Decision One Debt Relief, MCA Helpline Not Related, Company Says
February 7, 2018Everest Business Funding has voluntarily withdrawn claims against one of three named defendants in a debt settlement tort lawsuit in Florida, court records show. The case against Decision One Debt Relief was withdrawn without prejudice on February 2nd.
That leaves MCA Helpline, LLC and Todd Fisch individually as the remaining named defendants.
Everest had originally alleged that Fisch was the individual behind both MCA Helpline and Decision One Debt Relief. Decision One Debt Relief, however, told AltFinanceDaily that the two companies had no ties to each other. “Decision One has no relation with Todd Fisch or MCA Helpline,” Decision One’s president wrote as part of an emailed statement about the dismissal.
Everest is still seeking damages for the remaining Defendants’ tortious interference with at least a dozen of its merchant contracts.
‘Debt Relief’ Company is Allegedly Robo-dialing Out Of Control
July 18, 2017
A lawsuit brought by famous serial TCPA plaintiff Craig Cunningham against defendants who allegedly robo-dial with offers for small business debt relief services, has a new twist, according to recent court records. That is that the defendants allegedly continue to robo-dial Cunningham despite having been served with the suit from him. All told, Cunningham says he has received at least 105 automated calls for the defendants’ business debt relief services despite the fact that he doesn’t even own a business.
Cunningham filed an amended complaint that also added new defendants alongside Mark D. Guidubaldi, Corporate Bailout and Protection Legal Group. They include Sanford J. Feder and Cashflow Care, LLC.
Cunningham was one of several TCPA litigants referenced in a featured story AltFinanceDaily published about TCPA lawsuits last October.
Protection Legal Group, meanwhile, was cited in another brief where a small business owner sued them for allegedly not providing the debt relief services promised. According to the docket, Protection Legal Group has yet to file an answer to it.
Debt relief and debt settlement services have become a booming business as of late, but it’s a risky endeavor. Earlier this year, four individuals were arrested when they did not actually attempt to negotiate the MCAs or business loans they were paid to assist with. One of those arrested is still in prison awaiting trial. He is facing a maximum of 30 years.
‘Debt Collection Terrorist’ Sues Protection Legal Group and Corporate Bailout
May 13, 2017
A new crop of supposed debt relief companies are beginning to take fire from all sides. In this latest case, Mark D. Giubaldi & Associates, LLC DBA Protection Legal Group and Corporate Bailout LLC, have once again found themselves on the receiving end of a complaint. On Wednesday, May 10th, Craig Cunningham, a once self-proclaimed debt collection terrorist and famous TCPA litigant, filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas to seek out more than $1 million in damages for alleged unsolicited robocalls to his cell phone.
Cunningham, who goes by the screen name Codename47 on the fatwallet.com forum, previously authored a post titled, “TCPA enforcement for fun and for profit up to 3k per call” and is well known in the TCPA plaintiff community. In the complaint against Protection Legal Group and Corporate Bailout, he claims that they called him more than 50 times to ask about supposed “merchant cash advance loans” he had outstanding. The deeply troubling problem with that, according to the complaint, is that Cunningham doesn’t have any such thing.
When the calls connected to an agent, the Plaintiff was told that he was called by the defendants and told that according to UCC filings, they had noticed the Plaintiff had several merchant cash advance loans out. In reality, there are no UCC filings, and the Plaintiff has no merchant cash advance loans outstanding. In every call, the Plaintiff noticed a delay between answering the phone and the call connecting with a live person, which is characteristic of an automated telephone dialing system.
These are just some of many harassing calls the Plaintiff has received and as Defendants are just content to knowingly call what could be wrong numbers, or uninterested individuals and are blanketing the nation with these unsolicited calls.
[…]
Additionally, in the above referenced telephone calls, Defendants and their agents falsely claimed to have information regarding alleged UCC filings of Plaintiff, which don’t exist and were never made.
These calls were knowingly and willfully placed and the Defendants had or should have ascertained they were calling the wrong person.
Additional lawsuits currently pending against Protection Legal Group allege that the company is practicing law without a license in New York and interfering with merchant cash advance contracts.
Craig Cunningham v. Mark D. Guidubaldi & Associates LLC DBA Protection Legal Group, and Corporate Bailout LLC was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas under case # 3:17-cv-01238-L.
Enrolling a Merchant’s “Debt” May Be Harmful… to the Merchant
March 29, 2017
How would you like to make $12,000 on a single referral?, a flyer directed at business finance brokers asks. This ad wasn’t offering a commission for brokering a loan or advance, but rather for enrolling a merchant’s debt into the company’s restructuring program. Debt restructuring, negotiation, or settlement is a booming cottage industry these days. Some of these debt restructuring companies promise ISOs that they will be completely discreet with referrals. Others offer them commission bonuses for achieving certain enrollment targets. It’s a way to monetize declined deals, they typically say.
For merchants, the allure of a restructuring company’s help might just be payment terms tied to their monthly budget. That’s allegedly what one NJ firm’s agreement says, in fact. “I hereby authorize [the company] to negotiate my unaffordable business debts and to enter into affordable repayment terms on my behalf based on my monthly budget,” reads a document submitted in a New York Supreme Court case involving Creditors Relief. And based on the marketing materials AltFinanceDaily has reviewed from several similar companies, their definition of debt is so broad that it can even include things that aren’t debt, like merchant cash advances, for example.
Even if the restructuring company held a critical view of MCAs and believed them to be loans, treating them as such for the purpose of negotiation might actually cause harm to their customers. That’s because a well-formed MCA contract already offers payment adjustments at regular intervals to appropriately match a merchant’s sales activity. Depending on what the language says, a merchant might just have to call their funder and ask them to reduce the debits to reflect their current sales activity. And yes this goes for ACH-only deals. Even ones that could appear to have fixed payments do not actually have fixed payments. This is basically how all MCAs work by the way, so if you are a broker or funder and this all sounds foreign to you, you need to take this course ASAP.
The point is this: a merchant need not pay a fee to an outside company to restructure anything when sales drop because a free remedy already likely exists and is a key benefit to MCAs in the first place. And yes, I’m talking about MCAs with daily ACH debits. If you’re confused by this, you need to take this course ASAP.
The best advice a restructuring firm can give a merchant struggling with an MCA due to slow sales is to tell them to look for a reconciliation clause in their contract that explains how to get the payments reduced. Once the merchant finds it, have them call the funder and execute it. There’s no need to enroll anything, negotiate anything, risk breaching a contract, or pay a broker tens of thousands of dollars in commissions. The debt restructuring firm might not want merchants to simply take advantage of what they’re already entitled to however, because they stand to make no money that way. In this regard, mischaracterizing future receivable sales as loans only serves to carry out their agenda to confuse merchants about what their rights might be under those agreements.
I myself, am occasionally contacted by merchants who claim to be facing hardship and in one instance where a merchant had spoken to a negotiator, the negotiator didn’t tell him that the remedy he sought was already a natural provision of his contract. I helped him find it. He didn’t have to pay any fees which would’ve gone to pay someone a huge commission or end up in some crazy situation where he’s being sued for breach of contract. Think about this the next time you encounter a distressed merchant. Not everything is debt and that can be very much to the merchant’s benefit.
If you work for a debt restructuring, settlement, or negotiation company, you should probably take this course too. It will help you understand MCA agreements and what remedies merchants already have at their disposal.
Top Stories of 2024 vs 2014
December 30, 2024A lot happened in 2024, but rather than just rehash it all out, let’s revisit the world of 10 years ago. In 2014, both OnDeck and LendingClub went public, Bitcoin landed in the mainstream, Square started funding, securitizations in the industry commenced, and the world was still not totally sold on the concept of MCA. Oh how things changed!
They Offered to Reduce My MCA Payments. I Played Along.
September 3, 2024
It started when I got a cold text that said my merchant cash advances could be reduced by 80%. I didn’t have any advances but was intrigued by the audacity of the offer. REDUCE THEM BY EIGHTY PERCENT!
“Ok,” I thought to myself, “I’ll bite to see where this goes.”
I replied and was assigned a rep via text who introduced himself by name, Mark.
I told Mark I believed his offer to be a scam and sent him a link to an article (that was literally on AltFinanceDaily) in which someone making similar offers had been arrested by the FBI. I was 100% confident that he would disappear but he was undeterred.
“Those were shady companies,” Mark said, assuring me he had nothing to do with them. I wondered if Mark had caught on to who I was because he seemed eager to convince me he was legit. He told me that I’d still have to pay my advances in full but that he would just get the payments for them reduced. That seemed unusually tame compared to what I’d heard about these type of encounters with “debt relief” companies but Mark kept talking.
By signing up with them I’d be assigned a lawyer who would have “leverage” over my MCA provider due to them likely being in default on their own contract. He explained that they were always in breach for failing to reduce the daily payments (a likely reference to reconciliation clauses). Mark’s fee for helping me take advantage of this, the cost of which was not mentioned, would be included in my new regular payments they’d negotiate for me.
Just as I was beginning to realize that I’d be on the hook for paying them for their service on top of apparently still paying my advances, the messages over texts stopped, and he tried to only continue the conversation by phone, which I avoided.
From there robocalls hit my phone 4-5x per day as they attempted to reel me back in until they eventually tried texts again. When they did the offer had changed from them being able to reduce my payments by 80% to only 50%. Weird. Nevertheless, I wanted to get back to where we had left off, finding out the cost of this service, of which I now learned included legal representation by an attorney and a separate case manager. It sounded like it would be very expensive for me and I let him know my concerns. If Mark had known who he was actually speaking to before, the attempt to play it off now had been forgotten.
“Our program is not designed to cost you any additional money,” Mark said. “We go after unpaid fees and interest. You will never have to pay us out of pocket.”
And so that was the pitch, wordplay designed to make it appear the service was free and I would never have to pay them.
The website they referred me to included obviously fake testimonials with stock photos. They were “Trusted”, “Approved” and had been seen on various TV networks. It promises to stop withdrawals from funding companies and that their “in-house licensed attorneys” based in Florida and New York will take care of everything. The 7 month old website, which lists no business address, also claims the team has a decade of experience while the legal entity itself does not appear to exist, at least not in all the states I checked.
As I attempted to track down anything about this company I could find, a breakthrough led me to an address in Miami, which as fate would have it was home to another debt relief company targeting businesses with merchant cash advances. The website is similar. They are “Trusted”, “Approved” and seen on TV. They can also improve cash flow by up to 80%. What a coincidence. The owner of this one also has a colorful background with the law. Although I was not able to fully confirm that this company is the alter-ego of the other, I learn that this second company was just sued in April for allegedly absconding with a merchant’s funds it claimed was being used to pay off MCAs. In another instance the debt relief company is suing a merchant for the recovery of over $400,000, the sum of which it claims was its fee for trying to reduce a merchant’s MCA payments. It would seem that such work is not so free after all.
As my phone continues to ring and ring with offers to reduce my MCA payments, I decide to disengage.
“Sean, how many loans do you have?” Mark resumes. “Sean we will reduce your payments by at least 50%, let’s discuss.”
I ignore him. When he tries me again, he tells me he can reduce the payments by 80%. Then again later by 50%. He never tells me why it changes. His last message more than several months later is a return to the same script.
“Sean, Do you have MCAs hurting your cash flow?”
I’m pretty sure that he can’t be trusted. If your sales drop, you should call your funding company to discuss and stay away from shady pitches like this.
MCA Businesses Must Protect Themselves Better
May 28, 2024David Roitblat is the founder and CEO of Better Accounting Solutions, an accounting firm based in New York City, and a leading authority in specialized accounting for merchant cash advance companies.To connect with David or schedule a call about working with Better Accounting Solutions, email david@betteraccountingsolutions.com.
A couple of weeks ago, AltFinanceDaily covered the story of Mark Csantaveri, a key figure behind three fraudulent companies that defrauded over 50 distressed small business owners with outstanding cash advances–and their cash advance funders–of over $3.4 million.
Together with his co-conspirators at MCA Cure LLC, LDMS Group LLC, and Evergreen Settlement Group LLC, Csantaveri allegedly set up these fake debt settlement companies to prey on people with cash advance deals in place. Promising a fantastic debt restructuring system that could lower their payments by 80% and under the guise of negotiating with the funders, Csantaveri told his victims to direct the payments meant for their funders to an escrow account. He then promptly forwarded the money to his own personal accounts, leaving the merchants trying to figure out what happened when their funder contacted them asking what happened to their payments.
Happily, Csantaveri and his cronies have been charged for their crimes and face decades of prison and steep fines, but these stories are too common in our industry. Every few weeks we hear of businesses getting cheated and defrauded, and unfortunately rarely are the schemes particularly imaginative or unusually unavoidable. AltFinanceDaily has been on streak recently, publishing blockbuster features about the underbelly of the merchant cash advance business, and yet despite all the warnings, it just keeps happening over and over again.
Cash advance companies have an obligation to proactively protect themselves. And luckily, there are clear ways to do that.
Preventative Step 1: Clearly communicate with the merchant.
Merchant cash advance is a hungry game, and we’re always chasing the next client, the next close, the next commission. This need for speed is often an asset, but when we’re dealing with clients in perilous financial situations who are desperate for quick fixes, it is extremely unwise to deal with them hastily.
It must be clearly communicated to clients the terms of the deal they are accepting, and what exactly they are committing to. They must be reminded that the only people authorized to negotiate the terms of this arrangement are the two parties that signed it, and there are no “white knight saviors” that have any way of interceding on their behalf. If they’re having trouble meeting their obligations, they should feel comfortable letting their funder know, and both parties can work together on finding a mutually beneficial solution.
Preventative Step 2: Actively monitor your deals.
Making sure to actively stay on top of deals is how to avoid things going sideways.
Thanks to industry-customized CRMs such as MCA-Track, LendSaas and Orgmeter, merchant cash advance companies can keep in regular touch with their merchants, while easily tracking the progress of the deals throughout their term lengths.
For example, MCA-Track allows funders to monitor the bank activity of their merchants to see if they’re putting themselves in further financial entanglements by diverting payments, taking on additional advances, or are having outgoing payments bounced. If a funder sees any of that happening, they can step in and connect with the client to proactively ensure everything is still in order, and if it’s not, iron out any issues before they balloon into a much larger problem.
Embracing the available platforms to remain vigilant, and consistently reviewing the sustained health of your deals can help avoid a lot of stress down the road.
Preventative Step 3: Have a go-to financial professional.
This is the step I am personally passionate about for obvious reasons.
Better Accounting Solutions has had the privilege of serving the cash advance industry for well over a decade, and I’ve been a consistent evangelist for companies to embrace outside financial counsel–particularly those with experience in our business–to avoid getting into these issues in the first place.
Businesses need independent financial experts to ensure transparency, prevent bias, and avoid conflicts of interest. The benefits of using MCA experienced firms (any firm!), instead of in-house accountants, are obvious: it removes the danger of assuming a myopic view of what is happening in the industry only analyzed through the lens of just one company, ensures trust and transparency between funders and syndicators, and prevents misappropriation of funds.
Sometimes businesses settle on using any accounting firm, with no experience in MCA accounting, but that can lead to more issues than you had before they were engaged. The danger lies in you thinking everything is being handled and in compliance with the relevant regulations, when in fact they don’t know how to navigate the challenging financial world of our industry.
The industry as a whole is tarnished when crooks are able to circumvent systems meant to protect us all. Staying financially aware and employing these best practices is the key to ensuring it can’t happen again.
AltFinanceDaily’s Most Popular Stories of 2018
December 22, 2018
Five of the top 10 most read stories of 2018 were related to the saga of 1st Global Capital; The bankruptcy, SEC charges, the revelation that they had made a $40 million merchant cash advance, and finally the devastating news of that deal falling apart. We decided to lump all of them together in our #1 slot, but first, the following story was the most independently read of 2018:
The Saga of 1st Global Capital
1. Largest MCA Deal in History Suffers Multiple Closures was picked up by ABC News in California, placing AltFinanceDaily’s website on TV for the first time.
These were the other most read stories related to 1st Global Capital
- 1 Global Capital Files Chapter 11
- Syndication at Heart of SEC and Criminal Investigation into 1st Global Capital
- 1st Global Capital Charged With Fraud by SEC
- The Largest Merchant Cash Advance in History
Bloomberg Businessweek began publishing a series in November about the allegedly scandalous merchant cash advance industry. An initial review by AltFinanceDaily uncovered questionable holes in their reporting, but when the series’ senior editor thanked a state senator for proposing legislation in response, suspicious ties were uncovered, followed by one Bloomberg reporter wiping his twitter account clean. Bloomberg’s exaggerated series dubbed #signhereloseeverything has spawned a highly popular counterseries that has challenged Bloomberg’s reporting. We call it #tweetherewipeeverything. The following stories were all in the year’s top 12 most read, but we’ve lumped them together here at #2.
The Bloomberg Blitz
2. Multimillionaire CEO Claims Predatory Lenders are Causing Him to Sell His Furniture for Food
The other two were:
Arrested for Data Theft
3. CAUGHT: Backdoored Deals Leads to Handcuffs was the year’s third most read story.
MCAs are Not Usurious
4. It’s Settled: Merchant Cash Advances Not Usurious came in at #4 this year, ending the debate that has persisted in hundreds of cases at the trial court level in New York State.
In October 2016, the plaintiffs sued defendant Pearl in the New York Supreme Court alleging that the Confession of Judgment filed against them should be vacated because the underlying agreement was criminally usurious. As support, plaintiffs argued that the interest rate of the transaction was 43%, far above New York State’s legal limit of 25%. The defendant denied it and moved to dismiss, wherein the judge concurred that the documentary evidence utterly refuted plaintiffs’ allegations. Plaintiffs appealed and lost, wherein The Appellate Division of The First Department published their unanimous decision that the underlying Purchase And Sale of Future Receivables agreement between the parties was not usurious.
Debt Settlement Company Sued
5. ISOs Alleged to Be Partners in Debt Settlement “Scam” in Explosive Lawsuit was #5 in 2018. The lawsuit ultimately settled and resulted in a big payout to the MCA companies.
A Broker’s Bio
6. The Broker: How Zach Ramirez Makes Deals Happen was #6. AltFinanceDaily interviewed Zachary Ramirez to find out what makes a successful broker like him tick, how he does it, and what kinds of things he’s encountered along the way.
Ban COJs?
7. Senate Bill Introduced to Ban Confession of Judgments Nationwide was #7. Although this is related to the Bloomberg Blitz, the introduction of this bill fits more neatly into a category of its own.
Who’s Funding How Much?
8. A Preliminary Small Business Financing Leaderboard was #8. Despite this being published early in the year and offering detailed origination volumes for several companies all in one place, it wasn’t as well-read as all the drama that unfolded later in the year. Unsurprisingly, a chart of The Top 2018 Small Business Funders by Revenue ranked right behind this one, but we’ve lumped it in with #8 since it’s related.
Thoughts by Ron
9. Ron Suber: ‘This Industry Will Look Very Different One Year From Now’ was #9. Known as the Magic Johnson of fintech, the 1-year prediction by former Prosper Marketplace president Ron Suber, originally captured in the LendAcademy Podcast, resonated all throughout the fintech world. Will he be proven correct?
A Rags to Riches Tale
10. How A New Hampshire Teen Launched A Lending Company And Climbed Into The Inc. 500 was #10.
Josh Feinberg was not a complete newbie when he started in the lending business in 2009, but he also had a long way to go to find success. His dad had been in the business for 15 years and shortly after graduating high school, Josh started to work in equipment financing and leasing at Direct Capital in New Hampshire, his home state. He then had a brief stint working remotely for Balboa Capital, but he wasn’t sure that finance was for him.
He was 19, with a three year old daughter, and he took a low paying job working at a New Hampshire pawn shop owned by his brother and a guy named Will Murphy.
“I was making $267 a week at the pawn shop and I was having to ask friends to help me pay my rent for a room,” Feinberg said. “So at that point, I realized that something needed to change.”
