How a Missouri financial company verified a borrower in 10 minutes and saved $100,000

Banks take risks when they provide loans to insolvent clients. While collaterals reduce this risk, they cannot exclude it completely. Much depends on the initial verification of the borrower and the quality of scoring. If the financial condition of the client is assessed incorrectly, the likelihood that the debt will not be paid off increases.

In this case, we will explain how a financial company from Missouri quickly and efficiently verified potential borrowers, which helped to save $100,000.

The source data

Company Information: Financial Organization A is part of a private investment holding company with headquarters in Washington. It is engaged in financing business, provides loans to individuals and corporate clients.

Problem: Company A was contacted by Company B, an agricultural enterprise that wanted to take out a loan to purchase agricultural equipment with a total value of $100,000. The property of the company and its equipment was proposed to be pledged as collateral.

Objective: Verify the potential borrower.

Tasks: Minimize the risk of collaboration.

What did we do?

  1. We checked the registration data and made sure that the company exists and is currently operating.
  2. We studied the financial statements. We paid attention to the size of the authorized capital, and the fact that it has decreased 30% over the past year. Additionally, as part of the scoring, managers drew attention to cash flow and profit before tax.
  3. We verified if the company was involved in lawsuits. No lawsuits filed against the company.
  4. We verified the reliability of the company and requested the data on sanctions, liquidation, and bankruptcy. No sanctions were imposed on Company B. The company was not going through bankruptcy or liquidation proceedings.
  5. We verified loan information. It turned out that the agricultural company was applying for a third loan. Before that, it took a loan to purchase seeds and upgrade equipment. One of the loans has not been paid off yet, and its repayment period had expired a long time ago. Moreover, the proposed property and equipment had already been pledged as collateral.

Conclusion

The management of the financial company decided against cooperation and refused to provide a loan to the agricultural enterprise. In the beginning, Company B made the impression of a reliable partner, but the fact that the company wanted to secure a loan with property and equipment which were already being held as collateral, was key in making the final decision. Perhaps this helped to save the $100,000 that the agricultural company requested for new equipment.

We serve cookies.
We use tools, such as cookies, to enable essential services and functionality on our site and to collect data on how visitors interact with our site, products and services. By clicking Accept to use this site, you agree to our use of these tools for advertising and analytics.