Although we had reservations about potential conflicts of interest, such as cherry-picking the best leads for themselves, they assured me they were no longer wholesaling and were focused solely on the VA lead generation services.

Their familiarity with our local market and deep insights into targeting specific areas seemed like a major advantage over services from outside our region. After much consideration, we decided to move forward with them. The budget was set at $5,000 per month, and we agreed on an initial three-month trial with the option to terminate early if the results were unsatisfactory.

During our onboarding call, they promised at least four qualified leads per day, with one VA dedicated to our account. This translated to roughly 80 leads per month, which aligned with our goal of closing 2–4 contracts monthly. I provided a list of zip codes, including some in lower-income areas that overlapped with neighborhoods of interest.

Weekly Breakdown and Results:

• Weeks 1–2: Early Challenges
  As calls began, most leads came from lower-income areas within the zip codes we had provided, but not from the specific neighborhoods we wanted. When I raised this concern, they reminded me that these zip codes were part of my list and contained the most motivated sellers. While that explanation seemed plausible, it didn’t fit our buy box. We adjusted the model by removing the undesirable zip codes.

• Weeks 3–4: Reduced Lead Flow
  After removing those zip codes, the number of leads dropped significantly. Although we understood this was a ramp-up period, we were disappointed not to secure any contracts by this time. Compounding this, our bookkeeping team delayed the second payment by a few days. That was our fault and certainly accept responsibility for this. Without notifying us, the VA lead gen service paused our account and reassigned our VA.

• Week 5: Restart and More Delays
  Once the delayed $5,000 payment was made, they assigned a new VA, but it took several days to resume calls. Even then, the number of leads remained low due to our revised zip code list.

• Weeks 6–7: Nearly No Leads
  By this point, the lead flow was nonexistent for 10 days. Despite pulling 2,500 records monthly, skip-tracing, and auto-dialing, we received very few leads. When I contacted the service, they explained that their lead manager had been dealing with health issues and promised to credit us for the lost time. They assured me their “best rock star VA” would now handle our account.

• Week 8: Suspicious Improvements
  With the new VA, leads improved and were finally seeing them come in from our target areas. However, many of these leads were problematic. Some homeowners claimed they had been contacted days earlier, while others had no intention of selling. This sudden improvement in lead quality raised red flags. Why hadn’t we seen these kinds of leads in the first seven weeks? It seemed plausible they were reallocating leads from another client and we were the secondary calls. I have zero proof of this but my gut was telling me otherwise.

• Week 9: Billing Dispute and Termination
  When the third invoice arrived, I reminded them of the promised credit for earlier disruptions. They argued that since the lead quality and quantity had improved, no credit was offered. Frustrated by their lack of accountability and unwillingness to honor their commitments, I decided to pause the service. Despite my constructive feedback, they insisted we continue for a third month, citing the need to pay their VAs. Ironically, they had no issue pausing the service when our second payment was delayed and they reassigned the VA. At this point, it became clear they were more focused on securing payments than maintaining a long-term relationship. Their actions suggested they expected us to terminate after the third month and wanted to extract as much revenue as possible beforehand. Ultimately, I chose to terminate the service entirely.

We spent $10,000 and locked up zero contracts.

Observations

• Conflict of Interest: Before hiring, we discussed potential conflicts of interest, including lead-sharing and whether they might resume wholesaling. They assured us they wouldn’t, yet during the contract, my rep twice offered leads from their “old wholesaling overflow,” raising suspicions.

• Transparency Issues: Initially, they agreed to provide VA call recordings for review but later refused, citing confidentiality. This lack of transparency made it impossible to verify how leads were being qualified.

• Missed Targets: They promised four leads per day but delivered only 56 leads in 60 days, just 25% of the expected target.

• Quality Shift: The drastic improvement in lead quality during week eight was suspicious, likely indicating leads were being shifted from another client to cover for their earlier failures.

• Lead Misrepresentation: Many leads were unqualified. Some homeowners had no intention of selling, others we were never able to connect with after 5-8 follow up calls, and vacant land which we do not buy. This as at least 40% of all leads received.

• Market Saturation: Despite claiming not to wholesale, I discovered from other investors they were offering wholesaler coaching meetups and obviously upsold their VA services to new wholesalers. They never disclosed this to us. We weren’t competing with them, just every other new wholesaler they trained and used their services.

Lessons Learned

• Avoid hiring lead generation services based in your market.

• Don’t work with services who are current or former wholesalers.

• Insist on reviewing VA recordings to ensure transparency.

• Establish clear monthly goals and outcomes for non-performance.

• Define what constitutes a “qualified” lead. A lead should reflect genuine seller intent, not just a conversation.

• Outline specific remedies for service disruptions, such as credits, breach of contract, or termination.

• Limit initial commitments to 1–2 months and switch to a month-to-month basis only if they perform as promised.

This experience was a tough but valuable lesson that highlighted the challenges of outsourcing critical lead generation tasks. By relying on an external service, we encountered conflicts of interest, a lack of transparency, and an overall failure to meet expectations. However, these challenges have become a positive lesson to take control of our lead generation process and bring it in-house. This will give us the ability to control every aspect of the process and ensure consistent results. Obviously, something we should have done from the start.