Paul Tomasi Project Funding duo rips off clients Hilton Head Island South Carolina.

Dear Wil and anyone reading this:
Thank you for the above post.

I sincerely and humbly apologize if any language or verbiage I used offended those who were funding you and then with good judgement did not continue to do so.

Indeed ironically GFN's contract with you asked that you do due diligence on the finder (gatekeeper) and the funder, and if your people did such, and ''smelled something rotten in Denmark", then by all means, thank God, they did not pay any more money into the deal.

While I am retired and not to be working, I will as per your request on the phone, review a business plan for a project in one of the Carib Islands and try to match it with a funder or finder or both, at no charge to you or them, from me. Since you are the broker, if this closes, this will help you earn a commission, and help you earn back some of the money you spent.

Remember however, this is not what I normally do. I just collected business plans, and made sure they were complete and forwarded them. So please, this time, I beg, as I asked before, any funder or finder that I mention to you, I cannot warrant or guarantee . You must have your lawyers, do due diligence on anyone, before you deal with any of them. I do not know any one. And obviously, from the postings above, even if I did think I know someone, I am very trusting by nature and believe in the goodness in people, and that unfortunately, may not be a good trait to have when sums of money are at stake.

Again, my amends if any wording about your benefactors were misleading. I am only finding the whole story in bits and pieces from your side, as you know, as your contract states with IBC, I and everyone else, was to be not communicated with.

Let us move forward with Providence's blessings.

" Doctor S____ has gone out of his way, being very ill, to help me in my funding process. He has introduced me to the Vice President of a USA major national bank in charge of their commercial loans. He has talked to me for an hour each a few times on the phone. As soon as he discovered Tomasi was not what he was saying he was, Dr. S_______ stopped referring to him. Please, no one post anything negative about Dr. S ______ . He is a victim, as well, of a smooth con man. Thank you, WM, Southern Caribbean Air."

Also,
Dr. S Please correct the inaccuracy of our relationship. My investors did not stop supporting me, they became suspicious of Mr. T---. So, in order to protect us they no longer wanted to deal with him. Second, a lot of indecent things were said about my associates undeservingly; I think they need an apology. Yes we speak on the phone for an hour, and each time you are a gentlemen over the phone. But on the internet you reduce me to nothing. I want that corrected as well.

wm

Dear Carey Ohio:

You are 100% correct that people can be judged by the company they keep.

People can also be judged by the company they leave when they find that those they kept company with are not abiding by the same ethics one wishes to live by.

Con men gain one's confidence. They are smooth. I knew the above for 5 years. For 5 years, once a week, I had dinners with him and discussed only topics of a spiritual nature. The word 'God' was in every other sentence.

When he asked me to become a referral source for IBC, I had no reason to doubt him. He told me his other source was a minister in Missouri.

As in any relationship, it can take a while to find out those who we are keeping company with, are not what they said they were. As we all know, some marriages can go on for years, with one spouse cockolding the other. Our own nation can be deceived by polititians, and even re-elect them, only to end up trying to impeach them, and then watching them resign in disgrace. We don't call the husband a tramp because his wife was, and we don't call every American a crook and a burgler because Nixon was.

It takes a while in IBC's funding process with so many steps to discover that some one who was referred to IBC got stuck in the funding process.

I started referring to IBC circa mid July 07 and left in Nov 07. Ironically, I didn't leave because of Southern Caribbean Air nor Pig Papas not being funded. As both will attest, I thought their funding was going along fine in IBC's hands.

I knew Big Papa got rejected by her original funder because a 'black mark' came up in due diligence that wasn't disclosed on her original application to GFN but that IBC was going to get her another funder, at no additional cost to her. This is what I was told by IBC. And as far as Southern Carib Air, Mr. M____ told me they were on their way to California for a meeting with the funder.

I left, because a week before leaving, two brokers, came a great distance to have lunch with me. Just lunch and then they left to travel back. Most of the businesses that we tried to help came from business brokers, folks who were giving professional advice to their clients, in the funding process and being paid quite well for this service by the clients. And these two brokers told me something which made me shiver, and showed me emails.

See, my agreement with IBC included me not being involved with the businessperson, once they signed IBC's financial procurement agreement. I heard little bits and pieces but nothing major.

And on that lunch date, I found out that the president of IBC talked and wrote to clients in the most unprofessional, unGodlike manner. I wanted no part of it. I became very physically ill, requiring medical attention, and told him I would not refer to him any longer. I was so ill, my doctors, pulled me totally away from the business. 4 months later, and a doctor's appointment this week, and I am still not out of the woods.

It was only by seeing ripoff report.com, that I found out that Big Papa and Southern Carib Air were not heading toward funding.

You ask what did I do to help them.

Even though it was not my business obligation to do so, [as my job was to refer to a gatekeeper (a finder of funding) and it was the business's job to follow the written advice given, 6 times, and have an attorney and accountant, with them every step of the way, and be 100% forthcoming and have all fees ready before applying], for Southern Carib Air, [because they were indeed given a funder by IBC, but their personal source of helping them pay the funder's fees changed his mind], I got them to the vice president in charge of commercial loans for one of the USA's largest commercial banks, with funding fees paid at closing, built into the loan.

If their business plan passes this banks 'muster' and no 'black marks' pop up, and they are collateralized with air routes and air planes as they say, God willing, they will get funding. I also waived the fee that I would get on their closing. Even though I am not to be working at all, I spoke with Mr. M______ on the phone the other day, and he has made contact with the bank and this vice president.

With Big Papa, I first advised her to work with her attorney and accountant, and get this 'black mark' of 20 years or so, off her record (expungement). I then gave her 26 names and addresses and phones numbers included on web sites, of major funding sources. These came from finders and gatekeepers, who I know, who felt badly for her, but also equally badly for me, that I was hood winked also. She has been advised, that before she approaches any of these funders, to have her record cleared, and to work only with a lawyer and an accountant.

With Big Papa I have answered her email questions the best I can, but funding is so tight now, until she gets her past record completely expunged, she is not fundable, in this economic climate.

The third post on ripoff report.com, from Kentucky, is also Big Papa. And some one posted today, from Chicago, and I never had a business from Chicago that I tried to help with funding, so someone else, sent them to Paul Tomasi. His post does not mention me, thank God.

As far as continuing on the line of the company we keep, when I left, so did the minister in Missouri. He independently found out similar things. And after I left, I found out another of IBC's referral sources left a few months, before I began to refer, for similar reasons.

And because smooth is smoooooooth, a web search reveals two new referral sources are on the web, telling businesses of how IBC gets results "100%" of the time. I had no reason to doubt this, and while I have no proof, I am willing to say that these two new referral sources, believe like I, the minister from Missouri, and the fellow from DC, that the folks they refer to IBC will all be funded.

Remember, as all will admit, IBC did exactly what his Financial Procurement Agreement said he would do and more. He said he would 'try' to find them a 'possible funding source.' He did this for Big Papa but she got dropped when something from her past showed up. So IBC got her another 'source.' This source, unlike the first source, is someone in Europe, who was going to 'try' to farm her funding request out for a 'fee'.

IBC got Southern Carib Air a funding source, and all would be going along, but their friends who were giving them the money for the funding fees, backed out.

While someone's attitude is, so what, its your problem, the way I live my life, is to try to help folks as best as I can. While its sad Big Papa lost her funding cause of a black mark 20 years old, and sad that SCAir can't use the funding source they were giving, because they lost their money for funding fees, if IBC treated them professionally, and with kindness, they would never have to have had to post on ripoff dot com.

As soon as I saw these posts, I did my best to get in touch with these folks and do what I could to help them. They paid IBC. I helped them out of basic human kindness. I waived both of my fees upon closing from both of them.

I am retired and not well. I am not going to be answering any more postings. Both companies posts slandered and libeled me. They accused me of fraud, and taking their money and being in some scheme with Tomasi. I was not. I didn't get angry at them because I could read how angry and unclear thinking they were. And I like them.

I have helped them more than IBC ever did, hence, they have gotten more than their money's worth that they paid IBC. Now I am the injured party with this web gossip. All of us have been hurt. Let us stop pointing fingers at each other, work towards getting businesses who need loans funded, and post about the companies who are still out there hurting folks. I never did and I was referring to Tomasi for circa 3 months. Don't judge me or my life of more than a half century because I was conned just as these two businesses were. I got out quickly. It took the minister a year to see through it and the fellow from DC, even longer.

So while some may judge others by the company they keep, and while one is best off not judging at all, LET US ALSO JUDGE SOMEONE BY THE COMPANY THAT HE DROPS.

This is the end. SCAIR and Big Papa are made more than whole.

May God bless you and keep you.

This goes out to Dr. Segal as I have seen there is more than one report with him included and leaving very long rebuttles. I have noticed that in all cases the filer has said you are helping them but do not go into detail about how. My comment however is, are we not judged by the company we keep? Its obvious that you have kept company with this Tomasi guy. Now your rebuttles are very long and include always the wrong that whom ever has committed to not get what they needed in these cases funding on all counts, and since I have counted three 3 that means there is a pattern. All cases have had 1000's of dollars taken with no real pay- off that is why they have come to this site. Dr. segal although I am sure you beleive you are right, people are judged by the company they keep, you should choose yours more careful so as not to have your name drug into such matters.

This goes out to Dr. Segal as I have seen there is more than one report with him included and leaving very long rebuttles. I have noticed that in all cases the filer has said you are helping them but do not go into detail about how. My comment however is, are we not judged by the company we keep? Its obvious that you have kept company with this Tomasi guy. Now your rebuttles are very long and include always the wrong that whom ever has committed to not get what they needed in these cases funding on all counts, and since I have counted three 3 that means there is a pattern. All cases have had 1000's of dollars taken with no real pay- off that is why they have come to this site. Dr. segal although I am sure you beleive you are right, people are judged by the company they keep, you should choose yours more careful so as not to have your name drug into such matters.

This goes out to Dr. Segal as I have seen there is more than one report with him included and leaving very long rebuttles. I have noticed that in all cases the filer has said you are helping them but do not go into detail about how. My comment however is, are we not judged by the company we keep? Its obvious that you have kept company with this Tomasi guy. Now your rebuttles are very long and include always the wrong that whom ever has committed to not get what they needed in these cases funding on all counts, and since I have counted three 3 that means there is a pattern. All cases have had 1000's of dollars taken with no real pay- off that is why they have come to this site. Dr. segal although I am sure you beleive you are right, people are judged by the company they keep, you should choose yours more careful so as not to have your name drug into such matters.

This goes out to Dr. Segal as I have seen there is more than one report with him included and leaving very long rebuttles. I have noticed that in all cases the filer has said you are helping them but do not go into detail about how. My comment however is, are we not judged by the company we keep? Its obvious that you have kept company with this Tomasi guy. Now your rebuttles are very long and include always the wrong that whom ever has committed to not get what they needed in these cases funding on all counts, and since I have counted three 3 that means there is a pattern. All cases have had 1000's of dollars taken with no real pay- off that is why they have come to this site. Dr. segal although I am sure you beleive you are right, people are judged by the company they keep, you should choose yours more careful so as not to have your name drug into such matters.

I Wil just want to make it clear that I never paid money to Dr. Segal. In any event Dr. Segal is helping me with my situation and i am content with our conversation today.

Wil

Dear Mr. Wil :

Communicating via a web site is the best way to ensure that Southern Caribbean Air will NOT get funding.

We do not take pleasure in saying this.

Funders know that clients who point fingers, especially at honest referral sources, (like GFN) , assigning them blame, but ignoring the four fingers pointing back at themselves, are risky clients in which to do business.

No one is calling you, nor Southern Caribbean Air, insolvent. No one is name calling at you. We need you to understand, as well as anyone reading your postings, that GFN , as well as IBC, made it very clear, that funders charge fees for all types of services, and that BEFORE you committed to paying IBC a fee for their services in finding you a funder, which they did, you needed to have in hand, your fees for the funder.

You assured us that you had your sources to get this. You mentioned some famous politcal international people as your close relatives, ready, willing and able to help you. If you did not have this or their help, GFN would never have allowed you to submit your application and would have advised you, to apply when you were ready.

Putting all of this behind us, you are indeed correct that the past president of GFN is ill, and his medical doctor, did force him in November 07 to leave the business. As a courtesy, he even sent this letter to you, with the doctor's name and phone number. She is the chair of the department for the illness of which he has, and holds an MD and a PhD, and is located at the state's best medical school and hospital.

Yet even though you said untrue things about GFN's past president, he tried in earnest to contact you this weekend, only getting phone numbers disconnected and a cell phone that would not take messages. Finally he located your brother, the CEO of Southern Caribbean Air.

The following was stated by GFN's past president to be relayed to you by your brother:

a. He reiterrated the history of GFN and you and Southern Caribbean Air with which your brother agreed . No monies were every paid to GFN by you. You paid your monies to IBC.

b. He and you were completely aware that there would funding costs by the funder and his signature appears on the application stating such.

c. Even though GFN is not contractually obligated, your brother was asked to have you call GFN's past president, at his home, whose number you have had for almost a half year, and he would, WITHOUT any fee to you, or Southern Caribbean Air, introduce you to the Vice President of a major national USA bank, with offices in your area, who is in charge of commerical loans, to help you.

d. He stated that if you were so dissatisfied with him, that you felt the need to lie about him and slander him on the web, he would waive his commission fee that is due him when you close your loan. He has never accepted a fee from anyone who felt he was undeserving of such.

Yet, instead of taking a few moments to call GFN's past president, GFN's past president was told today that you posted again and said untrue things, saying he is unfair and hurts small businessmen.

Your money was paid to IBC and Mr. Tomasi, and if you believe that they charged you for something you didn't receive, contact them, please.

GFN does not control or have any business interest in IBC. If IBC doesn't want to speak with you, then have your brother call. GFN advised you from the start to have your accountant and lawyer in on every call and every letter.

Wil, you as the owner of Premier Lending Company, know very well the world of funding.

And as one who has sent GFN, not only your Southern Caribbean Airline loan, but a Canadian Airline loan of 900,000,000 USA$s, and a Caribbean Telephone company loan of 600,000,000 USA$s, and another loan which GFN immediately rejected when it found that the CEO and its board, were fellons , convicted of phony stock and bond fraud by the Federal Government, you understood, and understand, that funding costs money.

You know that funding costs money, because the fees that a broker, such as yourself, would charge clients for getting them funding, would be at least, e.g NINE MILLION DOLLARS USA on the above Canadian Airline loan. Many others charge double or triple this amount.

Either one deals with traditional funders who want 20% down and the 80% to be collateralized, or you search the web, as you did, looking for funders, who will fund at 100%, but have fees for funding paid along the way, because they have no guarentee until the momement of closing, that a client will close.

Let us not forget, that you were referred to GFN by Randy Hanson of Offshore Funding Network who you went to first, but he had no funders who would deal with a telecommunication project, which is how you first approached him and GFN.

Now, Wil, do you note, how the one who was always there to answer your calls, answer your emails, always polite, and gave you straight honest advice, and even told you, that if you only had 25k of the 75k that Mr. Tomasi wanted, that GFN's comfort level would be NOT to pay this unless you had the full 75K in your hand and could afford to pay it, is the one you're slandering the most? Is it ironic to you that the past president of GFN , who you paid zero to, is offering to aid you, when Mr.Tomasi who you paid 75K is not answering your calls, and your funder, is not trying to contact you to ask why you are not following through?

Now again, for the record, please stop using a third party web site for communication. The past president of GFN, against medical advice, again tried to call you, but your cell phone doesn't work. It is obvious that you are reachable, because your brother was able to contact you, as information that you posted this morning only came from him. Your brother was asked for a phone to reach you but said he only had the same non working cell phone number that we have.

If you want GFN to help you with your funding, without you paying GFN, which you never have, please call tonight or tomorrow at the latest. The past president of GFN can introduce you to the head of commercal loans for one of the USA's largest banks. He is this bank's Vice President. The past president of GFN and he had dinner together 10 days ago.

You can arrange to have funding fees put into closing costs with the bank. If you cannot get funding with this bank with this connection, no one will be able to help you at the present. You are advised again, that when starting with this bank, to have your professional accountant and lawyer with you from the start.

You mention 'the man upstairs' and it is assumed you mean G!D. Your slander is not being taken personally, as your frustration is understood. The other cheek is being turned and the past president of GFN is still willing to help you. But you must call him tonite or tomorrow, and please stop this posting. You are not hurting the past president of GFN, but only hurting yourself, Southern Caribbean Air, and any future client of yours that wants funding.

Continual negative posting only will show you don't want help in funding but just want to find someone to blame for misfortunes. We do not know what happened between now, February 08, and November 07. In November your email said you were heading to California to meet with the funder to close and how happy you were with GFN's service to you and your clients. You had you relatives on board to fund your funding fees. Everything looked good. Now its gone South for Southern Caribbean Air. Where did your funding committment go from your relatives?

Well let us see with a phone call, if we can get Southern Caribbean Air heading North with their funding and into the skys, instead of being grounded and its owners spending their days posting on the world wide web.

Thank you.

I am not at all surprised of Dr. Segal's response to my complaint. It takes a lot of courage to step up against these guys, they're good at what they do. And furhtermore, I have never taken any controlling position in Southern Caribbean airline, and i'll be more than happy to prove that. But just remember this Mr. Segal, as good as you are in crippling the aspirations of vulnerable business people, there is someone out there and above that is better than you, it is the man above.

Furthermore, if i had any control as an officer of southern caribbean airline, why wouldn't Paul Tomasi speak to me. He told me that he will only speak to principles of the business, and not me. Also, what are you doing reading the ripp-off report.

I thought you said that you are 100% disabled, and your doctor told you not be involved in any business involving project funding. I am however content that you mentioned to Mr. Missial that you're still willing to help. But i have to tell you, like we've always told you in the past. We don't have another dime. If you say that we're insolvent as to insult us, were not at all insulted, because we've always made it clear that we might have difficulty coming up with such a high amount of money. And you patiently waited until we came up with it.

Dear Reader:

After reviewing the original posting, other items need to be clarified.

Mr. M----- refers to himself as a broker and says it was his client who paid fees to IBC.

Mr. M----- and his brother, also a Mr. M-----, are the owners of the airline for which IBC obtained a funding source.

Mr. W. M----- refers to how his 'client' spent money and is in hardship. In fact there was no client, as the funding was sought for himself and his brother.

Further, there is ONE CRUCIAL FACT that needs to be stated. Once GFN refers a client to a finder GFN's business is completed. GFN's job is to explain the process, which it did, recieve the application, and forward it to a finder of possible funding sources.

At that point GFN is out of the picture.

Mr. M---- dealt directly with IBC for the airline funding. As mentioned above, GFN advises all clients to have their accountants and lawyers involved from the beginning of the process. GFN invited Mr. M--- to have a conference call with his attorney and accountant. He passed on this offer. GFN also advised Mr. M---- to have his attorney and accountant involved in negotiating the contract with both the finder and the funding source. This advice also was not taken.

In addition, for the Canadian airline loan and for the Caribbean telephone company loan, Mr. M--- had a written agreement with GFN. This agreement specifically stated that Mr. M---- was responsible for doing due diligence on both the finder and the funder, and that GFN was a referral source only. The finder's ''financial procurement agreement'' was the sole document between the finder and Mr. M----.

This statement was also on the web site and on emails.

GFN was not told by the finder which funder the client had received. This is the proprietary information of the finder. GFN only became aware that Mr. M---- was given funding when Mr. M---- stated so to GFN. Mr. M---- was so pleased with GFN, that he brought two other cases, as mentioned, to be funded. He was so pleased, in fact, that he wanted to continue to do business with the new owner of GFN.

While GFN cannot and will not comment on IBC, as it was not an employee nor agent of IBC, Mr. M---- 's comments about GFN and its past owner are libelous and slanderous. An apology should be posted.

Mr. M---- agreed to pay IBC 75K for pre-funding ''placement closing costs''. IBC did not collect a retainer in this case. A retainer in the 25K range is the usual for IBC for the loan amount that Mr. M---- was seeking. GFN advised Mr. M--- to have an attorney to discuss this variation from IBC's usual methods. Mr. M----- did not take GFN's advice. GFN is not involved with IBC and its contracts with clients.

Further, GFN was not involved in the transactions with Mr. M---- and his funder. As stated above, he was warned on serveral occasions prior to submitting his application, (which included his business plan), that there would be fees charged by the funder. This was printed on the web site. Mr. M---- signed that he understood this on his application.

It was Mr. M----'s responsiblity to have his accountant and attorney ask the funder for a list of all fees. Mr. M---- told GFN that he was a past loan broker and had expertise with ''term sheets'' and business loans. However, since funding an airline involves buying airplanes, he was told to expect a comprehensive due diligence fee and a complete site visit fee, at a minimum.

Mr. M----'s complaint, if he has one, lies with those to which he paid money. His contract with IBC stated that if he was not given a possible funding source he could have the American Arbitration Committee review his file in order to retrieve the fees paid to IBC.

If Mr. M---- and his brother were so dissatisfied with GFN, it is illogical that would apply more than once to GFN. The above is obvious by comparing the date on which Mr. M---- paid his funder's fee, to the date on which he sent in other clients' applications.

Lastly, Mr. M--- omits the fact that he and GFN had a fee-sharing agreement regarding commissions on GFN's closings. Mr. M---- had his own commission agreement with the clients, which GFN did NOT share. Hence Mr. M---- was to earn more than GFN.

GFN, which had worked dilgently for Mr. M----, gave Mr. M---- honest advice. Yet when Mr. M---- was not happy with one finder, GFN found Mr. M---- another finder. Therefore the accusation of a ''funding duo'' is false. GFN was never paid a dime by Mr. M----. This also applies to the Canadian airline client and the Caribbean telephone company client.

Yet Mr. M---- DID get his funding source from IBC. If he lost his funding source, it was not due to any action of GFN, nor its past or present owner.

We understand Mr. M----'s deep concerns. However, as stated above, at last conversation, circa November 2007, when GFN was sold, no complaints were ever expressed.

IN summary of this posting and the one above, an apology is owed to GFN by Mr. ----- and to its past and present owner, as GFN did exactly what Mr. M---- was promised.

Dear Reader:

After reviewing the original posting, other items need to be clarified.

Mr. M----- refers to himself as a broker and says it was his client who paid fees to IBC.

Mr. M----- and his brother, also a Mr. M-----, are the owners of the airline for which IBC obtained a funding source.

Mr. W. M----- refers to how his 'client' spent money and is in hardship. In fact there was no client, as the funding was sought for himself and his brother.

Further, there is ONE CRUCIAL FACT that needs to be stated. Once GFN refers a client to a finder GFN's business is completed. GFN's job is to explain the process, which it did, recieve the application, and forward it to a finder of possible funding sources.

At that point GFN is out of the picture.

Mr. M---- dealt directly with IBC for the airline funding. As mentioned above, GFN advises all clients to have their accountants and lawyers involved from the beginning of the process. GFN invited Mr. M--- to have a conference call with his attorney and accountant. He passed on this offer. GFN also advised Mr. M---- to have his attorney and accountant involved in negotiating the contract with both the finder and the funding source. This advice also was not taken.

In addition, for the Canadian airline loan and for the Caribbean telephone company loan, Mr. M--- had a written agreement with GFN. This agreement specifically stated that Mr. M---- was responsible for doing due diligence on both the finder and the funder, and that GFN was a referral source only. The finder's ''financial procurement agreement'' was the sole document between the finder and Mr. M----.

This statement was also on the web site and on emails.

GFN was not told by the finder which funder the client had received. This is the proprietary information of the finder. GFN only became aware that Mr. M---- was given funding when Mr. M---- stated so to GFN. Mr. M---- was so pleased with GFN, that he brought two other cases, as mentioned, to be funded. He was so pleased, in fact, that he wanted to continue to do business with the new owner of GFN.

While GFN cannot and will not comment on IBC, as it was not an employee nor agent of IBC, Mr. M---- 's comments about GFN and its past owner are libelous and slanderous. An apology should be posted.

Mr. M---- agreed to pay IBC 75K for pre-funding ''placement closing costs''. IBC did not collect a retainer in this case. A retainer in the 25K range is the usual for IBC for the loan amount that Mr. M---- was seeking. GFN advised Mr. M--- to have an attorney to discuss this variation from IBC's usual methods. Mr. M----- did not take GFN's advice. GFN is not involved with IBC and its contracts with clients.

Further, GFN was not involved in the transactions with Mr. M---- and his funder. As stated above, he was warned on serveral occasions prior to submitting his application, (which included his business plan), that there would be fees charged by the funder. This was printed on the web site. Mr. M---- signed that he understood this on his application.

It was Mr. M----'s responsiblity to have his accountant and attorney ask the funder for a list of all fees. Mr. M---- told GFN that he was a past loan broker and had expertise with ''term sheets'' and business loans. However, since funding an airline involves buying airplanes, he was told to expect a comprehensive due diligence fee and a complete site visit fee, at a minimum.

Mr. M----'s complaint, if he has one, lies with those to which he paid money. His contract with IBC stated that if he was not given a possible funding source he could have the American Arbitration Committee review his file in order to retrieve the fees paid to IBC.

If Mr. M---- and his brother were so dissatisfied with GFN, it is illogical that would apply more than once to GFN. The above is obvious by comparing the date on which Mr. M---- paid his funder's fee, to the date on which he sent in other clients' applications.

Lastly, Mr. M--- omits the fact that he and GFN had a fee-sharing agreement regarding commissions on GFN's closings. Mr. M---- had his own commission agreement with the clients, which GFN did NOT share. Hence Mr. M---- was to earn more than GFN.

GFN, which had worked dilgently for Mr. M----, gave Mr. M---- honest advice. Yet when Mr. M---- was not happy with one finder, GFN found Mr. M---- another finder. Therefore the accusation of a ''funding duo'' is false. GFN was never paid a dime by Mr. M----. This also applies to the Canadian airline client and the Caribbean telephone company client.

Yet Mr. M---- DID get his funding source from IBC. If he lost his funding source, it was not due to any action of GFN, nor its past or present owner.

We understand Mr. M----'s deep concerns. However, as stated above, at last conversation, circa November 2007, when GFN was sold, no complaints were ever expressed.

IN summary of this posting and the one above, an apology is owed to GFN by Mr. ----- and to its past and present owner, as GFN did exactly what Mr. M---- was promised.

In Response to Mr M----- and his Airline Company, I have the records of GFN's transactions as well as mine with him.

Let me set the record straight as I am impartial.

Mr. M---- and his airlines did submit a loan application to GFN who referred such to IBC for funding. IBC is a finder of funds. GFN's web site clear specified that there would be fees due to the finder and well as to any funder the finder would find for them.

Mr. M---- was advised no less than 6 times in writing via email and on the web site by GFN to have his attorney review with IBC , IBC's contract. This was not done by Mr Misial.

Further, Mr. M---- is a business broker himself, well versed in business loans.

At the same time Mr. M----'s airline was contracting for funding with IBC, he was brokering a loan with IBC for a bit less than one Billion dollars USA, for a Canadian Airline.

As it turned out, with calls going into all hours of the night, and promises that 'the check for the fee IBC earned for getting this Canadian airline funded was sent ' and being told all kinds of odd excuses, this deal never materialized, putting IBC out much time, as well as GFN.

Note that at no time, did Mr M----- ever pay GFN (Segal) a dime in any transaction.
Repeating: AT NO TIME DID MR MISIAL EVER PAY GFN (Segal) A DIME IN ANY TRANSACTION.

Mr. M---- paid IBC for their services of finding him a funding source.

When it came time for Mr. M---- to pay IBC for finding it a funder, Mr. M---- had his retainer fee waived and pre paid some of his closing points to IBC.

Mr. M----, as per IBC's contract, was given a funder, who as both GFN and IBC told Mr. -----, there would be funding fees. Mr Misial had made it clear that they were solvent and could afford such fees.

Low and behold, the funder found Mr. M----- advertising on the Web for someone to loan them money to pay for their funding fees.

This made the funder, very suspicious of Mr. M----- and his airline's capabilty of repaying any loan made, and made their originial application, where they asserted that they meet the qualifications of all funders IBC did business with, one of which was solvency, to not be valid.

Mr. M----- while all of this is going on contacted IBC again asking for a loan for a Telephone company, for more than a half a billion dollars USA, for a small Caribbean nation.

IBC would not work with Mr. M----- any more due to the Canadian airline run-around, and told him to concentrate on getting his airline funded.

Mr M----- then worked with another finder of funds.

And this new finder found this Caribbean Telephone company ( a buy out) the loan it needed with Mr. M----- as a broker.

And one day before the meeting in the Caribbean, Mr. M----- announced that the President of this Telephone company was arrested in his own Caribbean country, and that loan fell apart. And this was also after Mr. M-----'s client had this new finder of loans, jumping through hoops, with late night calls, and emails.

GFN is now sold and the buyer even tried to help Mr. Misial but stated that he would not tolerate any of the past behaviors.

Everything that GFN and IBC promised Mr. M----- that they would do they did.

While GFN was not alligned with IBC, but did refer cases to it to try to get them possible funding sources, IBC indeed got Mr. M-----'s airline company a funding source.

Unfortunately, Mr. M-----, could not afford the funder's fees, which again, he was informed about, from day one. If Mr. M----- told GFN from the start that it did not meet the criteria and could not afford fees to a funder, GFN would not have turned the application in to IBC.

For the record, again, GFN only gets its 'true pay day' if a client closes a loan, and Mr. M----- never paid GFN a penny, on any of the above three deals, making GFN working for Mr. M----- for free, involving IBC plus, two other finders of funding when each one would no longer work with Mr. M-----. Futher GFN was indeed a NJ registered division of a NJ corporation.

It is very easy to slam someone on the web, but as one who knows all sides of the story, I can state that GFN certainly wanted to see Mr. M----- funded, and enjoyed working with him, as well wanting to help him get his two other clients funded.

GFN worked very hard for them, and while GFN and its original owner are out of the business now, due to health reasons, it would be very upsetting for him to find that Mr. M-----'s airline, after getting emails that they were flying to California to meet and close with the funder, that this deal, like the Canadian Airline deal and the Caribbean phone company deal, have stalled.

At no time did GFN, the old owner or new one, receive news, that Mr. M----- airline is having funding problems. As mentioned, as of last communication, it appeared that all was going as planned.

This web posting is the first that GFN has heard of this.

We are all sorry to read of this but a funder was found, and IBC's contract with Mr. M----- in which his agreement states IBC only will 'attempt' to find a possible funding source, has been more than fulfilled.

In the era of sub prime and other loans causing Trillions to default, funders are now more than ever, raising their bar with their criteria for funding. Finders of funding like IBC and others, can only refer one to funders, but the ultimate responsiblity of closing is between the applicant and funder. Advertising on the web for a partner to pay for your funding costs, is the quickest way to turn an interested funder, into an ex-funder, and that is not the finder's not the referral source to the finders, fault.

We wish you the best of luck with your loan process. but please do not flame GFN nor its past owner for things it did not do. GFN and its past owner, as did all of us who interacted with you and your varied clients, only tried to help you, Mr. M-----, and your two clients, and it appears yourself now, have all caused situations that are out of all of our control.