Weekly Bulletin Board Complaint

In the previous report:

http://www.leasingnews.org/archives/April%202004/4-13-04.htm#week

There was criticism that the #1 was not named, and because he was a “friend.”

As noted, this person was already posted on our Complaint Bulletin Board,

and we noted a member of the National Association of Equipment Leasing

Brokers. Our policy is if the “dispute” is settled, there is no complaint.  The check was returned to the applicant, so the complaint will not be printed.

#3 ,The broker who could not get the lease approved, who also said he was

a long time member of the National Association of Leasing Brokers and wanted to keep the advance fee for his time ( and expenses ), changed their mind at the last minute, returning the full amount by Airborne. 

Before going into current “complaints,” there is a Bulletin Board Complaint posted that wants it removed. He states his  is also a member of the National Association of Equipment Leasing Brokers, confirmed, who has offered to return the advance rental he has kept if we remove the complaint from the Bulletin Board.  He is very well liked and respected, we are told, and let's leave it at that.

His motivation:  He states when his company is searched with the browser Google, the Leasing News complaint about his company is brought up as Number One.  He says this is true on other internet browsers.  It has affected his business, he claims.

There is one precedent where we have removed complaints over the years

from companies no longer in business, but the party named has another company.

As part of the “resolution,” the old complaint was removed with the stipulation that the “advance rental” be returned, and if such a situation should occur again, the old complaint will be posted along with the one that was settled.  This was to give both a benefit of doubt, a new chance, and to get the money back to the applicant.

The archives were not amended or changed; just the weekly bulletin board complaint.

In this new situation, we will not amend the archives, but are considering the “offer,” and would like feed back from readers.

Please go here:  
We are sorry. The survey is no longer available. The time has expired.

    Currently in the works are:

#1  Broker Agreement

“You know (funder) extremely well and understand that we would never withhold a brokers fee.  With our generosity and commitment to the ****** broker community and to UAEL you know that we would not try to “steal” $1000 from a broker.  I would just like to give you our side of the story in advance.

“******** sent us a good deal with a company back east and we were able to put the deal together with a great team effort.

“During this process, on multiple occasions, we asked ******* to complete our application and Broker Agreement, which you yourself have completed and signed with no troubles whatsoever.

“After funding the deal ****** has crossed out essentially all of the reps & warrants in our agreement, I'd be happy to forward to you, and asked that we fund the rest of his fee.  ****** has already received 80% of the fee in the form of a commitment fee he received from the lessee.  We know that there is no way he will ever sign our agreement if we send him the remaining ****** prior to receiving the signed agreement.

“It is very troubling to us that he will not provide a copy of his credit bureau for the application, will not spend the time to thoughtfully consider our agreement especially after we funded the deal in good faith that he would sign and return our document.

“I'm sorry to bug you with this information however I would hate to have ******* attempt to leverage your newsletter against us as he's threatened to do so below.”

(name with held)

-

Subject: RE: Unpaid portion of commission

“Gentlemen, the delays re: the payment of the outstanding portion of our commission have gone on long enough.

“I have been patient and reasonable and done everything you asked.  I have signed the broker agreement, with a few minor changes, and faxed in a signed copy.  I was not told that you needed an original until now and by now I should have the check. Guys I haven't invested this much time and energy in getting paid from a lender in years.

“Here is what I propose, you can FedEx my commission (please) and we can keep this on a friendly basis and hopefully do more business.

“If you chose not to pay me the money you owe me (please be aware that all the records show you funded the deal, your Tvalue and emails show my commission, the invoice and your emails show of the commission paid and some still due.  However for some reason ******** is just stalling and not paying us the balance of the money owed)  ... then I will have to ask Kit Menkin to publish this incident to warn other Brokers that ******* does not pay full Broker commissions, at least in this incident.  I will also bad mouth you in Las Vegas.

If your argument,  in response to that article, once published would be that I did not sign a Broker agreement, that would be false.  I did.  Do you want to be in a position where you are explaining to the broker community at large why you were trying to cheat Integrity out of a grand, based on the premise that you needed me to leave in the clause in your Broker agreement that enables you to come into our office without notice and be entitled to go through our records, when I explained to you that even GE waived that clause when we asked.

Guys I just want to get paid and move on.  Please do the right thing and pay what you owe while there is still a chance we can all walk away happy and do business again.

Thanks

 (name with held )

(A flurry of e-mails of the next few days back and forth between many parties.

The error occurred when the funder paid the vendor without having the signed

broker agreement back.  There are some very strong provisions, but not as strong as in others such as buying back the lease if default in first six months, etc.; and on the other hand, over 100 brokers have signed the agreement.

(One of the things that is not true is Leasing News just does not print a complaint.  We look into it, and our first step of the ladder is to see if the complaint is justified.  The second, is to see if we can resolve the issue, which we thought we had, but instead other issues in the agreement and attitudes changed.

(My advice: don't lose a good funding source such as *******.

(It is only one deal, sign it. And then renegotiate a new agreement.

(The California Department of Corporations Finance Lender's Division can come into your office unannounced, look at all records, and you pay for their time and expenses for the investigation. If you have bank lines, the bank has the right to audit at any time.  And if you haven't been visited by the state for a sales tax audit or county for a personal property tax audit, you would welcome the funder much more, believe me.

(At last call, the broker was out $500 from the original “published rate,” and the funder did not want to do business with him, despite the volume produced or years in business of the broker.  Both were losers in this as the funding source would have been a valuable asset to the broker, and the broker would have brought more business.

 Getting back to the original place, an exception was made for the funding to the vendor and lessee, another reason why “policy” should be followed.  Sometimes trying to be a nice guy, does not pay off.  Both parties should have agreed to the terms and conditions before proceeding.  Remember: the person with the gold makes the rules. Editor)

-- 

#3  Sale/Leaseback

A dentist in Southern California signed a $110,000 “sale/leaseback” January 14, 2004. The contract appears to be a generic form with a venue in Oregon.  The president of the Dana Point, California has not returned six telephone calls over the last few weeks, but an employee did, who knew of the transaction, and said the money was to be refunded.

There is an e-mail from the president in March,2004, stating the same thing.  The dentist cannot get anyone to return his telephone calls, he says, and the direct number to the “president”  no longer works (although the 800 does.) 

In a March 11 email, it states,

“I did get your file back, but unfortunately it was without what we are looking for. It's time to make a decision as to how you want to proceed. It is ridiculous that funding has taken this long to wrap up your transaction. Our company recently took a seven figure hit on a sale-leaseback transaction due to fraud on behalf of the borrower. As a consequence every sale-leaseback is being checked and re-checked which is why this process has been so drawn out, Regardless, this is not fair to you and I know it interferes with your business plans. But we have a few choices as follows:

“1.)   You cancel the transaction and we will promptly refund your deposit.

“2.)   Continue to wait out funding, as I know there is not any fraud involved in your

            loan.

“3.)   Secure another approval.

“The easiest choice is to refund your deposit, but after investing in so much time with each other I would prefer you not to exercise this option. What I would suggest is pursuing another approval, while waiting funding out. I will get your transaction funded, but your input is needed. I can only imagine how frustrating this is for you, as its incredibly frustrating for me.

“I will be in a meeting for a few hours until lunch PST, but will call you as soon as l get out. Please let me know how you want to proceed.”

( name with held )

Deposit not returned to date.

--- 

#4  Complaint About an Advertiser

An applicant claims not to have received his commission from a funder (discounter/superbroker/lessor) who also advertises in Leasing News. 

“I have a dispute with ********* . They are refusing to return my deposit of $5,000. I have an agreement with them to perform within 20 days to secure funding on a leasing sign. They did not. Please advise what shall I do.

My e-mail: ***     Mr phone #   ****

Your help will be greatly appreciate it.

( name with held )

We asked him to e-mail or fax all the signed documents, and we would obtain

the “other side to the story.”  Whether they are an advertiser or not, friend of not, we will be “independent, unbiased” to the best of our ability, and if the “dispute” is not resolved, we will print the complaint. Editor