This particular person committed fraud and submitted fraudulent documents and therefore could not be approved for financing of any kind. Nater and Associates did everything possible but when a client commits fraud in order to obtain financing, there is nothing that can be done. The client was angry and decided to attempt to smear an otherwise excellent company that has been doing business since 2005. Shame on this client.
Paul Nater of Nater Associates, Inc. was referred to my company to complete financing for a business acquisition deal that we were working on. After pursuing financing from traditional sources, my primary broker and I determined that my credit profile presented a challenge to these sources. This was the result of a previous “lending” source shopping the file to scores of other potential lenders without prior approval.
Nater was brought in because of his alleged expertise in alternative financing, He presented a plan to secure financing from one of his sources through the use of a Standby Letter of Credit (SBLC). According to Nater, “Credit will not be an issue as the SBLC will act as the collateral to secure the loan.” He went on to describe how he would be able to get the deal done and that his team was on standby to get the SBLC drafted and presented to secure the capital. He also intimated that the lender was prepared to fund. The process was designed to secure two instruments in order to accomplish my objectives. Nater provided the fee agreement to secure the instrument. The document provided the details of all fees as well as the total dollar values to be secured. Nater went so far as to indicate that he would pay a portion of the fee. A promissory note was drafted to this affect. It is worthy to note that no record of him actually paying a portion of the fee was provided.
The process was to take place over a short period of time beginning in October 2017. This was designed to allow me to complete my transactions prior to the end of the year. As the process started, I was not fully kept in the loop as everything progressed. I was simply told that everything was progressing and that we would close by November XX, 2017. The date came and passed and there was still no feedback. Finally, my lead broker contacted me to inform me that the bank/lender did not accept the original structure, but had accepted an alternative structure. He went on to tell me what the next steps would be and when the closing would take place. As we progressed towards the closing, my lead broker unfortunately, had to bow out of the process due to a family emergency. At this point, he turned everything over to Nater exclusively to close; it was also at this point that everything fell apart.
Nater did produce an SBLC. I knew going into the process that an SBLC is a viable financial instrument, however the one that he produced was not. In order to produce one, a voluminous set of documents must be executed. Nothing of the sort was executed with Nater. What was eventually produced, was a worthless sheet of paper that could not be used anywhere; not even with his own funding source. Nater’s communication was sparse at best once he was handling the transaction. We missed the 2nd closing date which caused me to default on closing my deals. In all of my efforts to reach him, he would always give circular and unclear responses. He would also leave out pertinent information. Whenever he did respond, his response would be, “I’m waiting to hear back from the lender. As soon as I hear something, I will let you know.”
He eventually sent me on a wild goose chase to contact a 3rd broker that he had brought into the process. Upon reaching this 3rd source, I was told, “I don’t know why he told you to call me. I already told him that I wasn’t interested.” Given the lack of communication and the response from this 3rd source, it became clear that no further effort was being made and Nater was simply stalling out the process. Eventually the lead broker was able to rejoin the process. Unfortunately, as a result of Nater’s actions all opportunities were lost. It was later learned that the lead broker had multiple deals placed with Nater, and Nater failed to deliver on each of them. Nater presented himself as one that had the resources to complete the transaction through a specialized process, but in the end what was produced lacked the necessary components to complete the deal. Further, given Nater’s disappearance and cryptic messages after receiving the fee, leads one to draw the conclusion that the process was all about collecting a fee.
Nater Associates, Inc. Reviews
The review here was fraudulent.
This particular person committed fraud and submitted fraudulent documents and therefore could not be approved for financing of any kind. Nater and Associates did everything possible but when a client commits fraud in order to obtain financing, there is nothing that can be done. The client was angry and decided to attempt to smear an otherwise excellent company that has been doing business since 2005. Shame on this client.
Paul Nater of Nater Associates, Inc. was referred to my company to complete financing for a business acquisition deal that we were working on. After pursuing financing from traditional sources, my primary broker and I determined that my credit profile presented a challenge to these sources. This was the result of a previous “lending” source shopping the file to scores of other potential lenders without prior approval.
Nater was brought in because of his alleged expertise in alternative financing, He presented a plan to secure financing from one of his sources through the use of a Standby Letter of Credit (SBLC). According to Nater, “Credit will not be an issue as the SBLC will act as the collateral to secure the loan.” He went on to describe how he would be able to get the deal done and that his team was on standby to get the SBLC drafted and presented to secure the capital. He also intimated that the lender was prepared to fund. The process was designed to secure two instruments in order to accomplish my objectives. Nater provided the fee agreement to secure the instrument. The document provided the details of all fees as well as the total dollar values to be secured. Nater went so far as to indicate that he would pay a portion of the fee. A promissory note was drafted to this affect. It is worthy to note that no record of him actually paying a portion of the fee was provided.
The process was to take place over a short period of time beginning in October 2017. This was designed to allow me to complete my transactions prior to the end of the year. As the process started, I was not fully kept in the loop as everything progressed. I was simply told that everything was progressing and that we would close by November XX, 2017. The date came and passed and there was still no feedback. Finally, my lead broker contacted me to inform me that the bank/lender did not accept the original structure, but had accepted an alternative structure. He went on to tell me what the next steps would be and when the closing would take place. As we progressed towards the closing, my lead broker unfortunately, had to bow out of the process due to a family emergency. At this point, he turned everything over to Nater exclusively to close; it was also at this point that everything fell apart.
Nater did produce an SBLC. I knew going into the process that an SBLC is a viable financial instrument, however the one that he produced was not. In order to produce one, a voluminous set of documents must be executed. Nothing of the sort was executed with Nater. What was eventually produced, was a worthless sheet of paper that could not be used anywhere; not even with his own funding source. Nater’s communication was sparse at best once he was handling the transaction. We missed the 2nd closing date which caused me to default on closing my deals. In all of my efforts to reach him, he would always give circular and unclear responses. He would also leave out pertinent information. Whenever he did respond, his response would be, “I’m waiting to hear back from the lender. As soon as I hear something, I will let you know.”
He eventually sent me on a wild goose chase to contact a 3rd broker that he had brought into the process. Upon reaching this 3rd source, I was told, “I don’t know why he told you to call me. I already told him that I wasn’t interested.” Given the lack of communication and the response from this 3rd source, it became clear that no further effort was being made and Nater was simply stalling out the process. Eventually the lead broker was able to rejoin the process. Unfortunately, as a result of Nater’s actions all opportunities were lost. It was later learned that the lead broker had multiple deals placed with Nater, and Nater failed to deliver on each of them. Nater presented himself as one that had the resources to complete the transaction through a specialized process, but in the end what was produced lacked the necessary components to complete the deal. Further, given Nater’s disappearance and cryptic messages after receiving the fee, leads one to draw the conclusion that the process was all about collecting a fee.