S.T.A. Financial, Inc.

8/28/16[redacted],In response to the complaint from [redacted] Owner of [redacted]dated 8/18/16 from the Revdex.com Case # [redacted].Mr. [redacted]’s complaint does not tell an accurate accounting of the timeline and services provided by STA Financial Inc. The below information is...

in response to Mr. [redacted]'s complaint.Mr. [redacted]’s personal banker referred STA Financial Inc. to him on 12/17/15. This was after his bank was not able to provide additional financing for his equipment finance needs. This was due to a previous loan made to [redacted] 6 months earlier from the same bank. The bank wanted to wait for an additional 6 months before providing additional finance based on their current exposure. His bank also wanted copies of his 2015 corporate tax return. Mr. [redacted]'s bank recommended using STA Financial Inc. as we provide competitive lease finance solutions for this type of industry and equipment. The banker, in a copied email to STA & Mr. [redacted] then stated that “STA Financial Inc is a reputable local business and I do endorse them.” STA has also funded millions of dollars with this banker and provided competitive solutions for our customers. The next day Mr. [redacted] Contacted STA Financial Inc to discuss and start the process of obtaining an approval for his current needs.After approximately 30 days we obtained commercial credit information & due diligence for his request, STA Financial obtained a pre-approval with our participant national bank group and program. [redacted] met the equipment lease program credit guidelines. The criteria were based on clean public credit information obtained through commercial credit reporting. An “Equipment Lease Proposal Commitment” contract dated (1/22/16) was presented on 1/25/16 in a face to face meeting at [redacted] with Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] requested time to review and wanted to look over the contract and options before making his final decision. Mr. [redacted] requested a 2nd option with a larger down payment to lower his monthly payment. STA provided information and 2- amortization schedules for his review on 1/25/16 that same day. After his review Mr. [redacted] emailed STA Financial and requested Scott [redacted] to stop by and pick up the signed Equipment Proposal Commitment on 2/3/16. Scott [redacted] met with [redacted] at [redacted] and went over details again for the proposal commitment. Mr. [redacted] signed and provided a check for the required upfront fees to move ahead to obtain the final approval for his request.The “Equipment Lease Proposal Commitment” contract is standard procedure. After preliminary financial documentation and public credit information are obtained, the public business credit is processed. This is still subject to rejection if any undisclosed derogatory information arises in the final credit process. Our national bank partner was presented [redacted]'s final documentation and request for final approval. . The final due diligence brought to light an internal default of a significant amount in a different department of the bank that was not public information ordisclosed by Mr. [redacted]. Due to Mr. [redacted] not disclosing this default and obligation our participant bank rejected the final approval and funding.I went over this information at length with Mr. [redacted] and discussed possible options for an alternate option. On 2/16/16 Mr. [redacted] verbally and by email requested STA Financial try to find other solutions of which was provided. STA Financial acquired 2 additional options. Based on the alternate programs and payment was higher and discussed with Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] decided to terminate the process and seek other finance options on his own.Mr. [redacted] requested a refund and cancellation at that time. On 3/18/16 Mr. [redacted] was refunded $4749.30 per the Equipment Lease Proposal Commitment per his request.The “Equipment Lease Proposal Commitment” contract fully explained that “If STA Financial Inc. or finance partners fails to approve the transaction substantially as proposed herein, STA Financial Inc. shall refund said deposit in full, less the processing fee and origination.” In the commitment that Mr. [redacted] signed 2/3/16, itclearly spells out the amount of $6,505.07 included the first 3- payments totaling $4749.30. The remaining balance was the credit processing fee and origination required for providing services to obtain final approval for this request. Mr. [redacted] states that he is due the balance of $1752.77 with no accounting for the 3 months ofservices provided on his behalf along with the agreed terms and conditions of the Equipment Lease Proposal Commitment signed and agreed to on 2/3/16.If Mr. [redacted] had been upfront and disclosed his previous default with our participant banks first proposal, the lower rate option would never had been offered. However, STA Financial did continue to pursue additional options per Mr. [redacted]'s request and benefit. STA Financial was able to provide two additional options for [redacted]Mr. [redacted]'s paid fees were agreed to per the Equipment Lease Proposal Commitment. Requesting an additional refund (5) months after receiving a full refund based on the terms of the contract is unwarranted. Mr. [redacted]’s attempt to provide false inaccurate accounting of the details is also very disappointing and misleading to STA Financials’ reputation. STA Financial provided services up and beyond the Equipment Lease Proposal Commitment agreed to by Mr. [redacted] & [redacted]STA Financial considers this matter closed on 3/18/16 at the time of Mr. [redacted]'s request and STA Financials’ refund per signed contract terms.Regards,Scott [redacted], PresidentS.T.A. Financial, Inc.