So there wasn't going to be administrative hearing
Post# of 7802
Posted On: 06/10/2016 5:41:24 AM
So there wasn't going to be administrative hearings?
SFRX didn't have to pay the state's $4400 + in legal fees?
Seafarer/Tulco wasn't working without permits?
The escrow funds weren't improperly spent?
BTW.....Hunt alleged that I posted false info about this POS. And simply by the very act of making false statements "agin" this POS I was liable for damages. I would say I agree.....if true.
Now we know Seafarers did NOT have an 80/20 or a full transition to a recovery permit as they stated in item 82 in the original complaint when they FALSELY claimed the Defendant did not do his DD.
SFRX is liable for damages per their own attorney. They made several false statements about the Defendant in the original complaint and subsequent filings. Here are just a few.
He banned posters
He made SFRX lose contracts (plural)
He misrepresented Seafarers contracts with the FBAR, etc.
Yet some actually thought they had agreements as described by SFRX in the court documents and PR's.
http://investorshangout.com/post/postreplies?id=2051996
I wonder what SFRX will wind up paying the Defendant, don't you?
I love the written word. Kyle gets Hunt to try and scare me, and in the process admits to their own liability.
Stupid is as Kyle does, right?
SFRX didn't have to pay the state's $4400 + in legal fees?
Seafarer/Tulco wasn't working without permits?
The escrow funds weren't improperly spent?
BTW.....Hunt alleged that I posted false info about this POS. And simply by the very act of making false statements "agin" this POS I was liable for damages. I would say I agree.....if true.
Now we know Seafarers did NOT have an 80/20 or a full transition to a recovery permit as they stated in item 82 in the original complaint when they FALSELY claimed the Defendant did not do his DD.
SFRX is liable for damages per their own attorney. They made several false statements about the Defendant in the original complaint and subsequent filings. Here are just a few.
He banned posters
He made SFRX lose contracts (plural)
He misrepresented Seafarers contracts with the FBAR, etc.
Yet some actually thought they had agreements as described by SFRX in the court documents and PR's.
http://investorshangout.com/post/postreplies?id=2051996
I wonder what SFRX will wind up paying the Defendant, don't you?
I love the written word. Kyle gets Hunt to try and scare me, and in the process admits to their own liability.
Stupid is as Kyle does, right?
(1)
(0)