Chat with us, powered by LiveChat
Processor Rating No. 023  ·  The Anti-Brochure Series
MerchantE
Rates documented growing to 5-7% of every sale. A $500 exit fee on a disputed one-year term. And a PCI certificate that was valid everywhere except on your own statement.
weAUDIT SCORE 44 OUT OF 100
Scored under the weAudit Rating Methodology · Last updated July 2026 · Every claim linked to its source
Regulatory & Legal Record
25/25
Fee Practices & Contract Terms
3/25
Complaints & Resolution
6/20
Corporate Transparency
4/15
Sales Channel Conduct
6/15
Company Snapshot
Who you’re actually signing with
Company
MerchantE, the current brand of the company founded in 1999 as Merchant e-Solutions, headquartered in Redwood Shores, California, providing card, ACH, and e-commerce processing with CRM and accounting integrations. Its ownership has crossed hemispheres twice: acquired by Brazil’s Cielo S.A. in 2012, then passing into the Omise/Opn ownership structure, the Asia-based fintech group, a chain independent review flags as raising questions about strategic continuity that merchants entering multi-year agreements should take seriously. Company documentation · Ownership chain documentation · Cielo acquisition documentation
The ratings
BBB accredited since 2020 with an A+ letter grade sitting above a 1 out of 5 star customer review average, a combination readers of this series will recognize as the accreditation paradox. Independent review has adjusted the company’s customer service grade to a C, citing significant termination fees and numerous complaints about charges. Documented themes: automatic renewals, substantial early termination fees, unexpected American Express charges, fund holds, and support that does not call back. BBB record and grade adjustment · Complaint theme analysis
The systemic-pattern finding
Independent review’s own conclusion, quoted for its rarity: the range of issues documented across multiple independent sources reflects systemic patterns rather than isolated incidents. When a reviewer whose business model depends on measured language reaches for the word systemic, we score accordingly. Pattern analysis
Credit where due
The integration technology is real, the platform’s CRM and accounting connections serve genuine B2B needs, no independent-agent sales army is documented, and the located legal record is clean. The conduct documented on live accounts is what this page measures.
The Headline Finding
Five to seven percent, and $500 to make it stop
The documented account that anchors this rating: a merchant’s processing rates escalated to an effective 5 to 7 percent of every card sale, dramatically above anything disclosed at signup. When the merchant called to close the account, they were quoted a $500 penalty, on the strength of a contract the merchant states was a one-year agreement, long since expired.
Sit with the arithmetic. A typical small merchant’s total cost of card acceptance, interchange included, runs in the twos. Five to seven percent means the processor’s take had grown to roughly double or triple the entire legitimate cost of the service, a level at which processing stops being an expense and becomes a partner drawing profits. The surrounding record shows how a rate gets there quietly: independent review documents a gap between sales-quoted rates and actual billing, escalation arriving without effective notice, and, in one specimen that deserves framing, a merchant who spent three days reaching a supervisor to ask about a new fee, and was told it “replaces” another fee, except it was higher, and per the merchant’s account, both the new fee and the fee it supposedly replaced were being charged. Twice put on hold for a supervisor, twice disconnected. That is not a fee schedule. It is a fee ecosystem, reproducing.
SOURCES: Documented merchant accounts (5-7% escalation, $500 quote, replacement-fee specimen) · Quoted-versus-billed gap documentation
And the series gets a new trap for its taxonomy, documented in the merchant’s own words: “I have passed many PCI compliance tests and have certificates, but they did not honor it because it was not ‘Their’ PCI compliance.” A non-compliance fee, billed for nearly two years on an account processing nothing, against a merchant who was demonstrably compliant, just not through the processor’s own paid program. A compliance standard that only counts when you buy it from the company charging the penalty is not a security program. It is a subscription with a fine for not subscribing. SOURCE: Documented merchant account
Category 1 of 5
Regulatory & Legal Record25 / 25
No FTC actions, state attorney general enforcement, class actions, or card network fines against MerchantE or Merchant e-Solutions were located. Full marks under the formula, with the caveat this board applies to every clean docket beside a dirty complaint file: readers of our Clearent and Versapay ratings know that an empty courthouse and an empty complaint file are not the same thing, and the next four categories are where this company’s record actually lives.
SOURCES: Legal record documentation
Category 2 of 5
Fee Practices & Contract Terms3 / 25
1
Escalation at the floorThe documented 5-to-7-percent effective rate scores this subcategory at zero, joined by the replacement-fee-that-replaced-nothing specimen and independent review’s finding of a documented gap between quoted and billed rates. Under Rule 6, price level and price movement are fee practices, and this is the steepest documented escalation on this board.
2
The zero-transaction annuityA BBB reviewer documents $104.85 in a single month against zero transactions on an account they had repeatedly tried to cancel; another merchant documents nearly two years of monthly fees plus non-PCI penalties on an account with no activity, caught only when a new bookkeeper questioned the drafts. Inactive accounts that keep paying are this board’s oldest finding, and here they arrive with the PCI subscription-fine attached.
3
Exit by attritionAutomatic renewals documented as a leading theme, substantial early termination fees including the $500 quote against a disputed expired term, and a documented retention line worth preserving: merchants attempting to cancel report being told that leaving would make them non-PCI-compliant, a claim that is simply not how PCI works, followed, per the account, by the company going silent when challenged. A cancellation process that argues, then bills, then stops answering, is a process working as designed.
SOURCES: Escalation, replacement-fee, and dormant-account records · BBB record ($104.85 specimen, PCI retention claim) · Auto-renewal and ETF documentation
Category 3 of 5
Complaints & Resolution6 / 20
Absolute complaint volume is modest, and the size-normalized credit is reflected in the score. What the record documents in quality it lacks in quantity: fund holds without adequate notice or explanation appearing as a pattern; unexpected American Express charges suggesting Amex pricing is not clearly communicated; and a support record whose specimens do the talking. A customer since 2012, unable to run cards, promised priority, receiving no callback. A merchant waiting seven days for a return call after four attempts, describing representatives as playing interference with every call. And an online business whose processing went down entirely, documenting roughly $400,000 in lost sales and growing while the response window moved from end-of-day to 72 hours. For an e-commerce processor, support is not a courtesy function. It is the difference between a bad afternoon and a dark storefront, and the documented record prices it here.
SOURCES: Hold and support pattern documentation · 2012-customer, callback, and outage accounts
Category 4 of 5
Corporate Transparency4 / 15
No published pricing, a documented gap between what sales quotes and what billing collects, and an ownership story that requires a map: founded in California, sold to a Brazilian acquirer in 2012, rebranded, and now held within an Asia-based fintech structure, with independent review explicitly flagging the chain as a strategic-continuity concern and more than ten current and former employees documenting internal dissatisfaction following the ownership changes. One documented merchant summarized the practical effect: decades with the company, a broken terminal reloaded ten times, and no one reachable who could say who was actually in charge. When your processor’s owner has changed hemispheres twice, the entity deciding your rates and your reserve policy is several boardrooms removed from anyone who will take your call.
SOURCES: Pricing opacity and ownership-chain analysis · Employee record documentation · Long-tenure merchant account
Category 5 of 5
Sales Channel Conduct6 / 15
No agent army, but the quote and the bill are two different documents
Credit first: no independent-agent network is documented, and the classic ISO slamming-and-leasing record is absent from this file. The deductions come from what replaced it: the documented, systemic gap between sales-quoted rates and actual billing, which is a sales-conduct finding whoever delivers the quote; unexpected Amex pricing that surfaces only on statements; and the retention channel’s documented conduct, the PCI scare claim deployed against merchants trying to leave. A sale is not over when the contract is signed. In this record, the sale’s most important misrepresentations arrive at cancellation.
SOURCES: Quoted-versus-billed and Amex documentation · Retention claim record
The Bottom Line
If you process with MerchantE today
Is MerchantE a good processor? Based on the documented record, MerchantE, formerly Merchant e-Solutions, scored 44 out of 100 under the published weAudit Rating Methodology, a band reserved for companies whose documented record warrants extreme caution: rate escalation documented reaching 5 to 7 percent effective, a $500 termination quote against a disputed expired term, non-PCI fees billed to a demonstrably compliant merchant, and support documented failing exactly when processing goes down. The integrations are genuine; the documented conduct on live accounts is what the score measures.
Three things to do this week:
1
Compute your effective rate today, against your signup quoteTotal fees divided by total volume, for each of the last twelve months, set beside the rate you were sold. The defining account in this file drifted to 5-7% before anyone computed the number. If your line has left the twos, every month you wait is measured in whole percentage points of revenue.
2
Audit every PCI-labeled line against your actual compliance statusPull your attestation and your certificates, then match them against every PCI fee and non-compliance penalty on 24 months of statements. If you were compliant through any validated program while being billed penalties, dispute the entire run in writing, and do not accept “it wasn’t our program” as an answer without seeing where your contract says only theirs counts.
3
Get your term, renewal date, and exit cost in writing before you need themThe documented record disputes even what term merchants are on. Request the operative agreement, the current term’s end date, the auto-renewal notice window, and the exact termination fee today. Calendar the renewal notice deadline, and if the retention desk tells you leaving affects your PCI compliance, know that it does not, and get the claim in writing, because that document is worth more than the fee.
Nobody notices 5% until someone computes it. We compute it every month.
weAudit is America’s #1 Credit Card Processing Auditing Firm, founded by a Former Executive for the World’s Largest Credit Card Processor. We audit your statements every month for a low fixed fee, never a percentage, and we answer to no processor. Ever.
Get Your Statement Audited