Results 51 to 58 of 58
-
09-11-2017, 11:34 AM #51
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 1,780
Agreed. If no stacking took place, then the man should get his commission.
-
09-11-2017, 12:12 PM #52
- Join Date
- Oct 2013
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 1,203
I have no problem with Max in fact Michael and I worked close together for a few years, however it seems odd to me that rather than go to the source people feel their best course of action is to blast a funding company on DF. And furthermore they offer no proof and then throw other funders under the bus that have nothing to do with the original grievance? Is this middle school?
I mean come on now...we're all working towards the same goal yet we sit and bash each other when no true problem really exists. If said problem or grievance did truly exist then offer up some hard evidence facts or anything other than hearsay....If you don't then you're blowing wind and slandering a company who has nothing to actually refute.
In summation........ YOURE WASTING YOUR BREATH AND OUR TIME
-
09-11-2017, 12:49 PM #53
I can honestly say that Daily Funder has become a weapon to ISO's to come on and bash the funder for bad press, when in fact your actions put you in this position. !!! I have been in this mca game a long time and MAX ADVANCE is truly a pioneer in the game. Now lets be realistic, we have seen many funders come and go, but to stay in this industry for this long, takes perseverance and knowledge. Most importantly damn good underwriting!!!!!
From the generals who put me in the business, none of them have anything to say bad about Max Advance or Michael P.
What do you really gain by bringing all of this drama on DF? (will this be your s.o.p moving forward with funders)
Try another approach and maybe you will find better results
Last edited by CraaaCraaa Radio; 09-11-2017 at 02:02 PM.
Disclaimer
This message brought to you by:
CraaaCraaa Radio ®
http://debanked.com/merchant-cash-ad...nce-directory/
World of MCA
E.V.P Business Development
___________________________
"Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't lose."
-
09-11-2017, 01:06 PM #54
- Join Date
- Oct 2013
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 1,203
Amen!
-
09-11-2017, 01:31 PM #55
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Posts
- 4,318
Andy, did you read the thread? Its quite clear he WENT TO THE SOURCE ALREADY. Now what?
Max Advance basically admitted this is the case on this very thread.
If the ISO isn't being paid on a renewal, there is a problem.
You may want to look up the definition of "hearsay". When a person is telling their story in first person, its not "hearsay".
How are they wasting their time? Better yet, how are they wasting YOUR time? Was your response involuntary? All types of logic fails over here.
In summation, Max Advance says they withheld the commission because the ISO threatened to stack them. It is Max Advance that needs to provide the "hard evidence" or else pay-up.
-
09-11-2017, 06:42 PM #56Karen37aGuest
Everyone keeps saying "stacking"...how much was the supposed "stack"? Was it enough to pay off the first advance and still have money left over?
If it was you were not stacking ? The merchant could have said he was paying off the first advance...you do not have to have a third party agreement to pay off an advance.So unless he did it, like they said..it didnt happen
That will most likely not be the argument they will make.
This is Tortious interference in a contract and breach of contract ( the iso agreement)
This is going to come down to the Iso agreement and the language of it and if it has a clause or passage on "tortuous interference" and a remedy for breaches in the contractual agreement between the Funder and Iso .
Laws depend on the state you are in , and vary if you are going to court or arbitration.
Intent comes into play( which you showed for whatever reason )but then "actual interference" and damages associated for the interference usually have to be established to not pay the commission.
If you prove they intentionally held back the commission , and they do not meet the interference test ....you can win treble damages( if you sue for them) plus the cost of attys fees.
** you can/will also lose the balance of your renewals when you are terminated as an Iso /Broker( if there are any.)..this is how Isos/Brokers get trapped. Brokers also enter into tortuous interference agreements as well to stop them from stacking behind ISO's backs or becoming a mole and causing an inadvertent breach from iso to a funder.
There is also a way to slap someone back so hard for suing you that if you are not 100% right, you will wish you didn't do it..... all this has to be worth it $$$ or sometimes you take it on the chin and live to fight another day.
( not legal advice)Last edited by Karen37a; 09-12-2017 at 03:29 PM.
-
09-11-2017, 06:59 PM #57
- Join Date
- Dec 2016
- Location
- Brooklyn N.Y.
- Posts
- 428
Sometimes a healthy stack can help a funder get paid, especially when the first position is half way through.. Just another way to look at it.
-
09-11-2017, 07:01 PM #58Karen37aGuest
Similar Threads
-
Is stacking an ACH advance on a split-funding advance okay?
By Sean Cash in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 94Last Post: 12-18-2017, 09:50 PM -
Looking for a Business Cash advance Direct lender for Cash advance consolidation
By Powerfunder in forum Merchant Cash AdvanceReplies: 6Last Post: 10-03-2015, 03:57 PM