Global Funding Solutions - Paul McKay SCAM Beverly Hills, CA Internet

In our course of business we deal with thousands of potential business financing clients each year who contact us from ads and/or our web site gfsbusiness.com for high end business loans up to $50 million.  Sometimes we run into flakes and/or people with an agenda to get free work done at our expense.   Unfortunaly some people get upset when we advise them that their is a fee for these services. Mr. Patrick is such a person who simply want free work and claims to be a "jack of all trades" but in reality is a master of none!  More on his work experience later.  To deal with his initial complaint Mr. Patrick is advised to read the US Patriot Act Section 326 which spells out the guidelines that lenders must adhere to in the verification process though Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) and other credit agencies to avoid terrorism, illegal transfer of funds, money laudering etc. that is a part of the federal commercial lending process.  Evidently Mr. Patrick did not want to pay for us to complete his D&B Business Information Report which calls for a retainer fee of $3,500 as his business had no report.   This is a time consuming process that envolves specialized work. Note for the record that we never did any business with this individual, never collected any monies nor signed any contracts.  Nevertheless,  after only one e-mail from Global and two phone calls stating why this D&B report was essential he took the liberty of trying to ruin the business of Global and the reputation of Paul McKay by filing a frivolous online complaint with Rip-Off Report!  Why did he take this extreme action without considering the consequences?   He could have just walked away.  Well, for one thing he has a tremendous ego and is a CON Man!   Here are some of the businesses that he's claiming to have been in - He's a real "Jack of All Trades":  Seek - Client Services and Tech Manager Mar 2000- December 2001, Micros Systems Inc.- Consultant Jan 2002 - June 2006, Oracle - Senior Technical Analyst  - July 2006 - Sept 2010, Patrick Brothers LLC - Managing Partner Aug 2010 - Jan 2011, Ace Cab - (Yes, a cab driver) from Jan 1997 - Jan 2002, Bonita Cab- Jan 1997 - Jan 2002.  He was even a commercial airline pilot Captain with US Airways from Feb 2000 - Oct 2001 so he claims! (Note: No pilots license has been verified in our investigation......HMMMM!).   Believe it or not he even started a detective agency about four months ago!  He's a big time activist too - just go on facebook and read all about it.  He dabbles in human rights as he's a black man, aged 45, a feminist and determined to make his mark by "cracking down" on all business activities that he's deems a SCAM.  So who is the real SCAMMER here?  We're dealing with a man with a tremendous ego who has sophisticated businesses (allegedly) who just can't make it in the real world.  He goes from job to job and career to career! Is there anything this man can't do? Anytime Mr. Patrick tells you something about his accomplishments question it and do your own investigation.  You might be surprised about the other things we have found out about this man.  Fortunately, for Mr. Patrick he got off easy as we sued him for filing this frivolous complaint which has highly damaged our business and the reputation of Paul Mckay.  We deny and dispute his allegations based on his convoluted "analysis".  Furthermore, as he agreed with Jason Mock of Thunderstruck Signs whom he refers to in his complaint we obtained a judgment against Mock and business for over $180,000 in Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC605165! You can read all about it at lasuperiorcourt.org and select "case history" in the search bar.  Now we in process of collection.  Or, call our office at 310-461-1919 or our attorney Eric Ridley at 805-244-5291 and we will be glad to fill you in on more information learned abuout Roy Patrick and Jason Mock.  Note that Patrick endorses the complaint of Mock.  Once someone attacks our business, officers or employees unfairly we take them to court.  Don't let scam artists and con men ruin your business.  Take them to court.  Sue them!  Due to the liberal court system the judge made a bad decision and could'nt recognize the damage that Patrick's complaint did to our business.  According to this judge anyone can call anyone as SCAMMER as it's only an opinion.  My opinion is that we're dealing with an "all talk" CON MAN - MR ROY PATRICK of CRETE ILLINOIS.   You can also check out our business with the Better Business Bureau which gave us an "A+" rating, the Business Consumer Alliance which rated us "AAA" plus read positive Client reviews on these sites and on trustlink.com or access Paul McKay for endorsements on linkedin.com.  Note that none of the allegations made by Rip-Off Perpetrators is ever verified.  If you pay attention to the nonsense that Patrick and others perpetuate without knowiing what they're talking about then we probably don't want you as a client either.   We have run a successful operation for about twenty years - fulltime.   We don't "dabble" like Mr. Patrick - financing is our one and only business and have numerous satisfied Clients.   Thank you!

My problems with McKay and his company Global Funding Solutions exploded after I made my initial post to this site, stating that I believed I was being scammed.  He threatened to sue me (for hundreds of thousands in damages), then said he would settle for just $3,500.  When I hired a lawyer to push back, he harassed the attorney, and made a spurious race-based comment.  When I still refused to pay the $3,500 he demanded.  I still don’t know how he settled on that number, I did not order any services from him and didn’t owe him anything – in fact, I had told him, in essence: “I need money, which is why I am seeking financing – why would I give you money before you secure financing?  And if you are sure you can obtain financing for me, why don’t you just agree to take the up-front fees you are requiring out of the funds you secure?”.

Well, McKay sued me for “defamation” in LA Superior Court (Case No. BC 612474), alleging in the complaint and in arguments to the Court that my prior post greatly harmed his business, and falsely claiming that I had essentially accused him of being a criminal.  His actions may be criminal, but I did not say that.  Before I responded to the complaint, he again attempted to get me to settle with him.  The frivolousness of his demands were obvious:  Although he was claiming in the lawsuit actual damages of at least $500,000, punitive damages of at least $500,000, and his attorneys fees, he was willing to settle his case against me for less than $5,000.  Rather than cave in, I filed a motion opposing the complaint, giving the Court the true facts of my involvement with McKay, and my investigative findings regarding McKay and his businesses – including findings that suggest he does business under various aliases, has declared bankruptcy perhaps multiple times, does not have his own business office or address and only uses P.O. Boxes, virtual offices and telephone lines he can hide behind, and is not as successful as he claims (his own company is not listed on Dun & Bradstreet, although he insisted it was necessary for my company to be listed there -- hence the required payment -- to get funding.  I argued that my prior comments were only statements of my opinion, and were not defamatory under the legal standard for that cause of action in California.  LA Superior Court Judge Daniel Murphy (Dept. 32, Central Courthouse), agreed with my arguments.  In his ruling issued on July 22, 2016, here is what the Judge said: ““The critical determination of whether an allegedly defamatory statement constitutes fact or opinion is a question of law for the court and therefore suitable for resolution by demurrer. . . . In drawing the distinction between opinion and fact, California courts apply the totality of the circumstances test to determine whether an allegedly defamatory statement is actionable. In applying the totality of the circumstances test, ‘editorial context is regarded by the courts as a powerful element in construing as opinion what might otherwise be deemed fact.’ . . . Part of the totality of the circumstances used in evaluating the language in question is whether the statements were made by participants in an adversarial setting. ‘[W]here potentially defamatory statements are published in a. . . setting in which the audience may anticipate efforts by the parties to persuade others to their positions by use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole, language which generally might be considered as statements of fact may well assume the character of statements of opinion.’” (Ferlauto v. Hamsher (1999) 74 Cal. App. 4th 1394, 1401–02 [citations and internal quotations omitted].)  Plaintiff’s defamation action is premised on Defendant’s statement: “I did a search and determined that his Las Vegas “office” was a UPS Store and decided he was a scammer.” (Compl. ¶ 24.) Defendant contends that this statement is merely an opinion, not an actionable false statement of fact. Defendant states that he “decided” Plaintiff was a “scammer” after dealing with Plaintiff and conducting further research. Thus, the clear implication is that this is a statement of Defendant’s opinion of Plaintiff based on his experiences with Plaintiff. Furthermore, based on the copy of the statement attached to the complaint, it appears that the “Ripoff Report” is a website where user can post complaints about businesses. When read in this context, it is even more apparent that Defendant’s statement is merely an opinion. The audience of a consumer complaint website would expect to read negative statements about businesses and would anticipate epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the statements alleged in the complaint are opinions, and are not actionable false statements of fact.  [Defendant Patrick’s Motion to dismiss the complaint] is SUSTAINED without leave to amend.” 

So, I won a judgment dismissing McKay’s complaint, and will get my costs of suit as part of the judgment.  Believe me, I thought of just paying McKay the $3,500 he demanded, just to make all of this go away.  I am sure a lot of people probably do; being sued is traumatic.  But, I found a good lawyer who advised me of my options and helped me with my filings.  After some sleepless nights, my decision to fight back proved right.  As an aside, I do wonder how much money McKay makes by threatening to sue people he contacts if they don’t use his services.  If it is just twenty a year, that’s a cool $70,000 he and his lawyers could make, just by shaking down people for not wanting to do business with him.  Makes me think of writing a book: “How Do Pricks Get Rich?”     

So, again I say, “Steer Clear!”  Don’t be a victim.  If Paul McKay comes at you the same way he did me, I encourage you to fight back.  If his pushiness makes you uncomfortable, call him on it.  Don’t be afraid to tell him no, and refuse to pay him any money before actual services are provided, or you can fully see the benefits he promises.  Post your experiences here and elsewhere, and warn and inform others of the type of business he is running.  That is our public responsibility and service, and our best way of protecting ourselves and others from businesses that bully and/or take advantage of consumers.  McKay may actually provide a good service to some consumers, but my experience with him from the start was completely negative.  He was hostile, aggressive, and nasty.  Then he sued me.  Of course, then I got the last word, with Judge Murphy’s ruling.  Haha.  [If anyone wants me to send them a copy of the files of my court case against McKay, post that request here, and I will send you a link].   Be wise.