MCA Reconciliation Requests: Seven Statements to Measure Against the Agreement and Records

A reconciliation request should explain the difference between actual receipts and the collection amount without starting a second dispute about the facts.

Most owners dread this call. Preparation shortens it. The safest statement is the accurate one, supported by the agreement and the records, rather than a phrase chosen because someone promised it would persuade an underwriter. The seven statements below are points where owners most often contradict their own contract position or their own books.

The Revenue Figure and Its Period

In LG Funding v. United Senior Properties of Olathe, a New York appellate court weighed reconciliation alongside other provisions when asking whether repayment was absolute. The decision preserved a defense on that particular record. It shows why the actual clause matters, and it establishes no universal script for requesting an adjustment.

The first statement to check is the revenue figure. An estimate recalled from a busy month may not describe the adjustment period, and any figure quoted on the call, even casually, can later be weighed against the agreement. Use the actual records and explain differences among gross sales, collected receipts, and the amounts that reached the account after deductions. Simply read the clause before dialing. Resist the urge to round the numbers upward on a good day.

The second statement is the period covered. Saying revenue fell last month can mean a calendar month, a statement period, or the weeks since the previous debit change (the precise interval varies by agreement, which counsel should confirm). Identify the dates so the provider compares like periods. Only with the bank records assembled does the request carry weight, and an accurate total can still mislead if its interval stays uncertain.

Do not adjust a figure to fit the agreement estimate. There is an eerie precision to collection figures recalled without paper, and it dissolves on comparison with statements. One much litigated estimate implied fourteen thousand dollars in daily revenue against stipulated receipts near twelve hundred a day. If the original estimate itself looks wrong, describe the discrepancy and preserve the supporting records for counsel to assess.

The Prior Request and the Paper Behind It

A later appellate decision applying the same test credited reconciliation provisions that required adjustment upon request with proof of revenue. The majority opinion in the Bridge Funding case supplies the frame.

The third statement concerns whether an adjustment was already requested. Before saying the provider ignored every request, collect the emails, portal submissions, and whatever response the file contains. An owner may remember a telephone conversation the agreement does not treat as the required notice. The factual account should distinguish those events, since a dissent in the same case pressed on inflated estimates and procedures a merchant could not use in practice, which is where casual histories collapse.

If no request was made, do not invent one. State what is requested now and obtain advice about the earlier period. The fourth statement concerns the documents supplied, and no owner should say the provider holds delivery proof unless the required material was identified and its proof of sending retained. A statement may have gone to another representative, so list the attachments and keep a copy of the package. You tell them revenue fell and they ask for proof. That is the whole conversation.

The same decision denied summary judgment after the manager damages affidavit conflicted with the amount in the complaint, with no explanation offered. Numbers given to an underwriter that contradict the merchant’s own books destroy credibility the same way. Opposing counsel in these cases tends to open by testing whether the reconciliation clause was ever invoked, and the answer should already be documented before the call begins.

The Owner Promise Inside a Business Request

The fifth statement concerns personal responsibility. An owner should neither expand a business request into a new promise to pay from personal assets nor deny an existing guaranty without reading it. The signed instrument determines the obligation asserted, and the Bridge majority treated the guaranty as separate and distinct from the contract between the funding party and the business.

If the provider seeks a new guaranty, authorization, or acknowledgment as a condition of adjustment, obtain legal review before signing. An adjustment to collections and a new personal commitment are different subjects. In most of these disputes, though the record is anecdotal, the personal paper decides more than the business discussion.

The sixth statement concerns what the business can pay. A proposed amount should follow the actual cash forecast and the contractual request. The call invokes a clause, not a favor. Do not promise that a temporary amount will remain affordable when sales and essential expenses contradict the promise, and distinguish exercise of an existing right from a proposal to change the agreement.

What a Lower Payment Does and Does Not Accomplish

Consequences make the seventh statement. A request for a lower debit does not itself establish approval, waiver of a claimed default, or release of any other obligation the file contains.

Ask the administrator to ensure the response and the effective terms arrive in writing. A pending lawsuit still requires attention while the adjustment discussion proceeds, and counsel should assess the applicable deadline. The federal consumer collection statutes do not supply a script for this call, since they address consumer debts rather than commercial accounts, and confusion on that point is extremely common. Whether the response treats the request as a contractual exercise or a settlement overture will shape everything that follows.

When the Problem Exceeds Reconciliation

Delancey Street is a debt settlement company that can discuss business debt negotiation when the current burden no longer fits the operation. An attorney should assess contractual rights, disputed defaults, and personal liability, and the company should not be described as providing legal representation.

Bring the reconciliation request and its supporting records to the initial conversation. Counsel should compare the estimate, test the procedure, and prepare a position that addresses both the contractual language and the practical reality of the books, or what the records show, or fail to show, will shape whatever follows. Ask the provider to ensure any proposed payment accounts for the business other obligations and service fees, since shortfalls there are extremely difficult to cure after signing.

There is a particular silence on a servicing call in December, when both sides know the year end numbers will decide the matter. The seven statements above discipline accuracy rather than promise approval, and a business that says what the records support preserves its position even when the provider disagrees. The reconciliation clause is standard. Its careful use is rare.