Report: #1172454


  • Submitted: Tue, August 26, 2014
  • Updated: Thu, October 16, 2014
  • Reported By: Working man — Bryson Texas
    22062 Cape May Lane - 1st Floor
    Huntington Beach, California

UNION CAPITAL ASSOCIATES, Inc. RLC Funding, Navitas, Union Capital Associates, UCA Union Capital Associates lie to assess HUGE interest fees! Huntington Beach California

*Author of original report: Response to your side of the story


Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

We purchased a lowboy from a dealership who uses this company for their financing while our banker was on vacation with the intention of refinancing it within 30 days.  I asked repeatedly if there were any type of penalties or interest when paying off the loan early, and I was told in writing that there were none.


We were required to send 10% of the lowboy via overnight mail prior to the finance company even providing any terms.  Once they had our down payment, we kept asking questions about the contract to ensure there were no fees to paying it off early.


When we asked for a payoff, Scott Hickerson avoided us and told us that it was a strange request.  After a week, I finally got aggressive and they gave us a payoff that was $8,064.42 more than what we borrowed only 2 weeks ago.  Apparently, they feel they are owed the interest for the entire 60 month loan if we pay it early, and they do not consider that a penalty.  I consider over $8,000 a hefty penalty.  I hope all of the dealerships and hard working folks alike avoid this shyster company.  They misled us, and so did Navitas aka RLC Funding.  Be warned!

Is this Ripoff Report About you?
Ripoff Report A business' first line of defense on the Internet.
If your business is willing to make a commitment to customer satisfaction Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation? Fix it the right way. Corporate Advocacy Program™

Set the record straight: Arbitration Program

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 08/26/2014 01:14 PM and is a permanent record located here: The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
Also a victim?
Repair Your Reputation!

Updates & Rebuttals


#1 Author of original report

Response to your side of the story

AUTHOR: Dozer Hand - ()

The loan was reversed because I initiated the process and proceeded to return the trailer to get out of this ridiculous deal. 


You can read the long drawn out excuses, but the only reason this loan does not exist is because we stopped it and were willing to take the trailer back to them because of the overwhelming cost of this outrageous contract.


All I can say is be warned!  I'm not going to banter about it or waste another second on it.  Life is short, and this report is intended to make folks aware that you should read your contracts thoroughly and make sure that it shows an interest rate and terms of the loan.  These folks will certainly dance around any direct questions that you ask.

Respond to this report!

#2 UPDATE Employee


AUTHOR: Employee - ()

First, we would like to be very clear that the claims made in this complaint are false. Additionally, the loan has been unwound and it no longer exists.

At no time were we informed that the client’s intent was to use our company’s resources, time, labor, and effort to expedite the purchase of the trailer in question only to buyout of the loan before they had made a single payment. Had they done so we would have happily advised them on their best course of action to achieve their goals. It is now very clear that their intent all along was to simply utilize our services while their banker was out of town (as was admitted to in writing in their letter). Had they been honest with us from the start we would have expressly informed them that we do not provide bridge loans (even bridge loans need to be carried out for a minimum of three months of interest only payments- and that’s on the low side). All this could have been easily avoided had they been forthright with us as to their true intensions.

When analyzing an accusation such as this I'm sure that we can agree that it is very important to look at the motive(s) involved. In a business transaction the motive is typically monetary. If we had been informed that the client's intention was to buyout the loan after two weeks (as the client claims) we would have known that there was no monetary benefit to us. We expended labor, time and other expenses at a loss to us and we jeopardized our relationship with the equipment seller. The client, however, received the trailer in a timely fashion to meet their business needs. Their expectation, after the fact, was that there should be no interest charged and no fees assessed. Essentially, the client wanted to have us fund their trailer purchase so that they could receive it and then they wanted to have their bank purchase the loan from us at the cost of the trailer. I would put it to those reading this letter and ask which party gained during this transaction?

In short, we dispersed our funds and facilitated and expedited the delivery of the trailer to this client. Once they had possession of the trailer, then and only then, were we informed that they wanted to buyout the loan immediately. Moreover, they wanted to exit the transaction without concern for our labor, time and report expenses. I’m sure the client (or any company reading this rebuttal) does not offer their services free of charge. However, that was the client's expectation of us.

In regard to the pre-payment penalty, we were specifically asked by the client if they could buyout of this transaction after a couple of years without a pre-payment penalty (we now know that the time period mentioned was devised to hide the truth from us; which again was their intent to pay the loan off immediately yet still use our services to obtain the trailer weeks before they would have been able to had they financed with their local bank). Our response was that none of our notes carry a pre-payment penalty, which is absolutely the case. In general, conservative banks will charge a prepayment penalty of 5 points in year one, 4 points in year two, decreasing by one point each year; this is how traditional banks ensure that they won’t take a loss on a loan and allow clients to take advantage of their services at no cost to the borrower.

Of course there will be an interest charge to get out of any loan, before the borrower has made a single payment, when there is no pre-payment penalty built into the transaction. Why would any lender expend their resources to take on a loan and risk their funds without realizing a profit? To that point, never once did we tell the client that their interest cost would be zero if they wanted to buyout before they had made a single payment to us. Their intentions were not made known to us until after the loan was funded. We see that the client has stated in her letter to you that we informed them to the contrary in writing. We would like to see this written statement as we know it does not exist.

We also see that the client stated: “We were required to send 10% of the lowboy via overnight mail prior to the finance company even providing any terms.” This is a complete falsehood. First, we would appeal to common sense. Would anyone reading this send 10% down without knowing the terms of the loan? This claim doesn't pass the smell test. The terms were specified in writing within our proposal to the client. This proposal was signed and dated by the client and sent back to us by the client along with the ten percent down payment that was due. Both the proposal and the down payment check were dated for the same date.

The client also stated in her letter to you “When asked for the payoff, Scott Hickerson avoided us and told us that it was a strange request. After a week, I finally got aggressive and they gave us a payoff……” Never was this client avoided, but yes, I do expressly remember stating that it was a strange request. The reason I found this to be a “strange request” is due to the fact that in my 15 year career this is something that has never been requested. In addition, the President of our bank line, who has been in the industry for 27 years, has also never had a client make this request in the past. Between the two of us that’s a sample size in the tens of thousands of transactions. Thankfully this is the only client that has ever thought it was acceptable to take advantage of us like this client has done. So yes, it was indeed a very strange request; in fact an unprecedented request. Nonetheless, we provided this client with a buyout letter in a very timely manner. The buyout letter was requested on Friday August 22nd at 2:25pm (that’s 5:25pm Eastern Time which is the time zone location of our office where the buyout letter would need to be generated). The buyout request was not received by the East coast office until Monday morning and the buyout letter was delivered to the client on Tuesday August 26th at 10:25am (should you like to see evidence of this time frame in writing, the emails can be made available to you). The time frame of a week, that's referenced in the client's letter, and the statement of avoidance is yet another fabrication. The buyout letter was generated in about one business day.

In addition to the terms of the note being in writing, we have a recording of the client verbally accepting the terms of the contract in our final “verbal verification” that was made directly before the release of funds. All of our loans have both a written and oral acceptance of the loan terms in order to avoid situations like this.

All of this being said, once we learned of the client's dissatisfaction with the terms we spoke with the seller of the equipment, obtained a refund from them, and unraveled the transaction. We did this in an effort to keep everyone happy. Apparently, once again, our efforts were taken for granted even though the client was allowed to exit the transaction.

It is truly egregious that this client has taken advantage of us, expended our resources, taken up our time and slandered our effort, all at a loss to our company. We unraveled the transaction and it is truly disgraceful for them to attempt to discredit our good name after all they have put us through and we have done in order to satisfy their issues.

Again, I thank you for your help and attention to this matter.

Respond to this report!
Ripoff Report Recommends
ZipBooks Accounting Software

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.