If you Owe more than $30,000 contact us for a case evaluation at 888-756-9969
contact us for a free case evaluation at (833) 428-0937
Call us (833) 428-0937

What To Do If The SBA Lender Or SBA Denies Your Request For Loan Mitigation Help Or Financial Hardship Accommodation

Book a Consultation Call

What To Do If The SBA Lender Or SBA Denies Your Request For Loan Mitigation Help Or Financial Hardship Accommodation

When an SBA Lender or the SBA denies loss mitigation options (like forbearance, loan modification, hardship accommodation or deferral) to a small business experiencing temporary cash flow issues, potential actions and affirmative defenses can depend on the signed loan agreement, applicable law, and whether the lender is a private or government-backed institution.

Below are some potential causes of action, affirmative defenses or legal theories that might apply to your case:

1. Breach of Contract

  • Applicable  if: The SBA loan agreement or ancillary documents include provisions requiring the SBA lender to consider or offer loss mitigation, or if the SBA lender fails to honor agreed-upon terms.
  • Key Argument: SBA Lender and/or SBA failed to perform obligations, such as reviewing the small business in good faith for forbearance or restructuring.

2. Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

  • Applicable if: The SBA Lender and/or SBA acted arbitrarily or capriciously in denying mitigation without reasonable cause, especially if mitigation is customary under industry standards or course of dealing.
  • Key Argument: The SBA Lender and/or SBA unfairly deprived the borrower and/or guarantors of the benefits of the contract.

3. Promissory Estoppel

  • Applicable if: The SBA Lender and/or SBA made a promise (oral or written) to provide or consider mitigation, the small business relied on it to its detriment.
  • Key Argument: The small business took action or refrained from alternatives (e.g., seeking other financing) in reliance on the SBA lender’s and/or SBA's promise.

4. Negligent Misrepresentation

  • Applicable if: The SBA Lender and/or SBA made false representations about the availability of relief, modification criteria, or eligibility process.
  • Key Argument: Misstatements caused the small business to forego other viable solutions.

5. Fraud

  • Applicable  if: There was intentional deception by the SBA Lender and/or SBA regarding the availability of loss mitigation or inducement into further payments under false pretenses.

6. Unfair Business Practices / Violation of State UDAP Laws

  • Applicable if: The SBA Lender's and/or SBA's conduct is deceptive, oppressive, or unfair under federal or state law.
  • Example:In California, a claim under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200).

7. Tortious Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage

  • Applicable if: The SBA Lender's and/or SBA's denial disrupts the small business's ability to secure contracts, investors, or other financing that were reasonably certain to occur.

Federal Causes of Action (in some contexts)

  • Administrative  Procedure Act (APA) – If the lender is a government agency or acting on behalf of one (e.g., SBA).
  • Violation  of CARES Act or PPP/EIDL rules – If the loan is federally backed  and subject to statutory mitigation or deferment guidelines.

Strategic Considerations

  • Review all correspondenceloan documentsprior forbearance or workout agreements, and any internal policies or governmental  guidelines the SBA Lender and/or SBA are subject to.
  • Assess whether the SBA Lender and/or SBA acted inconsistently with similar borrowers, obligors and/or guarantors (discriminatory or disparate treatment).
  • If applicable, check if the small business is a minority- or woman-owned  and whether disparate impact claims are viable under possible civil rights laws (if federally involved).

Why Hire Us to Help You with Your Treasury or SBA Debt Problems?

construction accident injury lawyer

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

slip and fall attorney

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

truck accident injury attorney

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.

$310,000 SBA 7A LOAN - SBA OIC TERM WORKOUT

$310,000 SBA 7A LOAN - SBA OIC TERM WORKOUT

Client personally guaranteed an SBA 7(a) loan for $100,000 from the lender. The SBA loan went into early default in 2006 less than 12 months from disbursement. The SBA paid the 7(a) guaranty monies to the lender and subsequently acquired the deficiency balance of about $96,000, including the right to collect against the guarantor. However, the SBA sent the Official 60-Day Due Process Notice to the Client's defunct business address instead of his personal residence, which he never received. As a result, the debt was transferred to Treasury's Bureau of Fiscal Service where substantial collection fees were assessed, including accrued interest per the promissory note. Treasury eventually referred the debt to a Private Collection Agency (PCA) - Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc. Pioneer sent a demand letter claiming a debt balance of almost $310,000 - a shocking 223% increase from the original loan amount assigned to the SBA. Client's social security disability benefits were seized through the Treasury Offset Program (TOP). Client hired the Firm to represent him as the debt continued to snowball despite seizure of his social security benefits and federal tax refunds as the involuntary payments were first applied to Treasury's collection fees, then to accrued interest with minimal allocation to the SBA principal balance.

We initially submitted a Cross-Servicing Dispute (CSD) challenging the referral of the debt to Treasury based on the defective notice sent to the defunct business address. Despite overwhelming evidence proving a violation of the Client's Due Process rights, the SBA still rejected the CSD. As a result, an Appeals Petition was filed with the SBA Office of Hearings & Appeals (OHA) Court challenging the SBA decision and its certification the debt was legally enforceable in the amount claimed. After several months of litigation before the SBA OHA Court, our Firm Attorney successfully negotiated an Offer in Compromise (OIC) Term Workout with the SBA Supervising Trial Attorney for $82,000 spread over a term of 74 months at a significantly reduced interest rate saving the Client an estimated $241,000 in Treasury collection fees, accrued interest (contract interest rate and Current Value of Funds Rate (CVFR)), and the PCA contingency fee.

$505,000 SBA 7A LOAN - FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT LITIGATION (CALIFORNIA)

$505,000 SBA 7A LOAN - FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT LITIGATION (CALIFORNIA)

Clients borrowed and personally guaranteed an SBA 7(a) loan.  Clients defaulted on the SBA loan and were sued in federal district court for breach of contract.  The SBA lender demanded the Client pledge several personal real estate properties as collateral to reinstate and secure the defaulted SBA loan.  We were subsequently hired to intervene and aggressively defend the lawsuit.  After several months of litigation, our attorneys negotiated a reinstatement of the SBA loan and a structured workout that did not involve any liens against the Client's personal real estate holdings.

$391,000 SBA COVID EIDL - CROSS-SERVICING DISPUTE | NEGOTIATED REINSTATEMENT & WORKOUT

$391,000 SBA COVID EIDL - CROSS-SERVICING DISPUTE | NEGOTIATED REINSTATEMENT & WORKOUT

Client's small business obtained an SBA COVID EIDL for $301,000 pledging collateral by executing the Note, Unconditional Guarantee and Security Agreement.  The business defaulted on the loan and the SBA CESC called the Note and Guarantee, accelerated the principal balance due, accrued interest and retracted the 30-year term schedule.  

The loan was transferred to the Treasury's Bureau of Fiscal Service which resulted in the statutory addition of $90,000+ in administrative fees, costs, penalties and interest with the total debt now at $391.000+. Treasury also initiated a Treasury Offset Program (TOP) levy against the client's federal contractor payments for the full amount each month - intercepting all of its revenue and pushing the business to the brink of bankruptcy.

The Firm was hired to investigate and find an alternate solution to the bankruptcy option.  After submitting formal production requests for all government records, it was discovered that the SBA failed to send the required Official 60-Day Pre-Referral Notice to the borrower and guarantor prior to referring the debt to Treasury. This procedural due process violation served as the basis to submit a Cross-Servicing Dispute to recall the debt from Treasury back to the SBA and to negotiate a reinstatement of the original 30-year maturity date, a modified workout, cessation of the TOP levy against the federal contractor payments and removal of the $90,000+ Treasury-based collection fees, interest and penalties.

Read more Case Results

Related Content

Read more sba debt articles