As a responsible party (stemming from an SBA Note or SBA Unconditional Guarantee) for an SBA loan default or SBA debt that has been transferred to the Treasury’s Bureau of Fiscal Service, you may want to consider challenging your liability for the alleged debt by investigating whether the original seller of the small business that you purchased (through an SBA-guaranteed loan) may have engaged in fraud or misrepresentation in the sale and purchase of the subject small business based on inflated or fraudulent financials.
Case in Point: U.S. v. Rood
Todd E. Rood was the owner of Rood Machine & Engineering when he falsified documents in 2015 and 2016 to make his business look more attractive than it actually was. By altering his business’s bookkeeping records, Rood inflated its income by approximately $583,827 and lowered its liabilities by reclassifying them.
Rood, who pleaded guilty to SBA loan application fraud, admitted making false statements to the buyers’ bank in order to defraud the buyers and their financial institution – which was a participating SBA lender. The loss to the SBA lender and the small business buyers amounted to approximately $1,347,608.
Rood’s company was purchased for $2.05 million based on the fraudulent financial documents. A $1.74 million loan used to purchase the small business was guaranteed by the Small Business Administration (SBA).
According to court documents, the buyers of Rood’s small business also undertook a "quick sale" of their home in order to buy Rood Machine & Engineering on the timetable set forth by Rood, who falsely claimed to have terminal colon cancer. The buyers incurred a loss of $40,000 on their home as a result.
Under the terms of his plea agreement, Rood must pay the company's buyers $262,000 in restitution for their closing costs as well as a required cash infusion into the business.
Rood was sentenced to four years in a federal prison without parole. Rood also has been ordered by the federal court to pay $1,347,608 in restitution and a money judgment to the government of $1,207,979, which covers his profit from the sale.
To view a copy of Rood’s Plea Agreement, click here
If you are facing an SBA loan default involving an SBA Unconditional Guarantee or a Treasury/Bureau of Fiscal Service debt problem, contact us today for a FREE initial consultation with an experienced SBA or Treasury workout attorney at 1-888-756-9969
We can analyze your SBA loan, Treasury/BFS debt or Private Collection Agency problem and advise you on a range of potential solutions.
This presentation contains images that were used under a Creative Commons License. Click here to see the full list of images and attributions:
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.
Small business and guarantors obtained an SBA COVID-EIDL loan for $1,000,000. Clients defaulted causing SBA to charge-off the loan, accelerate the balance and refer the debt to Treasury's Bureau of Fiscal Service for collection. Treasury added nearly $500,000 in collection fees totaling $1,500,000. Clients were served with the SBA's Official 60-Day Notice and exercised the Repayment option by applying for the SBA’s Hardship Accommodation Plan. However, their application was summarily rejected by the SBA without providing any meaningful reasons. Clients hired the Firm to represent them against the SBA, Treasury and a Private Collection Agency. After securing government records through discovery, we filed an Appeals Petition with the SBA Office of Hearings & Appeals (OHA) court challenging the SBA's referral of the debt to Treasury. During litigation and before the OHA court issued a final Decision and Order, the Firm successfully negotiated a reinstatement and recall of the loan back to the SBA, a modification of the original repayment terms, termination of Treasury's enforced collection and removal of the statutory collection fees.
Client personally guaranteed SBA 7(a) loan for $350,000. The small business failed but because of the personal guarantee liability, the client continued to pay the monthly principal & interest out-of-pocket draining his savings. The client hired a local attorney but quickly realized that he was not familiar with SBA-backed loans or their standard operating procedures. Our firm was subsequently hired after the client received the SBA's official 60-day notice. After back-and-forth negotiations, we were able to convince the SBA to reinstate the loan, retract the acceleration of the outstanding balance, modify the original terms, and approve a structured workout reducing the interest rate from 7.75% to 0% and extending the maturity date for a longer period to make the monthly payments affordable. In conclusion, not only we were able to help the client avoid litigation and bankruptcy, but our SBA lawyers also saved him approximately $227,945 over the term of the workout.
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.
.jpg)
