In recent months we have had a few dealings with Convertibill and they have not gone well at all. My recommendation would be to avoid them and to find an alternative lender.
I will detail my experience and opinions on 3 different cases that we put to them and how these were handled. From there you can make your own decision as to whether you might like to deal with Convertibill.
A) Our client was looking to bridge a payment from an investor based in Australia and a matched funding payment from the Future Fund. The transaction was explained to Convertibill and they advised they could move quickly but required a commitment fee of £15,000. Our client paid the fee on the understanding that it would be refunded if Convertibill could not complete the transaction. Our client then asked if funds needed to be brought in to the UK or could they be held in escrow in Australia. At this point the client was advised that the goal posts had been moved and that they could no longer assist. The client asked for a refund of the commitment fee as did we. We were advised by Mark Runiewicz, “There was a lot of cost and £5m tied up for 10 days”. The client did not obtain any refund. I find it incredibly hard to believe that any funds would be tied up prior to formal credit approval. Our client is taking legal advice.
B) Our client was a wholesaler of hand hygiene products. They asked us to source them a stand alone trade/supplier finance product that would pay their suppliers for goods when they had large confirmed orders. Mark Runiewicz of Convertibill agreed that they could assist. We explained that the client was happy with their invoice finance provider that was Market Finance. Had the client required an alternative invoice finance facility we would obviously have assisted as this is our speciality. In speaking to the client we were surprised to learn that Mark Runiewicz who was representing Convertibill had in fact introduced the business to three invoice finance providers, namely Optimum Finance, Gener8 and Skipton Business Finance. Upon checking this introduction had been made to at least one of the lenders via another business called SC Advisors. On the website of SC Advisors Mark is described as the CEO. In my opinion this was underhand as any invoice finance requirement should have been discussed with Funding Solutions. It is also a conflict of interest as Mark should be representing Convertibill. We were advised that a new invoice finance provider was required as Market Finance would not acknowledge Convertibill. The crux of the matter is that he should not have been brokering our opportunity to other lenders via his other business. How Convertibill feel about this I am unsure. You can read more about Mark and his businesses here
C) We were looking for Convertibill to partner with a client of ours to provide a specialist marine finance product to the clients of our client. The initial discussions went well and a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA) was signed by Mark Runiewicz on behalf of Convertibill so that the client could release confidential information. The client was keen to keep the way they operated and the way they credit assessed clients confidential. They had a good product that yielded good returns and wanted to protect this. Over the course of negotiations more people from within Convertibill got involved and more and more questions were asked. Our client became concerned that Convertibill were simply trying to obtain information from them so they could structure their own marine finance offering that mirrored that of our client. This resulted in an exchange of e-mails which resulted in the CEO of Convertibill, Patrick Reynolds advising our client that, “There is no NDA “. We forwarded the signed copy of the NDA that was in place to Patrick Reynolds and Mark Runiewicz. We requested that Convertibill respected the NDA but we received no response. This is another client that is taking legal advice about how to deal with the matter and I understand that the client has sent a solicitors letter to Convertibill.