We Provide Nationwide Representation of Small Business Owners, Personal Guarantors, and Federal Debtors with More Than $30,000 in Debt before the SBA and Treasury Department's Bureau of Fiscal Service
No Affiliation or Endorsement by any Federal Agency
Millions of Dollars in SBA Debts Resolved via Offer in Compromise and Negotiated Repayment Agreements without our Clients filing for Bankruptcy or Facing Home Foreclosure
Millions of Dollars in Treasury Debts Defended Against via AWG Hearings, Treasury Offset Program Resolution, Cross-servicing Disputes, Private Collection Agency Representation, Compromise Offers and Negotiated Repayment Agreements
Our Attorneys are Authorized by the Agency Practice Act to Represent Federal Debtors Nationwide before the SBA, The SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals, the Treasury Department, and the Bureau of Fiscal Service.
Client personally guaranteed SBA 7(a) loan balance of $58,000. The client received a notice of Intent to initiate Administrative Wage Garnishment (AWG) Proceedings. We represented the client at the hearing and successfully defeated the AWG Order based on several legal and equitable grounds.
Clients executed personal and corporate guarantees for an SBA 7(a) loan from a Preferred Lender Provider (PLP). The borrower corporation defaulted on the loan exposing all collateral pledged by the Clients. The SBA subsequently acquired the loan balance from the PLP, including the right to collect against all guarantors. The SBA sent the Official Pre-Referral Notice to the guarantors giving them sixty (60) days to either pay the outstanding balance in full, negotiate a Repayment (Offer in Compromise (OIC) or Structured Workout (SW)), challenge their alleged guarantor liability or file a Request for Hearing (Appeals Petition) with the SBA Office of Hearings & Appeals.
Because the Clients were not financially eligible for an OIC, they opted for Structured Workout negotiations directly with the SBA before the debt was transferred to the Bureau of Fiscal Service, a division of the U.S. Department of Treasury for enforced collection.
The Firm was hired to negotiate a global Workout Agreement directly with the SBA to resolve the personal and corporate guarantees. After submitting the Structured Workout proposal, the assigned SBA Loan Specialist approved the requested terms in under ten (10) days without any lengthy back and forth negotiations.
The favorable terms of the Workout included an extended maturity at an affordable principal amount, along with a significantly reduced interest rate saving the Clients approximately $181,000 in administrative fees, penalties and interest (contract interest rate and Current Value of Funds Rate (CVFR)) as authorized by 31 U.S.C. § 3717(e) had the SBA loan been transferred to BFS.
Client’s small business obtained an SBA 7(a) loan for $750,000. She and her husband signed personal guarantees exposing all of their non-exempt income and assets. With just 18 months left on the maturity date and payment on the remaining balance, the Great Recession of 2008 hit, which ultimately caused the business to fail and default on the loan terms. The 7(a) lender accelerated and sent a demand for full payment of the remaining loan balance. The SBA lender’s note allowed for a default interest rate of about 7% per year. In response to the lender's aggressive collection action, Client's husband filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in an attempt to protect against their personal assets. However, his bankruptcy discharge did not relieve the Client's personal guarantee liability for the SBA debt. The SBA lender opted to pursue the SBA 7(a) Guaranty and subsequently assigned the loan and the right to enforce collection against the Client to the SBA. The Client then received the SBA Official 60-Day Notice. After conducting a Case Evaluation with her, she then hired the Firm to respond and negotiate on her behalf with just 34 days left before the impending referral to Treasury. The Client wanted to dispute the SBA’s alleged debt balance as stated in the 60-Day Notice by claiming the 7(a) lender failed to liquidate business collateral in a commercially reasonable manner - which if done properly - proceeds would have paid back the entire debt balance. However, due to time constraints, waivers contained in the SBA loan instruments, including the fact the Client was not able to inspect the SBA's records for investigation purposes before the remaining deadline, Client agreed to submit a Structured Workout for the alleged balance in response to the Official 60-Day Notice as she was not eligible for an Offer in Compromise (OIC) because of equity in non-exempt income and assets. After back and forth negotiations, the SBA Loan Specialist approved the Workout proposal, reducing the Client's purported liability by nearly $142,142.27 in accrued interest, and statutory collection fees. Without the Firm's intervention and subsequent approval of the Workout proposal, the Client's debt amount (with accrued interest, Treasury's statutory collection fee and Treasury's interest based on the Current Value of Funds Rate (CVFR) would have been nearly $291,030.
SOP 50 51 2A, Ch. 17, 8-12 states that “[a]ny settlement amount must bear a reasonable relationship to the present value of the estimated amount of recovery available through foreclosure (using a forced sale equivalent value) and enforced collection. This value, combined with the earning potential of the debtor, will form the basis for the offer in compromise.“ Litigative risks” involve answering certain legal questions as to the actual liability of the debtor and will be thoroughly explored by the SBA, if raised properly. The degree of doubt coupled with the potential costs, expenses and time involved in pursuing collection matters will generally determine the acceptable amount for a settlement. Thus, when considering an SBA OIC, it is very important for your qualified representative (who should have a background in litigation and thus be an attorney and have a working knowledge of SBA matters) to be able to advise SBA debtors regarding litigative risks and the costs associated with litigation and how all of these factors can impact the proposed offer to the Federal Government.
Yes. The Agency Practice Act (5 U.S. Code Section 500 et seq.) specifically authorizes attorneys in good standing of the bar of the highest court of their State to represent you before the U.S. Small Business Administration, the U.S. Department of Treasury and the Bureau of Fiscal Service. However, if you decide to hire a non-attorney firm or consultant to handle your SBA matter before the aforesaid federal agencies, be advised that this non-attorney firm or consultant are in violation of the Federal Agency Practice Act, and cannot advise you on any legal issues. The problem we have with non-attorney representation for SBA matters in this industry is that we do not believe these non-attorneys have the legal authorization and ability to advise or counsel you on any interpretation of SBA administrative law (such as the SBA’s SOPs, the Code of Federal Regulations (CFRs), SBA OHA decisions, bankruptcy issues, federal/state statutory law or federal case law). In addition, many of these non-attorney representatives are neither affiliate members of NADCO, NAGGL (SBA trade associations) nor authorized to practice before the Department of Treasury pursuant to the Agency Practice Act and Circular 230. Finally, in the event that you need to appeal your case to the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals in connection with your SBA debt or any adverse decision that may be considered an abuse of discretion, the non-attorney representatives will NOT be able to cite to legal precedent or argue applicable law before the SBA’s Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) as any attempt on their part would arguably be the unauthorized practice of law, and would be useless since these non-attorneys wouldn’t have any clue as to how to proceed with representing your interests in this special forum as these individuals do not have the education, training or experience to administratively litigate your case and protect your interests.
While the SBA prefers a cash settlement offer (i.e., lump sum payment or cash compromise) with an SBA OIC Package, a monthly installment payment plan not to exceed 5 years or 60 months (term compromise) may also be considered if necessary. If a term compromise is desired, the SBA may also require a lien on any worthwhile collateral that may be available to secure the agreed upon balance due.
The adequacy of an SBA OIC must begin with an evaluation of the assets of the obligor(s). The starting point is ordinarily the net present value of the forced sale value of such assets (not the loan balance). This value combined with the prognosis of the obligors’ earning power form the basis for determining the adequacy of the offer. The review must balance the right of the Government to collect the amount owed and the obligation to treat all obligors with dignity and fairness.
Yes, as long as you meet the criteria above individuals may avail themselves of Subchapter V.
.jpg)
.jpeg)
