A manufacturer with two turnover stories
A Gauteng component maker’s application used invoiced sales, while its motivation described cash receipts. Both figures were defensible, but the labels made growth appear contradictory. We traced the periods, recorded the basis difference and suggested one clarification question. The adviser amended the narrative and retained both schedules with clear headings.
“The review did not polish away the difference. It showed us why the bank deposits and sales ledger could not be compared as if they measured the same thing.” — SME finance adviser, Midrand
Seasonal cash needs in food distribution
The file contained a twelve-month forecast built from an annual average, despite sharp December and January purchasing peaks. Our memorandum connected the forecast assumption to supplier statements and asked for a monthly bridge. The owner supplied it before committee discussion.
“I found the document requests exacting, and collating old supplier statements took longer than expected. Still, the final exceptions list separated the genuine seasonal issue from two harmless filing gaps.” — Operations director, family-owned distributor
An approval-condition trail
A fund governance team asked us to inspect a closed file with several application versions. We built a chronology showing which debt schedule the committee had seen and where an updated lease obligation was later recorded. The review did not challenge the decision; it gave the team a cleaner retention checklist for future files.
“The chronology let us discuss process without blaming the case officer. Each observation pointed to a version and date.” — Governance manager, enterprise lender
Names and identifying details are withheld under client confidentiality. These accounts illustrate process, not guaranteed results.