Complaint Review: STILAS - Nationwide

The firm was never based merely on the personal license of any individual. Both the law firm license and financial services license are international and for the legal entity. The State of Virginia has nothing to do with its lawful licensed authorities. Real clients are given documents to prove this. The firm is an established authority on anti-fraud and investigative due diligence, relied on for years by governments to protect investor rights. The internet is filled with expert articles on this by the firm and its founder, as well as numerous truthful descriptions of major successful fundings for clients. People who actually talk to the firm and are willing to see its documents proving its licenses, expertise and capabilities understand. People who themselves have tendencies to misrepresent themselves and violate laws to demand what they do not deserve are the ones who post complaints, as unlawful pressure to enforce their demands. Clients of the firm and their brokers (who are not blacklisted for misconduct) know that the firm regularly gives detailed informative reports to all of its clients, documenting outstanding efforts and accomplishments in the banking industry for their benefit. The costs of this work are much more than the partial expenses that the clients are asked to pay. The firm has a track record of responding to normal inquiries of paying clients within 48 hours, and to more difficult technical questions within 7 days. All claims of "never hearing from them" are false - unless you are a blacklisted criminal broker who is not allowed to receive the reports. The self-proclaimed "Truth" guy above is an amateur broker with no qualifications in law or finance, named B. Brown. He has been implicated in the ongoing federal investigation into criminal racketeering and extortion against the firm by those posting false defamatory statements. He cooperates with a known criminal who is facing up to 130 years in federal prison to help other brokers join in their racketeering ring. The firm, and multiple law firms representing it, as well as a licensed international detective agency supporting the federal investigation against the criminals opposing the firm, have documentary evidence of Mr. Brown's participation in the organized crime activities. Mr. Brown is not in a position to give the firm's President any "opportunity" to do anything, as he is actively attempting to sabotage and undermine work that will benefit his own purported clients. His client was not offered a refund, but a voluntary rebate by reducing the costs paid, in exchange for evidence the client promised to give against Mr. Brown implicating him in the criminal activities. The client backed out, and the investigators obtained the same evidence against Brown from another source, together with much more damaging evidence defending the firm's rights under law. Clearly Mr. Brown has "sleepless nights" because he is trying to lead a campaign of false defamation against a good and strong firm, that has evidence against him, and he will be facing civil law suits for substantial damages as well as possible prison time for criminal conspiracy and aiding and abetting. He has been warned about the criminality of the individuals he is actively cooperating with, and knows better. He just hasn't seen all the cumulative evidence against him yet, so he is being bold, overconfident and foolish. Brown thinks that anything he personally hasn't seen does not exist, like the happy funded clients who exist but don't happen to talk to criminals like Brown, so he wouldn't know them. If you are considering working with that firm, don't rely on words, let them show you their documents, which are the best in the industry.

The RipOff Report from Those who have dealt with STILAS & Bird Dog are right on the Money. Communications is Excellent until you have wired them their up-front fee. Then you never hear from them again. I have 4 Clients who have sent them up-front Fees, Hell it's been two years now. The clients are still asking when are we going to close? When asked for referrals, there are none, just a bunch of excuses. They talk about their Offices, take N.Y. for example, there is no one there, for a Law Firm, you think someone would be working, answering the phone. I know of many many more Brokers who have brought their clients to STILAS, with the exact same results. I have yet to meet anyone Broker or client who has had a project get funded by STILAS/Matthew Greene. I personally have given Matthew Greene every opportunity to do what was right, even going as far to recommend that STILAS give back the large up-front fees. On one call with one of my clients he agreed to do so, well it's been over a year since he told the client that. We're not holding our breath! DO NOT SEND STILAS/MATTHEW GREENE OR BIRD DOG/NILS MCKINNEY ANY MONEY. THEY HAVE A TRUST MANAGEMENT WHICH THEY ALSO ADVERTISE. DO NOT INVEST IN THIS. I KNOW OF OTHERS WHO HAVE INVESTED AND GUESS WHAT, THE COMMUNICATIONS STOP ONCE THEY HAVE YOUR MONEY. STAY AWAY FAR AWAY! FOLKS THIS IS FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND 4 CLIENTS WHO HAVE PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED THE LACK OF PROFESSIONALISM AND THE TAKING OF LARGE UP-FRONT FEES WITH NOTHING IN RETURN BUT SLEEPLESS NIGHTS.

Scott Parks has knowingly and intentionally lied about everything in his illegally false complaint. He said the firm isn't licensed anywhere. It has multiple licenses in multiple countries all in good standing. He had copies of those licenses, and knew he was lying. He said he hadn't heard from anyone for over a year. Evidence showed regular almost monthly contact. He knew he was lying and had his own email records to know that. He said the firm had not financed anybody since 2004. He had documents in hand showing successfull fundings through 2005 and 2006, so he knew he was lying about that, too. More recent fundings of the firm are extensively published on credible online official sources who verify their information including press releases. Those postings show hundreds of millions of dollars of multiple fundings very recently. They do NOT need to be addressed here. This complaint was proven completely knowingly false, and only for the criminal purpose of illegally extorting money that a law firm does not have any obligation to give, by using unlawful false defamation online. This is a serious federal crime in the United States and in other countries, and the author of this intentionally false complaint will be facing real prison time. Scott Parks is currently under federal criminal investigation for this extortion against a fully licensed firm in good standing, and the firm has a fully prepared lawsuit against him that is being pursued.

There is only one point which seems very valid on the part of Mr. Scott Parks. "Their projects and success stories are from 2004 and before". Mr. Matthew Green did everything to answer and clarify every point of Mr. Parks. But he didn't answer the point mentioned above that Mr. Parks stated. I am sure if Mr. Matthew Green took out so much of his hectic schedule to draft, and deliberate clarifying Mr. Parks comments, I am sure he will spare no nerve explaining how many success stories he has had, each year, till date.

Read the RUBUTTAL, that PROVES that the PTC posting is illegally FALSE unlawful defamation. That client misrepresented himself in signed certified statements to licensed financial institutions (which is a CRIME), and breached his contract for preparation of documents with our law firm, because he lied that he had a project to finance. He has violated our investor rights by fraud (which is a CRIME), causing us to lose over $300,000. This posting is criminal extortion using unlawful defamation as pressure, to coorce our valid licensed law firm (in good standing) into "giving" him a bank loan that is not ours to give. Such extortion is a serious federal CRIME by PTC against a good firm. The FBI has already agreed with this interpretation of law against PTC and is taking steps for a criminal prosecution of this person for this false complaint and other related crimes. PTC has already been notified that a criminal investigation into the false complaint as extortion, and that subsequent postings (all false or false implications about a good firm) will be additional crimes of witness intimidation. This false complaint is only a very aggressive person of criminal behavior, trying to essentially rob a bank through a licensed law firm. WE HAVE A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE OF OUR VALID LICENSES, AND GOOD FAITH HARD WORK AND SUCCESSES FOR CLIENTS. ANYONE WHO SEES THIS AND IS CONSIDERING DEALING WITH US SHOULD EMAIL US TO RECEIVE ALL PROOF THAT THIS COMPLAINT IS FALSE AND CRIMINAL AGAINST OUR GOOD FIRM.

I am a STILAS support staff employee (in the administrative side and processing of client materials) and I am surprised by Mr. Parks [postings on here, again he has refused to even acknowledge what was said, like in so many e mails to him over the last several months. Mr. Parks has stated on here that STILAS has not ever contacted him and that STILAS would not arrange a meeting with him. In several e mails to Mr. Parks and PTC STILAS did answer all his questions. Whenever PTC or Mr. Parks sent an email to STILAS is was always answered usually within 1-5 business days. We have proof of all of the e mails sent to Mr. Parks as STILAS keeps records of all correspondence with its' clients. Mr. Parks again fails to acknowledge that STILAS did in fact attempt on two separate occasions to arrange a meeting with him. When he first requested a meeting, a reply was sent to him within 498 hours stating that STILAS' executive team was in London and was unable to meet in its' NY office for sometime and the team (including the president and CEO) of the company would be very happy to meet him in the London office. Mr. Parks not only did not take up the offer, he failed to offer any reply until about a month later where he again claimed no one wrote him back (however in that same email he sent to STILAS if you were to scroll down further you would see STILAS's reply to meet him in London and therefore did in fact reply back to him). He gain requested a meeting and again we stated we would be very happy to meet with him in the London office, he did not reply and nothing more was heard from him until this posting was put up and then he wrote in later the same day to STILAS stating again he has not heard from STILAS for many months. STILAS has met with several clients in our London office, STILAS is an international company with offices in NY, London, L.A., Moscow, Panama and other countries. Our top executive staff have been overseas working directly with several banks on behalf of our clients and partners and therefore were not available at the time to meet in N.Y. however support staff was but STILAS believed Mr. Parks would be better suited and would prefer to meet with STILAS Executives in charge for better answers and more clarity as he was valued as an important and respected client. STILAS never at any time had any replies from Mr. Parks that he would not be able to meet STILAS in London even though he was sent two email replies to his request for a meeting. We know he received those replies because when he wrote to us later, STILAS's replies to his requests for a meeting where contained in his own e mails to STILAS. Mr. Parks also knew that our top staff were overseas working on various projects as that was highlighted to all clients back in January in a update report to all clients. We have more than 4-5 email from Mr. Parks where he states he wrote in requesting information and never received a reply from us, however every time he wrote in, if you scrolled down the email you would in fact see STILAS's reply to his email request and that the replies were sent in within usually 1-3 days. This is a very repetitive habit that Mr. Parks displays. When Mr. Park signed up with STILAS he was sent a detailed materials list that stated very clearly that he was solely responsible to provide to STILAS his documents in order for STILAS to conduct work. He failed to send in those documents, he was sent a reminder, again failed to fully comply, he did send in a very limited partial set of documents, then after a couple of months STILAS sent him yet another reply for documents and then he got angry with STILAS stating he had already sent in documents, however he was missing several key components. Yet he then wrote in stating he wanted a refund, a refund that he was not only entitled to because it was not STILAS's wrong doing but Mr. Parks who failed to comply. How is a law firm suppose to conduct the work needed for a company when the company does not send in the needed materials and does not reply to several e mails. As for the above "preparation" costs, Mr. Parks paid a "retainer" to STILAS and to STILAS only, no money was paid to Bird Dog enterprises by Mr. Parks to STILAS what so ever. STILAS did not pay any monies from Mr. Parks to Bird Dog enterprises, Bird Dog Enterprises would receive a commission once the project had been funded as all brokers are with any company. Mr. Parks also claimed on here that STILAS is no fact "not" a registered law firm which again is verifiably not true, STILAS is in fact listed with Martindale Hubbell, Virginia Bar Association and American Bar Association, this can be researched and checked: Matthew B. Greene President STILAS. This i snot a case of a company calling the client a problem client and trying to put the blame on the client, this is in fact a simple case of a client who paid for law firm services to a law firm and then willfully did not comply with his contract to provide the law firm the needed materials from a list he was sent and also after several e mails for request, This is a simple case of a client writing into the law firm and then being replied to and yet does not want to acknowledge his e mails were replied to even though those replies are contained within each subsequent email from him to STILAS, this is a simple case of a client after a few months of not complying to his side of the contract requesting a refund after the law firm has already and been working on his project with what limited information they had while he had no right to it. This is a simple case of a client requesting for a meeting and being replied to by STILAS stating they are more than happy to meet with the client and yet the client does not even write back to say he will accept the meeting or say he cannot fly to London, instead he just did not reply at all for over a month and then wrote in again saying his first request was never answered and then requested a meeting again. This is a simple case where the client again refused to respond to STILAS's reply to conduct a meeting and waiting several months before writing back. At no point did Mr. Parks ever say he was unable to fly to London for a meeting (if he had STILAS would have tried to make other arrangements then.) Mr. Parks cannot stated that we never offered to meet him in London because in his own e mails he sent to STILAS our replies to his requests for meetings are in those e mails, again you just need to scroll down his email and you will see the email correspondence from both parties and see that STILAS did in fact reply and try to honor his wish. Again STILAS has a copy of ever email sent to and from PTC and Mr. Parks, we also have the server records that show the e mails were in fact delivered to Mr. Parks and we also have every email from Mr. Parks that also includes are replies to his last e mails before the one he sends in. We have complete detailed records of all work conducted on PTC's project and all correspondence. Mr. Parks has made outrageous allegations about STILAS, has clearly made defamatory accusations against STILAS that STILAS can clearly, easily demonstrate are not true. I will leave it to the readers on here to decide for them selves, however again I will state very clearly, if you check yourself you will clearly be able to see that STILAS is in fact registered (which proves Mr. Parks wrong) that Mr. Greene is licensed (which again proves Mr. Park is wrong), that STILAS does in fact hold the respective licences (which Proves Mr. Parks wrong) which can all be easily verified as they are all public records. We do in fact have copies of all of Mr. Parks e mails to STILAS which also contain all of STILAS's previous replies to Mr. Parks - therefore his "own" e mails to STILAS prove him wrong that STILAS does not reply to him. Mr.. Parks is not entitled to a refund of any sort, nor is he entitled to have STILAS complete any work as Mr. Parks himself has i fact breached his contract with STILAS on several fronts. In fact because of his actions he actually owes STILAS more money for loss of revenue, breach of contract and even for defamation. As with all the correspondence to Mr. Parks, From Mr. Parks and all the work that has been completed to date as well as these postings on here STILAS has them all as records and will be retaining them for further legal review and action against Mr. Parks. There are in fact companies out there that do conduct a disservice to their clients, however not every company does that and STILAS is not one of those, this is simply a case where a client did not provide the needed materials, refuses to accept any responsibility for his own action and then decides they no longer want the service and want a refund when they are no longer entitled to it, again remember STILAS can back up all statements and support all statements with records, we keep all records for several years.

I am a STILAS support staff employee (in the administrative side and processing of client materials) and I am surprised by Mr. Parks [postings on here, again he has refused to even acknowledge what was said, like in so many e mails to him over the last several months. Mr. Parks has stated on here that STILAS has not ever contacted him and that STILAS would not arrange a meeting with him. In several e mails to Mr. Parks and PTC STILAS did answer all his questions. Whenever PTC or Mr. Parks sent an email to STILAS is was always answered usually within 1-5 business days. We have proof of all of the e mails sent to Mr. Parks as STILAS keeps records of all correspondence with its' clients. Mr. Parks again fails to acknowledge that STILAS did in fact attempt on two separate occasions to arrange a meeting with him. When he first requested a meeting, a reply was sent to him within 498 hours stating that STILAS' executive team was in London and was unable to meet in its' NY office for sometime and the team (including the president and CEO) of the company would be very happy to meet him in the London office. Mr. Parks not only did not take up the offer, he failed to offer any reply until about a month later where he again claimed no one wrote him back (however in that same email he sent to STILAS if you were to scroll down further you would see STILAS's reply to meet him in London and therefore did in fact reply back to him). He gain requested a meeting and again we stated we would be very happy to meet with him in the London office, he did not reply and nothing more was heard from him until this posting was put up and then he wrote in later the same day to STILAS stating again he has not heard from STILAS for many months. STILAS has met with several clients in our London office, STILAS is an international company with offices in NY, London, L.A., Moscow, Panama and other countries. Our top executive staff have been overseas working directly with several banks on behalf of our clients and partners and therefore were not available at the time to meet in N.Y. however support staff was but STILAS believed Mr. Parks would be better suited and would prefer to meet with STILAS Executives in charge for better answers and more clarity as he was valued as an important and respected client. STILAS never at any time had any replies from Mr. Parks that he would not be able to meet STILAS in London even though he was sent two email replies to his request for a meeting. We know he received those replies because when he wrote to us later, STILAS's replies to his requests for a meeting where contained in his own e mails to STILAS. Mr. Parks also knew that our top staff were overseas working on various projects as that was highlighted to all clients back in January in a update report to all clients. We have more than 4-5 email from Mr. Parks where he states he wrote in requesting information and never received a reply from us, however every time he wrote in, if you scrolled down the email you would in fact see STILAS's reply to his email request and that the replies were sent in within usually 1-3 days. This is a very repetitive habit that Mr. Parks displays. When Mr. Park signed up with STILAS he was sent a detailed materials list that stated very clearly that he was solely responsible to provide to STILAS his documents in order for STILAS to conduct work. He failed to send in those documents, he was sent a reminder, again failed to fully comply, he did send in a very limited partial set of documents, then after a couple of months STILAS sent him yet another reply for documents and then he got angry with STILAS stating he had already sent in documents, however he was missing several key components. Yet he then wrote in stating he wanted a refund, a refund that he was not only entitled to because it was not STILAS's wrong doing but Mr. Parks who failed to comply. How is a law firm suppose to conduct the work needed for a company when the company does not send in the needed materials and does not reply to several e mails. As for the above "preparation" costs, Mr. Parks paid a "retainer" to STILAS and to STILAS only, no money was paid to Bird Dog enterprises by Mr. Parks to STILAS what so ever. STILAS did not pay any monies from Mr. Parks to Bird Dog enterprises, Bird Dog Enterprises would receive a commission once the project had been funded as all brokers are with any company. Mr. Parks also claimed on here that STILAS is no fact "not" a registered law firm which again is verifiably not true, STILAS is in fact listed with Martindale Hubbell, Virginia Bar Association and American Bar Association, this can be researched and checked: Matthew B. Greene President STILAS. This i snot a case of a company calling the client a problem client and trying to put the blame on the client, this is in fact a simple case of a client who paid for law firm services to a law firm and then willfully did not comply with his contract to provide the law firm the needed materials from a list he was sent and also after several e mails for request, This is a simple case of a client writing into the law firm and then being replied to and yet does not want to acknowledge his e mails were replied to even though those replies are contained within each subsequent email from him to STILAS, this is a simple case of a client after a few months of not complying to his side of the contract requesting a refund after the law firm has already and been working on his project with what limited information they had while he had no right to it. This is a simple case of a client requesting for a meeting and being replied to by STILAS stating they are more than happy to meet with the client and yet the client does not even write back to say he will accept the meeting or say he cannot fly to London, instead he just did not reply at all for over a month and then wrote in again saying his first request was never answered and then requested a meeting again. This is a simple case where the client again refused to respond to STILAS's reply to conduct a meeting and waiting several months before writing back. At no point did Mr. Parks ever say he was unable to fly to London for a meeting (if he had STILAS would have tried to make other arrangements then.) Mr. Parks cannot stated that we never offered to meet him in London because in his own e mails he sent to STILAS our replies to his requests for meetings are in those e mails, again you just need to scroll down his email and you will see the email correspondence from both parties and see that STILAS did in fact reply and try to honor his wish. Again STILAS has a copy of ever email sent to and from PTC and Mr. Parks, we also have the server records that show the e mails were in fact delivered to Mr. Parks and we also have every email from Mr. Parks that also includes are replies to his last e mails before the one he sends in. We have complete detailed records of all work conducted on PTC's project and all correspondence. Mr. Parks has made outrageous allegations about STILAS, has clearly made defamatory accusations against STILAS that STILAS can clearly, easily demonstrate are not true. I will leave it to the readers on here to decide for them selves, however again I will state very clearly, if you check yourself you will clearly be able to see that STILAS is in fact registered (which proves Mr. Parks wrong) that Mr. Greene is licensed (which again proves Mr. Park is wrong), that STILAS does in fact hold the respective licences (which Proves Mr. Parks wrong) which can all be easily verified as they are all public records. We do in fact have copies of all of Mr. Parks e mails to STILAS which also contain all of STILAS's previous replies to Mr. Parks - therefore his "own" e mails to STILAS prove him wrong that STILAS does not reply to him. Mr.. Parks is not entitled to a refund of any sort, nor is he entitled to have STILAS complete any work as Mr. Parks himself has i fact breached his contract with STILAS on several fronts. In fact because of his actions he actually owes STILAS more money for loss of revenue, breach of contract and even for defamation. As with all the correspondence to Mr. Parks, From Mr. Parks and all the work that has been completed to date as well as these postings on here STILAS has them all as records and will be retaining them for further legal review and action against Mr. Parks. There are in fact companies out there that do conduct a disservice to their clients, however not every company does that and STILAS is not one of those, this is simply a case where a client did not provide the needed materials, refuses to accept any responsibility for his own action and then decides they no longer want the service and want a refund when they are no longer entitled to it, again remember STILAS can back up all statements and support all statements with records, we keep all records for several years.

I am a STILAS support staff employee (in the administrative side and processing of client materials) and I am surprised by Mr. Parks [postings on here, again he has refused to even acknowledge what was said, like in so many e mails to him over the last several months. Mr. Parks has stated on here that STILAS has not ever contacted him and that STILAS would not arrange a meeting with him. In several e mails to Mr. Parks and PTC STILAS did answer all his questions. Whenever PTC or Mr. Parks sent an email to STILAS is was always answered usually within 1-5 business days. We have proof of all of the e mails sent to Mr. Parks as STILAS keeps records of all correspondence with its' clients. Mr. Parks again fails to acknowledge that STILAS did in fact attempt on two separate occasions to arrange a meeting with him. When he first requested a meeting, a reply was sent to him within 498 hours stating that STILAS' executive team was in London and was unable to meet in its' NY office for sometime and the team (including the president and CEO) of the company would be very happy to meet him in the London office. Mr. Parks not only did not take up the offer, he failed to offer any reply until about a month later where he again claimed no one wrote him back (however in that same email he sent to STILAS if you were to scroll down further you would see STILAS's reply to meet him in London and therefore did in fact reply back to him). He gain requested a meeting and again we stated we would be very happy to meet with him in the London office, he did not reply and nothing more was heard from him until this posting was put up and then he wrote in later the same day to STILAS stating again he has not heard from STILAS for many months. STILAS has met with several clients in our London office, STILAS is an international company with offices in NY, London, L.A., Moscow, Panama and other countries. Our top executive staff have been overseas working directly with several banks on behalf of our clients and partners and therefore were not available at the time to meet in N.Y. however support staff was but STILAS believed Mr. Parks would be better suited and would prefer to meet with STILAS Executives in charge for better answers and more clarity as he was valued as an important and respected client. STILAS never at any time had any replies from Mr. Parks that he would not be able to meet STILAS in London even though he was sent two email replies to his request for a meeting. We know he received those replies because when he wrote to us later, STILAS's replies to his requests for a meeting where contained in his own e mails to STILAS. Mr. Parks also knew that our top staff were overseas working on various projects as that was highlighted to all clients back in January in a update report to all clients. We have more than 4-5 email from Mr. Parks where he states he wrote in requesting information and never received a reply from us, however every time he wrote in, if you scrolled down the email you would in fact see STILAS's reply to his email request and that the replies were sent in within usually 1-3 days. This is a very repetitive habit that Mr. Parks displays. When Mr. Park signed up with STILAS he was sent a detailed materials list that stated very clearly that he was solely responsible to provide to STILAS his documents in order for STILAS to conduct work. He failed to send in those documents, he was sent a reminder, again failed to fully comply, he did send in a very limited partial set of documents, then after a couple of months STILAS sent him yet another reply for documents and then he got angry with STILAS stating he had already sent in documents, however he was missing several key components. Yet he then wrote in stating he wanted a refund, a refund that he was not only entitled to because it was not STILAS's wrong doing but Mr. Parks who failed to comply. How is a law firm suppose to conduct the work needed for a company when the company does not send in the needed materials and does not reply to several e mails. As for the above "preparation" costs, Mr. Parks paid a "retainer" to STILAS and to STILAS only, no money was paid to Bird Dog enterprises by Mr. Parks to STILAS what so ever. STILAS did not pay any monies from Mr. Parks to Bird Dog enterprises, Bird Dog Enterprises would receive a commission once the project had been funded as all brokers are with any company. Mr. Parks also claimed on here that STILAS is no fact "not" a registered law firm which again is verifiably not true, STILAS is in fact listed with Martindale Hubbell, Virginia Bar Association and American Bar Association, this can be researched and checked: Matthew B. Greene President STILAS. This i snot a case of a company calling the client a problem client and trying to put the blame on the client, this is in fact a simple case of a client who paid for law firm services to a law firm and then willfully did not comply with his contract to provide the law firm the needed materials from a list he was sent and also after several e mails for request, This is a simple case of a client writing into the law firm and then being replied to and yet does not want to acknowledge his e mails were replied to even though those replies are contained within each subsequent email from him to STILAS, this is a simple case of a client after a few months of not complying to his side of the contract requesting a refund after the law firm has already and been working on his project with what limited information they had while he had no right to it. This is a simple case of a client requesting for a meeting and being replied to by STILAS stating they are more than happy to meet with the client and yet the client does not even write back to say he will accept the meeting or say he cannot fly to London, instead he just did not reply at all for over a month and then wrote in again saying his first request was never answered and then requested a meeting again. This is a simple case where the client again refused to respond to STILAS's reply to conduct a meeting and waiting several months before writing back. At no point did Mr. Parks ever say he was unable to fly to London for a meeting (if he had STILAS would have tried to make other arrangements then.) Mr. Parks cannot stated that we never offered to meet him in London because in his own e mails he sent to STILAS our replies to his requests for meetings are in those e mails, again you just need to scroll down his email and you will see the email correspondence from both parties and see that STILAS did in fact reply and try to honor his wish. Again STILAS has a copy of ever email sent to and from PTC and Mr. Parks, we also have the server records that show the e mails were in fact delivered to Mr. Parks and we also have every email from Mr. Parks that also includes are replies to his last e mails before the one he sends in. We have complete detailed records of all work conducted on PTC's project and all correspondence. Mr. Parks has made outrageous allegations about STILAS, has clearly made defamatory accusations against STILAS that STILAS can clearly, easily demonstrate are not true. I will leave it to the readers on here to decide for them selves, however again I will state very clearly, if you check yourself you will clearly be able to see that STILAS is in fact registered (which proves Mr. Parks wrong) that Mr. Greene is licensed (which again proves Mr. Park is wrong), that STILAS does in fact hold the respective licences (which Proves Mr. Parks wrong) which can all be easily verified as they are all public records. We do in fact have copies of all of Mr. Parks e mails to STILAS which also contain all of STILAS's previous replies to Mr. Parks - therefore his "own" e mails to STILAS prove him wrong that STILAS does not reply to him. Mr.. Parks is not entitled to a refund of any sort, nor is he entitled to have STILAS complete any work as Mr. Parks himself has i fact breached his contract with STILAS on several fronts. In fact because of his actions he actually owes STILAS more money for loss of revenue, breach of contract and even for defamation. As with all the correspondence to Mr. Parks, From Mr. Parks and all the work that has been completed to date as well as these postings on here STILAS has them all as records and will be retaining them for further legal review and action against Mr. Parks. There are in fact companies out there that do conduct a disservice to their clients, however not every company does that and STILAS is not one of those, this is simply a case where a client did not provide the needed materials, refuses to accept any responsibility for his own action and then decides they no longer want the service and want a refund when they are no longer entitled to it, again remember STILAS can back up all statements and support all statements with records, we keep all records for several years.

I am a STILAS support staff employee (in the administrative side and processing of client materials) and I am surprised by Mr. Parks [postings on here, again he has refused to even acknowledge what was said, like in so many e mails to him over the last several months. Mr. Parks has stated on here that STILAS has not ever contacted him and that STILAS would not arrange a meeting with him. In several e mails to Mr. Parks and PTC STILAS did answer all his questions. Whenever PTC or Mr. Parks sent an email to STILAS is was always answered usually within 1-5 business days. We have proof of all of the e mails sent to Mr. Parks as STILAS keeps records of all correspondence with its' clients. Mr. Parks again fails to acknowledge that STILAS did in fact attempt on two separate occasions to arrange a meeting with him. When he first requested a meeting, a reply was sent to him within 498 hours stating that STILAS' executive team was in London and was unable to meet in its' NY office for sometime and the team (including the president and CEO) of the company would be very happy to meet him in the London office. Mr. Parks not only did not take up the offer, he failed to offer any reply until about a month later where he again claimed no one wrote him back (however in that same email he sent to STILAS if you were to scroll down further you would see STILAS's reply to meet him in London and therefore did in fact reply back to him). He gain requested a meeting and again we stated we would be very happy to meet with him in the London office, he did not reply and nothing more was heard from him until this posting was put up and then he wrote in later the same day to STILAS stating again he has not heard from STILAS for many months. STILAS has met with several clients in our London office, STILAS is an international company with offices in NY, London, L.A., Moscow, Panama and other countries. Our top executive staff have been overseas working directly with several banks on behalf of our clients and partners and therefore were not available at the time to meet in N.Y. however support staff was but STILAS believed Mr. Parks would be better suited and would prefer to meet with STILAS Executives in charge for better answers and more clarity as he was valued as an important and respected client. STILAS never at any time had any replies from Mr. Parks that he would not be able to meet STILAS in London even though he was sent two email replies to his request for a meeting. We know he received those replies because when he wrote to us later, STILAS's replies to his requests for a meeting where contained in his own e mails to STILAS. Mr. Parks also knew that our top staff were overseas working on various projects as that was highlighted to all clients back in January in a update report to all clients. We have more than 4-5 email from Mr. Parks where he states he wrote in requesting information and never received a reply from us, however every time he wrote in, if you scrolled down the email you would in fact see STILAS's reply to his email request and that the replies were sent in within usually 1-3 days. This is a very repetitive habit that Mr. Parks displays. When Mr. Park signed up with STILAS he was sent a detailed materials list that stated very clearly that he was solely responsible to provide to STILAS his documents in order for STILAS to conduct work. He failed to send in those documents, he was sent a reminder, again failed to fully comply, he did send in a very limited partial set of documents, then after a couple of months STILAS sent him yet another reply for documents and then he got angry with STILAS stating he had already sent in documents, however he was missing several key components. Yet he then wrote in stating he wanted a refund, a refund that he was not only entitled to because it was not STILAS's wrong doing but Mr. Parks who failed to comply. How is a law firm suppose to conduct the work needed for a company when the company does not send in the needed materials and does not reply to several e mails. As for the above "preparation" costs, Mr. Parks paid a "retainer" to STILAS and to STILAS only, no money was paid to Bird Dog enterprises by Mr. Parks to STILAS what so ever. STILAS did not pay any monies from Mr. Parks to Bird Dog enterprises, Bird Dog Enterprises would receive a commission once the project had been funded as all brokers are with any company. Mr. Parks also claimed on here that STILAS is no fact "not" a registered law firm which again is verifiably not true, STILAS is in fact listed with Martindale Hubbell, Virginia Bar Association and American Bar Association, this can be researched and checked: Matthew B. Greene President STILAS. This i snot a case of a company calling the client a problem client and trying to put the blame on the client, this is in fact a simple case of a client who paid for law firm services to a law firm and then willfully did not comply with his contract to provide the law firm the needed materials from a list he was sent and also after several e mails for request, This is a simple case of a client writing into the law firm and then being replied to and yet does not want to acknowledge his e mails were replied to even though those replies are contained within each subsequent email from him to STILAS, this is a simple case of a client after a few months of not complying to his side of the contract requesting a refund after the law firm has already and been working on his project with what limited information they had while he had no right to it. This is a simple case of a client requesting for a meeting and being replied to by STILAS stating they are more than happy to meet with the client and yet the client does not even write back to say he will accept the meeting or say he cannot fly to London, instead he just did not reply at all for over a month and then wrote in again saying his first request was never answered and then requested a meeting again. This is a simple case where the client again refused to respond to STILAS's reply to conduct a meeting and waiting several months before writing back. At no point did Mr. Parks ever say he was unable to fly to London for a meeting (if he had STILAS would have tried to make other arrangements then.) Mr. Parks cannot stated that we never offered to meet him in London because in his own e mails he sent to STILAS our replies to his requests for meetings are in those e mails, again you just need to scroll down his email and you will see the email correspondence from both parties and see that STILAS did in fact reply and try to honor his wish. Again STILAS has a copy of ever email sent to and from PTC and Mr. Parks, we also have the server records that show the e mails were in fact delivered to Mr. Parks and we also have every email from Mr. Parks that also includes are replies to his last e mails before the one he sends in. We have complete detailed records of all work conducted on PTC's project and all correspondence. Mr. Parks has made outrageous allegations about STILAS, has clearly made defamatory accusations against STILAS that STILAS can clearly, easily demonstrate are not true. I will leave it to the readers on here to decide for them selves, however again I will state very clearly, if you check yourself you will clearly be able to see that STILAS is in fact registered (which proves Mr. Parks wrong) that Mr. Greene is licensed (which again proves Mr. Park is wrong), that STILAS does in fact hold the respective licences (which Proves Mr. Parks wrong) which can all be easily verified as they are all public records. We do in fact have copies of all of Mr. Parks e mails to STILAS which also contain all of STILAS's previous replies to Mr. Parks - therefore his "own" e mails to STILAS prove him wrong that STILAS does not reply to him. Mr.. Parks is not entitled to a refund of any sort, nor is he entitled to have STILAS complete any work as Mr. Parks himself has i fact breached his contract with STILAS on several fronts. In fact because of his actions he actually owes STILAS more money for loss of revenue, breach of contract and even for defamation. As with all the correspondence to Mr. Parks, From Mr. Parks and all the work that has been completed to date as well as these postings on here STILAS has them all as records and will be retaining them for further legal review and action against Mr. Parks. There are in fact companies out there that do conduct a disservice to their clients, however not every company does that and STILAS is not one of those, this is simply a case where a client did not provide the needed materials, refuses to accept any responsibility for his own action and then decides they no longer want the service and want a refund when they are no longer entitled to it, again remember STILAS can back up all statements and support all statements with records, we keep all records for several years.

There are absolutely advanced fees due upon the "acceptance" of your project by STILAS. The advance fees collected are wired directly into a STILAS account. The BDE brokers agressively pursue you and provide the wiring instructions via email to send in advance "shared preparation cost" directly to STILAS. Those are the advanced fees referenced in the original post. The broker's compensation is inmaterial to STILAS' very poor customer service, lack of verbal or physical communication and terrible performance in a professional services capacity.

There are absolutely advanced fees due upon the "acceptance" of your project by STILAS. The advance fees collected are wired directly into a STILAS account. The BDE brokers agressively pursue you and provide the wiring instructions via email to send in advance "shared preparation cost" directly to STILAS. Those are the advanced fees referenced in the original post. The broker's compensation is inmaterial to STILAS' very poor customer service, lack of verbal or physical communication and terrible performance in a professional services capacity.

There are absolutely advanced fees due upon the "acceptance" of your project by STILAS. The advance fees collected are wired directly into a STILAS account. The BDE brokers agressively pursue you and provide the wiring instructions via email to send in advance "shared preparation cost" directly to STILAS. Those are the advanced fees referenced in the original post. The broker's compensation is inmaterial to STILAS' very poor customer service, lack of verbal or physical communication and terrible performance in a professional services capacity.

Thank you for you reply. As a paying client, I would expect over the course of many months that I would hear, real time(phone or meeting) from a STILAS representative. What legal/finance firm doesn't talk to their clients directly? I look forward to viewing the work product associated with and specifically for our project totalling $300,000 USD and not "the high quality active work that STILAS has been performing for the benefit of all of our clients" that you reference in your blanket email reply. I await your response to my request for a phone call or meeting in your "New York" or "Washington DC" offices.

Thank you for your reply. I trust you are doing well and look forward to reviewing your documention and work product for the $300,000 you have invested.

The complainant PTC is PTC Holding, LLC in the person of Scott Parks. We concede that he was a client of STILAS law firm services. By posting his false and defamatory statements to unlimited third parties online, Mr. Parks has waived any rights to attorney client confidentiality, thus allowing me to give a full rebuttal proving that his statements are knowingly false and unlawful. STILAS is in fact a licensed law firm in good standing, and always has been. This is verifiable online through the prestigious service Martindale Hubbell, which only lists law firms that it has verified are licensed and in good standing, and Martindale reviews its listings frequently. Matthew Greene is in fact a licensed lawyer, and has continuously been a member of both the Virginia Bar Association and American Bar Association in good standing since 1998 and even to this day. He is duly registered as having Associate member status, which is also validly licensed, and is the appropriate category of bar membership for a lawyer (and firm) who does not do any litigation work in any courtroom anywhere in the United States. This is verifiable by calling the VA Bar Association who will confirm valid continuous Associate membership in good standing since 1998. STILAS holds an additional international license as a law firm, in the offshore banking jurisdiction of Panama. That licence is valid in all countries for practicing international commercial and financial law as a law firm. It gives the firm itself the independent right to practice law under license as an organization. Thus, the licensed law firm status of STILAS is NOT dependent upon Matthew Greene or any other individual lawyer holding a personal license. Our firm also holds an international financial services license as a financial institution, also in Panama. That license is also valid in all countries for providing licensed financial services. Both the international law firm license and financial services license, both valid and in good standing, are verifiable by contacting the Panama Ministry of Commerce, or by simply asking our firm to provide an email copy of the license, which we provide to all clients before allowing them to retain our services. The intermediary broker company Bird Dog Enterprises does not charge any upfront fees at all. They receive purely success-based commissions only from the funding source. STILAS strongly discourages brokers from charging any upfront fees, because our good firm in reality must perform all of the hard work that is required. Thus Mr. Parks' accusation on this point is also false. This is verifiable because Bird Dog will have copies of a signed contract with Mr. Parks that specifies this. Extensive documentary evidence in our possession proves that Mr. Parks, literally from day one, was highly abusive of the brokers, who were forced to exercise their right to discontinue communications with him, and our firm's legal department took over all subsequent communications. Thus, Mr. Parks claim that Bird Dog charged advance fees and then failed to contact him is knowingly false and misleading, and the brokers have a cause of civil action against him for false defamation by libel. His implication that third party independent brokers who he offended declining to talk to him (when they owe him nothing) somehow reflects on STILAS is also false and misleading. The complaint that Mr. Parks has not had a conversation in over a year with our firm is also proven false by voluminous documented correspondence. Our firm possesses many months of frequent two way emails with Mr. Parks. Our legal department replied to every one of his emails promptly. Our replies are contained by text copy within his own emails that he sent to us, providing a long and detailed record. The client does not have to take no for an answer, or take yes for an answer, but by all means a person must certainly take an answer for an answer. It cannot possibly be the fault of our good firm that Mr. Parks wilfully ignores all of our replies to him and the contents and information provided in them. His last email to STILAS was over 4 months ago in May 2008, requesting an in-person meeting with our top executives in the middle of their banking mission in London. Our firm immediately agreed and arranged a meeting for him in our London office, where he would meet a large team of our executives together with various bankers. Mr. Parks failed to respond to that invitation twice in a row, and then we never heard from him again until the present false and defamatory posting. The verifiable facts proven by documentary evidence in our possession, that we can provide copies of, are that Scott Parks and PTC Holding, LLC severely breached their signed contract with our firm, causing substantial economic damages to us as their investor, in violation of our rights. PTC signed a contract for law firm preparation work on their project documentation on October 25, 2007. The contact, signed by Mr. Parks, specifies that the client must provide the working documents and materials to our firm, so that we have something to work with, within 30 days of signing the contract (Section: Client Must Provide Documents and Materials). PTC provided only partial materials over 120 days after signing. The very next day, STILAS sent him a detailed formal letter listing very basic key documents that he failed to provide, without which the work required by banks could not possibly be done. Only 9 days after our request for documents, Mr. Parks wrote an email terminating his contract and demanding a refund. This was a specific breach of the contract, for wrongful refusal to cooperate with our process. Our firm had already invested over $300,000 of real costs in preparation of the project for financing, and we did not want to lose our investment. So we ignored his breach and politely continued to collect necessary documents that only PTC could provide. The contract specifies that the preparation work requires 10 months. Now, only approximately 6 months after we received documents from Mr. Parks for the first time, he has breached the contract by public false unlawful defamation. This breaches 4 fundamental contract obligations of the client (Sections: Disqualification by Client Fault and Violation, Must Avoid Disruption and Interference, Protection of Reputation, and Damages from Wrongful Termination) and also causes all banks to decline to fund the client. Therefore, because of his own unlawful action on this public forum, Mr. Parks has made his project and company un-bankable, causing severe economic damages to STILAS. Doing this by false defamation, causing other damages to our firm, is outrageous and unacceptable. All of this is verifiable and proven by the signed contract, and entries with attachments in our central database, data from which is admissible under the US Federal Rules of Evidence. Voluminous documentary evidence, that we can and are willing and permitted by law to provide, proves that Scott Parks of PTC wilfully refused to cooperate with our services, seriously and wrongfully breached our contract, quite simply failed to give us his project so that we could work on it, and tried to terminate the contract and waste our investment before even giving us documents to work with. Now, only 6 months (after finally receiving his materials, 5 months late) into a 10 month process, he committed a breach so severe and so public, with knowingly fraudulent false misrepresentation of verifiable facts in writing, that no firm with any licenses will ever be able to represent his company for financing, and no bank will ever accept him. The signed contract for services, signed by Mr. Parks, clearly specifies that Client recognizes that STILAS... commits to investing in costs of preparation of the project for financing, that our firm needs to recover its invested expenses from successful funding, and that Client considers STILAS to be its first investor in its project. Therefore, Scott Parks has knowingly falsely misrepresented his accusations, unlawfully falsely defaming our good law firm that is licensed in good standing. The evidence proves that in fact Mr. Parks and PTC have defrauded STILAS as its investor, violating investor rights laws, and causing us to lose over $300,000 of our investment, that he under contract and by law is liable for. We were well within our rights under the contract (that PTC had already breached repeatedly), performing in good faith and in a timely manner, and now he commits this final breach that we cannot possibly ignore as much as we would like to. Any potential clients of our firm or corresponding banking institutions should contact us immediately to receive copies of our valid international law firm license and financial services license, and a copy of the signed PTC contract (if you want to see the complaint is false). STILAS gives more voluntary disclosure of all relevant due diligence documents on our legitimacy, legality and honest hard work for licensed professional services, more than any other law firm or financial services firm in the professional services industry. Our firm can provide extensive documentary evidence to prove the falsity of any defamatory statements about our firm. If you see any other false unlawful defamation about our firm online, if you are genuinely a potential client or banking source, please contact us directly to allow us to prove that anything you may be concerned about is false and misleading, and that everything I have written is verifiably true.