Complaint Review: James Rafanan

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN!!

It has been over 13 years since I wrote this report.  It was a sad and frustrating time for both James and I when I posted this originally.  Since then, our child has grown up both living with him and me.  James supported our daughter for many years after this post was made and really came through her when it was important.  Our child is now almost 20 and in the interest of James' reputation, I would like to recant this post.  I would like to say now that James should be given credit for stepping up and being a fantastic father and I regret posting this in 2002.

Patti from San Leandro

This guy sounds like a real piece of work - WAY too impressed with himself!

Interesting. Mr. Rafanan seems to be the classic wise-guy who thinks that the gift of the gab will redeem him from facts. I just so happen to frequent the island of Malta regularly and have been doing so for the last 15 years. As such, one meets many who may or may not know of certain people.

In fact, after having read this report last winter, I mentioned it to some 'friends' in Malta who coincidently knew this renowned 'casanova'. Apparantly this individual left quite an impression among the bars & nightclubs with his womanising & even worse, cheating on his Maltese girlfriend who, apparantly was supposed to have been pregnant by him too!

It is said that he had since left the Island and returned to California, leaving his Maltese connection high & dry after dishing out abuse. I only hope that this Patti has taken all necessary steps to ensure that he measures up to his responsibilities, however, from what I was told, he had a devious plan to evade payments by remaining unemployed for as long as possible and eventually spoke of trying to take his daughter away from Patti (?) Once a deadbeat, always a deadbeat I would say! Tougher laws are needed. Meanwhile I would warn any woman to stay well away from this refined, well spoken double-crosser.

I cannot assume you're intelligent enough to know this, so I'm updating your incorrect understanding- all for free of course, with the best interest of humanity in mind. :-/
Google is a SEARCH ENGINE(repeat that slowly), NOT a "things to hide" engine.
The same people smart enough to double-check their credit reports online, also look for relevant information on a myriad of subjects, using numerous search engines. Therefore, your argument is worse than pointless- It's a*s-backwards.
Of course, I could be wrong. In your imaginary little world, searching for information and subsequently making sure any pertinent information is accurate, may very well be a bad thing. Your writing certainly doesn't invoke a "common-sense" feel.
Here's what I would do if I were you: 1)Write a letter to the correspondence school from which you attained your IT "training". 2)Explain the current state of your internet-usage understanding. 3)Demand from Sally Struthers a full refund.
Furthermore, if you have neither evidence supporting the original posting or original rebuttal, nor constructive criticism which might be of use to either party involved, I suggest you find another playground in which to display your ignorance.

I cannot assume you're intelligent enough to know this, so I'm updating your incorrect understanding- all for free of course, with the best interest of humanity in mind. :-/
Google is a SEARCH ENGINE(repeat that slowly), NOT a "things to hide" engine.
The same people smart enough to double-check their credit reports online, also look for relevant information on a myriad of subjects, using numerous search engines. Therefore, your argument is worse than pointless- It's a*s-backwards.
Of course, I could be wrong. In your imaginary little world, searching for information and subsequently making sure any pertinent information is accurate, may very well be a bad thing. Your writing certainly doesn't invoke a "common-sense" feel.
Here's what I would do if I were you: 1)Write a letter to the correspondence school from which you attained your IT "training". 2)Explain the current state of your internet-usage understanding. 3)Demand from Sally Struthers a full refund.
Furthermore, if you have neither evidence supporting the original posting or original rebuttal, nor constructive criticism which might be of use to either party involved, I suggest you find another playground in which to display your ignorance.

Oh, Mr. Brian from the high-IQ-average-per-capita Inland-Empire.
The only thing you got "right" in your crude attempt at criticism, is the fact that this is truly not worth my time.
If you do some research on the subject at hand, followed by some careful consideration of the hearsay scriblings posted here(including my own), you may come to a different conclusion than the one you so absent-mindedly wrote.
However, I have little faith that you are even competent enough to do so, after witnessing your numerous spelling and grammatical errors.
Also, I'm not sure how tiny your world is, but I have many friends from many places, and have lived in too many places to remember. My point? -"Googling" is sometimes used to find updated information. You should make a note of that. Consider it a token of my esteem, sort of a charitable contribution to someone who obviously should spend less time in front of the pc exercising their mediocre wit on others, and more time at the local library or "Reading is Fundamental" van.
Lastly, I cannot believe the editors of this site actually posted your useless comments, after all their fuzzy, feel-good instructions in the rebuttal section.

If your lawyer is worth his salt, he will tell you to go pound sand and forget it. Just the way you word things make you sound like a complete fool.

Oh, and I learned a long time ago that anyone that 'googles' thier own name have things to hide.

I recently found this little gem of a posting while "googling" my name on the net in my spare time. I cannot say that I am surprised by the posting I found here- Patti is by nature, deceitful.

Allow me to be candid and brief: I have consistently paid ALL support ordered by the County of Alameda, Superior Court of California. These amounts include interest charges for the few late payments I admit.

In regard to my "other daughter" which Patti of San Leandro speaks: I paid my support directly to my older daughter's mother without pause, until I took custody of my daughter at age 16. Incidentally, the support amount I paid toward my older daughter's care was substantially greater than the amount I pay to Patti. My older daughter is now 18 and I continue to fund her education.

I possess all of the documentation necessary to prove my above statements. I strongly suggest that the libelous posting on this site regarding my character and actions, be removed from public access. I shall be consulting my attorney regarding this matter.