everest would ever be involved in actively stealing deals. The owners Tracy and Scott are both great guys and would never be involved in anything like this. With that said a lot of companies have rogue employees that have access to submitted files and my guess is that is how backdooring happens. In this case though there is a 0% chance the management of Everest has anything to do with it

100% agree, I CANNOT state how big the difference between another broker beating your offer and the merchant going with them is to Stealing. From what ?I gather, you just got out priced, happens all the time. But to claim theft with Zero evidence is cowardly and wrong, especially when your claims are against one of the most honest and upfront companies out there.

**Funder Mark** · 01-08-2016, 09:22 AM

Everest is widely regarded as one of the most honest companies out there. I cannot believe that your deal was backdoored by them.

**bsmith** · 01-08-2016, 09:59 AM

I've never had an issue with Everest, their pricing and speed right now is on point. However, I will say that hearing Funders blame these situations on "rogue employees", while true most of the time I am sure, is a weak response. Anytime you hire someone to work for you, you are choosing another person to represent your company. Not only are your employees your responsibility, but their actions, and inactions, can and will affect the company's image. Obviously this is a situation that funders have had difficulty resolving/preventing but, at the end of the day, any issues arising from the action or inaction of any employee is the responsibility of the employer and the employers responsibility alone.

jotucker1983 · 01-08-2016, 10:06 AM

I've heard great things about Everest as well. So correct me if I'm wrong, but in this situation the deal was closed by another broker who offered a lower price to the merchant? Does Everest have any deal exclusivity rules in place? If so, for how long? If not, then I'm wondering why not?

**FUNd** · 01-08-2016, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by jotucker1983

I've heard great things about Everest as well. So correct me if I'm wrong, but in this situation the deal was closed by another broker who offered a lower price to the merchant? Does Everest have any deal exclusivity rules in place? If so, for how long? If not, then I'm wondering why not?

Many lenders operate in much the same way. First to the table with contracts wins. 20 ISOs can have an approval, and the one who gets stips and contracts in, wins. I agree with this practice. It's not fair for the competing ISO or the merchant, to have another ISO with an approval possess exclusive rights to a deal. What if the merchant doesn't want to do biz with the ISO for some reason? What if the approval has fallen through the cracks and isn't even being worked on? What if the rep is trying to turn screws at 20 points when another rep is willing to settle for 5?

**Michael Jagiello BGF** · 01-08-2016, 10:28 AM

I've never had any issues with Everest. It's like everyone's been saying, a broker took a lower commission to sell the same deal and the merchant went for it. The odds of management being involved in stealing deals are non existent.

jotucker1983 · 01-08-2016, 10:38 AM

FUNd,

You bring up some good points, however, I'm going to have to disagree with the non-exclusivity rule due to the following:

1.) It creates total chaos in the marketplace. So Broker A faxes back the signed agreement with a 5 point mark-up at 10:30 a.m., and Broker B faxes back a signed agreement with a 9 point mark-up at 10:45 a.m., the merchant accepted both offers, which one do you go with? The one that came in at 10:30 a.m.? But the merchant accepted the higher revenue producing deal from Broker B, why not go with that one? If Broker A and Broker B are down the street from each other, this could cause all sorts of problems including physical altercations.

2.) A deal exclusivity rule that lasts up to two weeks is fair game in my opinion, but I think a 5 day rule across the board is the best idea. The rule should be based upon the merchant moving forward through the process and if it comes to a point to where the merchant has stopped moving, with 5 days having passed, then if another Broker submits said merchant then they can take over rights of the deal. 5 days gives the Broker time to work the deal.

3.) If a merchant doesn't "like" the Broker they are working with, the ISO/Broker Support Channel of the Funder can always pitch in to help close the deal. Some Funders prefer brokers to just submit a deal and they will have their inside team handle negotiation, pricing and closing. I would rather a Funder do that to combat this situation, rather than not having a deal exclusivity.

I would personally never do business with any Funder that doesn't protect my deal submissions for at least 5 days. To me (and this is just my opinion) that is bad business.

**AndyYSCISOdept** · 01-08-2016, 10:41 AM

John you make some really good points. I too agree that not having a minimum of 5 days protection as a broker would cause absolute chaos. And you see it happen all the time where a Funder is accused of "stealing" files because a brokers file was funded by a different broker due to there being no exclusivity period.

**chad_Everest** · 01-08-2016, 11:48 AM

@fundnow,

I am sorry that you feel that way.
Give our ISO Support Line a call, ask to speak with Lewis.

Let's make sure everything is taken care of, we would hate to lose your business.

ISO Support:
888 342 5709
iso.support@ev-bf.com

**Valentine** · 01-08-2016, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by jotucker1983

FUNd,

You bring up some good points, however, I'm going to have to disagree with the non-exclusivity rule due to the following:

1.) It creates total chaos in the marketplace. So Broker A faxes back the signed agreement with a 5 point mark-up at 10:30 a.m., and Broker B faxes back a signed agreement with a 9 point mark-up at 10:45 a.m., the merchant accepted both offers, which one do you go with? The one that came in at 10:30 a.m.? But the merchant accepted the higher revenue producing deal from Broker B, why not go with that one? If Broker A and Broker B are down the street from each other, this could cause all sorts of problems including physical altercations.

2.) A deal exclusivity rule that lasts up to two weeks is fair game in my opinion, but I think a 5 day rule across the board is the best idea. The rule should be based upon the merchant moving forward through the process and if it comes to a point to where the merchant has stopped moving, with 5 days having passed, then if another Broker submits said merchant then they can take over rights of the deal. 5 days gives the Broker time to work the deal.

3.) If a merchant doesn't "like" the Broker they are working with, the ISO/Broker Support Channel of the Funder can always pitch in to help close the deal. Some Funders prefer brokers to just submit a deal and they will have their inside team handle negotiation, pricing and closing. I would rather a Funder do that to combat this situation, rather than not having a deal exclusivity.

I would personally never do business with any Funder that doesn't protect my deal submissions for at least 5 days. To me (and this is just my opinion) that is bad business.

Not having that grace creates the thievery that everyone know's exist...... anyone with access to the file can re route to another company or do any of a number of bad things. No company is immune and it does not mean the higher ups are in on it.
Its happening as we speak.

Thread Tools

Display