Complaint Review: Federated Financial Services - 3275 W. Hillsboro Blvd. Suite 110 Deerfield Beach Florida

"After Rip Off Report reviewed the posting below, we decided the language of the posting could be interpreted to threaten or solicit violence against Mr. McFarland and his family. Rip Off Report is absolutely, categorically, without exception opposed to threats of violence or violence against Mr. McFarland and his family. The unique circumstances justify redaction."
========================

My personal experience is that (((REDACTED))). Is this the guy you are talking about?

Christopher R. McFarland

(((REDACTED)))
Boca Raton, FL 33433-8532
COUNTY: PALM BEACH

Wife
MCFARLAND, (((REDACTED)))

Seems to be a Buick man but has a 2004 Tahoe plate number (((REDACTED)))
and 2005 PT Cruiser (((REDACTED)))

Is this the guy?

Sooner or later thugs (((REDACTED))).

You will hear no more from me on this subject.

Someone on this site needs to stop the libelous and defamatory statements being made by the poster who is going after RipOffReport.com. None of his statements is true.

RipOffReport.com is one of the few sites where consumers can post in comfort and safety. Apparently, businesses like the one posting the defamatory statements cannot stand the truth or the criticism. They must cyberstalk the individuals who are permitting others to SPEAK OUT.

I know this because I have been cyberstalked myself after EXPOSING a business for unethical behavior. This particular company was covering up a major engine flaw in its vehicles which caused owners to spend thousands of dollars to replace the engines. Not only was there cover up, but there was also active anti-consumer activism taking place.

Proponents of the company found all the sites where criticism was taking place. They began a vicious name-calling session on each of them and posted defamatory statements about anyone coming forward with an intent to gather together the victims. Anyone who reads the history on the matter will see this is true.

Apparently, the idea is to take up the bandwidth just as the person(s) above have done....to distract the readers....the confuse them. I guess the hope is that the posters won't be caught for the wrongdoing....just like the company won't be punished for the fraud against the consumers! Such companies have crossed the line. What goes 'round will come 'round....and I hope the companies are prepared!

Ed Magedson is doing no wrong. He is HELPING CONSUMERS fight back against company corruption. Don't believe the posters who insinuate that he is in this for money. He is NOT. In fact, the companies who are doing as above are actually the ones extorting money.....from all the unknowledgeable consumers out there. THANK YOU, Ed Magedson, for allowing the consumers a place to VOICE THEIR CONCERNS!

Obviously, the only defense some unscrupulous companies have is to name-call and to spread lies. If that is all they have, I feel sorry for them. Isn't it about time that the consumer gets a break? After all, the media is controlled by the companies in general. Companies know that this is a way to keep us quiet. Fortunately, the internet allows us to speak our mind and state the facts.

What right does a company have to come in and step all over the whistleblowers? What right do that they have to stamp out the voices of the consumers? Why is the bottom line so important to a company that it must step over the its own consumers so viciously? Consumers need to stand up to this abuse of internet!

If you know of other such cases, let me know here. This is a topic that must be covered by the media as it is happening more and more. Companies need to take heed.....more will come out about the below the belt activities going on to squelch the consumer's voice!

Don't let this tactic continue unabated! Let's do something about it! We all know that consumers aren't getting a fair shake in the marketplace when it comes to defective products or unethical practices.....

On one other note.....I recall being threatened many times myself. Someone posted my personal information in an effort to put pressure on me. Someone claimed to know where I was going and what I was doing and who my employer was. It is all documented in postings.
The company "affiliates" (using different aliases) are making no effort to hide the stalking, the intimidation, the CRIMINAL behavior! The irony is that the companies are the ones who should be prosecuted for carrying out a smear campaign against the consumer advocates instead of CORRECTING THE INTERNAL PROBLEMS in the company.

Something told me a couple of years ago that this seedier side of corporate activity would come back up to the forefront of internet dialogue. This issue is a serious one and one that consumers should FIGHT tooth and nail! The companies already control the media so that consumers can't speak out; shall we also relinquish the internet to the companies with corrupt leaders?

If you have been stalked by a corporate proponent on the internet for speaking out about problems within the company or with its products, TELL YOUR STORY on all applicable web sites! Companies who STALK the very consumers they serve OR the people who unselfishly help those people should be EXPOSED! We may not have all the money and power that the companies have, but we do have a voice. We can use our voices TOGETHER!

Are you sick of the companies who take advantage of you? Are you tired of being RIPPED OFF? Are you read to speak out? Do so here first and some of us who advocate for consumers will help you locate other legitimate outlets to speak out. Don't give up in your efforts!
_________________
All consumers should be knowledgeable!

Personally, I figure the people responsible for this site are brave as hell.

To sit there and post the names and lay out the whole scam for the public to see. It doesn't matter if they are just posting the public's complaints without adding a thing.

That's all it takes to screw up a fraud's income big time.

I can't thing of many other sites that have this volume of pages. The auctions. EBay. That's about it.

So, once you're named here, you only have two choices. Change your name, or else clean up your act.

A fraud doesn't wanna clean up their act, because in doing so, they put an end to their income. And, changing names every 30 days really isn't practical either.

The result is that this site forces you out of the fraud business. And, that's the type of thing that's bound to piss off a lot of people.

But, here's the thing. Somebody needed to do that. Somebody needs to take a stand against this type of thing.

Most people are content to sit back and let others get hurt. As long as the situation doesn't affect them personally, they turn a blind eye.

The problem is that sooner or later, it does affect you. When all the businesses resort to fraud, who will you turn to then?

The public cries out for this type of control. Just what do you think they want when they say "old-fashioned values"? I believe they want to live in a world where they don't have to be afraid to walk down the street. Where they can trust that most of the world will act responsibly. Where they don't have to think twice before doing business.

And, this site goes a long way towards restoring that kind of a world.

There may be some out there who would say the people who staff this site are crazy to do this. That they have no chance anyway against the big multi-billion dollar companies.

Well, to those people I say look at the accomplishments in your life. Then, ask yourself how many times you actually tried to leave something better than when you found it? How many times did you try to make a difference in the quality of the world? How many times have you done something positive for mankind?

Devoting your time to stopping the injustices, the frauds, the thefts, and the prejudices in the world. When your time is up and you look back on what your life has meant and what you have accomplished, that is something you can feel proud to have done.

Below is a post that briefly appeared at another forum where I had entered into a discussion first with Steve Miller and then with Chris McFarland. (Or people claiming to be them. The Net, you know)

For those who do not know, these men at Federated Financial declared war on this site and its staff about two years ago. During those two years, I have been reading posts and websites engineered by these gentlemen to claim that the editor of Rip-Off Report is an extortionist and a fake, a pot-smoking, bad-check-writing evil person who steals piggy banks and all manner of ridiculous things. These websites and posts were (and still are) showing up everywhere and have increased in number alarmingly lately.

Their sites all claimed to have "proof" of all these misdeeds of Ed Magedson. Imagine my surprise to find that some of these allegations were dismissed thirty years ago or never happened at all. Miller and McFarland have dedicated huge amounts of time to their efforts to destroy this site and anyone associated with it. Their witch hunt has expanded to include any associates they can find, up to and including lawyers who have defended Rip-Off Report in past cases.

There is so much obvious obsessive hate behind these smear sites and internet postings and it has gone on for so long that I determined to get to the bottom of it. I had heard a great deal from Miller and McFarland and nothing from the editor here.

I admit I am a great fan of this site and it distressed me to think that Rip-Off Report might be misrepresenting itself to the general public. If the claims made by Miller and McFarland were true, things were not all that they seemed here.

I contacted the editor who took time to help me understand this situation (after a bumpy start) and I originally sent this reply to Mr. McFarland at the other forum, where it disappeared within hours. It is enough to make one wonder if Miller and McFarland have some magical mechanism to keep what they like and make the rest disappear. Or perhaps threats were tossed at that site, too, who knows.

I had never intended to post this here at Rip-Off Report at all, but the truth should be told somewhere where it will stick long enough for someone who is interested to read it. (Some items may make no sense as they were intended to be directed to Mr. McFarland in reference to his own comments).
==================================
Federated Financial Royally Borked!

It has been a lengthy interval since I was last able to post. It takes time to be productive sometimes and this was one of those times.

I have asked myself repeatedly why Ed Magedson, editor of Rip-Off Report, would choose to go to battle with Federated Financial which plays a small part in the overall complaints on that site, a truly minuscule amount percentage-wise. Why would the editor block rebuttals only from Federated Financial when I was seeing Owner rebuttals all over? What was up with this lawsuit? Lots of information from one side, next to nothing from the other. And, most importantly, is Rip-Off Report misrepresenting itself to the general public?

I had some difficulty getting a response from Mr. Magedson initially. In fact, I was getting the same reaction I got here. Mr. Magedson thought I was working for or with Federated Financial in some capacity. It took some time to get this initial mistrust out of the way and this is partly to blame for the length of time it has taken to respond to this. The results are stunning and deserve to be shared with those being misled by Mr. Miller and Mr. McFarland in various sites all over the web.

It seems that when Rip-Off Reports first began appearing about Federated Financial that Steve Miller began demanding the removal of those reports. The editor refused as per site policy and Federated Financial declared war on the site and Ed Magedson.

The editor of Rip-Off Report does not currently allow rebuttals from Federated Financial; that much is true. He said he is trying to work out a system to clarify that issue now, as he does not intend to mislead people about this. He says he simply did not realize that he might be giving a false impression to the readers of his site.

BUT, it seems he has his reasons for barring those rebuttals.

I listened to a tape of a conversation from November 2004, around Thanksgiving, between Steve Miller and Ed Magedson. The tape was lengthy and I am not going to attempt to post a full transcript of it here. This conversation took place a week or two AFTER Mr. Miller and Mr. McFarland filed suit against Mr. Magedson and Rip-Off Report and BEFORE Mr. Magedson ever saw the suit. The whole thing seemed to be aimed at trying to entrap Mr. Magedson into saying something, anything that could be used against him later. There was laughter and joking going on throughout as Miller attempted to lead Magedson to think that he never meant any harm and that they could now be buddies.

Points of interest:

1-Steve Miller tells Magedson that Chris McFarland is his "in-house lawyer". Didn't McFarland tell Miller about his decision to voluntarily disbar or were Mr. Miller and Mr. McFarland intentionally misrepresenting a non-lawyer as a lawyer? Knowing law does not give the right to practice law without proper credentials and misrepresenting oneself as an attorney is illegal in EVERY state.

2-Steve Miller tells Ed Magedson that "another lawyer from his company" filed a false report about Ed's brothers' company, that "Chris didn't do it". Again implying that McFarland is an attorney and admitting that employees at Federated Financial had filed at least one phony Rip-off Report.

3-There were references on the tape to an earlier threat to send Miller's relatives from Camelback Mountain to inflict great harm to Mr. Magedson. Harm that might lead to the death of Ed Magedson. Mr. Miller told Magedson at this time that he was joking, that his relatives no longer lived at Camelback. This sounds very much like terrorism on the part of Mr. Miller. What kind of professional people other than the Mafia uses death threats to get business done?

4- Miller asks about the Corporate Advocacy Program under the guise of being interested in joining, knowing full well that he was going to do no such thing. He had already filed his lawsuit. The responses to those questions seem to be the basis for the claims of "extortion" on the part of Magedson.

5-Mr. McFarland has taken it upon himself fairly recently to contact companies via taking part in the Corporate Advocacy Program via email under the false pretense of being interested in joining. Actually, he is just digging for anything that can be used to shore up a weak "extortion" case.

There is much more, but this is more than enough to convince me who is in the wrong here. Miller and McFarland have created their own problems in this matter. They entered Mr. Magedson's space making threats against his life. When Mr. Magedson pushed them out the door, slammed it and locked it in their faces (even Miller agreed with this analogy during the taped conversation), they decided to become angry and vindictive. This is akin to flipping the power switch and then going ballistic because the lights go out and suing the power company.

Should Mr. Magedson decide to produce this tape in court, Mr. Miller and Mr. McFarland may find themselves royally borked no matter how much "judge shopping" they engage in. Terroristic threatening and misrepresenting oneself as an attorney will undoubtedly outweigh the bounced check and a marijuana bust that were both dismissed more than 30 years ago. I am sure that they have misled many into believing that they have the "evidence" and will save then from the "terrible awful Rip-Off Report". What they need to do is find someone to save them from themselves.

I also viewed legal papers dated July 12, 2005 vacating the Raceway Ford judgment, so in the interest of fairness perhaps that should be removed from the Federated Financial smear site? Or will it remain along with the other outdated information? Let's just see how "truthful" Mr. Miller and Mr. McFarland are willing to be with their evidence.

I will continue on with my life now disregarding these outrageous claims by Federated Financial/Miller/McFarland. I am satisfied that Rip-Off Report is what it says it is, a place to post consumer complaints and a tool for consumers to take and get action on their own avoiding the litigious system we live in. Nothing more, nothing less. It does not exist for reasons of extortion or to ruin businesses. The editor is not creating reports to harm people; he could not possibly have time between the phone, email and the IM beeping and ringing every two seconds as I personally heard while listening to the above mentioned tapes.

As for why Miller/McFarland "would make up any of this"? I strongly feel that they are attempting to manipulate the court system into doing their extortion for them to lend themselves an air of legitimacy. They have may have triggered a defense that will ultimately expose them in a way they will not care for.

I worked with this poor excuse for a human here in Pennsylvania. After reading about him and his new business ventures on some Credit Suit 2000?? Website, directing us to this site, the things stated on this site comes at no surprise. Anything that Chris McFarland says is a lie.

This man is a thief and extremely threatening to those who do not agree with him. He should have been arrested for stealing thousands of dollars from many. He victimized both seniors and teenagers here in PA and got away with it, and he should have been arrested for violent acts against many.

Chris should be behind bars under intense therapy. Anyone who comes in contact with this Chris knows what I am talking about.

Friends found this site, who was a victim of Mr McFarland years ago, who was checking to see if he still lives in the area. She still fears for her life as others do. Now we all know he lives in Florida. Pennsylvanians are safe from one maniac for the moment. More than likely he still comes here to visit family.

Here is more info below to back up claims as to Chris McFarland's past. We have a friend that will send pictures and will reveal why he was disbarred. He is also a lawyer.

Federated Financial is a debt or credit counseling business from what I gathered here, and it is run by Steve Miller and this Chris McFarland?

The complaints here are not as bad as some and certainly do not warrant two years of hate sites and all this other stuff. Lawsuits, good grief.

What strikes me right off is if the owners or managers of Federated Financial are busy doing all these lawsuits and websites and wild Internet posting, who is taking care of business?

Won't the complaints become more numerous if the bosses don't keep an eye on things and make sure that the accounts are serviced correctly?

Taking care of customers will usually remove the need for the posting of complaints in the first place. I think this company and its managers are pouring their energies into the wrong areas.

Very childish, all this goofing off and a bad business strategy all around. Childish people should never be trusted with sensitive personal information. Who knows what they might do with it. They might have a fit of temper and post it publicly and there is enough identity theft already.

Steve Miller and Chris McFarland have started a smear campaign against this site. They are all over the place on the WWW; one can scarcely look at any site without some of their crap popping up.

At first, I was concerned. Could it be true that a consumer advocate website owner was doing these awful things? Bad check writing, smoking marijuana, and extorting money from companies!?

The search has been a hoot thus far.

Let's see, the EDitor smoked marijuana back in 1974 or so. I am sure that it has worn off by now and he has been able to get on with his life without being perpetually stoned from the one occurrence. It was never revealed if the EDitor even inhaled that time!

The check incident seems to have stemmed from a case of someone stealing the EDitor's checks that he had foolishly pre-signed, also back in the early 70's. (Uh, EDitor, NOT a good idea, dude, as I am sure you have learned by now.)

The supposed "extortion"...the items posted seem to be answers to someone's inquiries as to how the consumer advocacy plan works. Things like that look very suspicious when taken out of context, as in the questions that were asked are not revealed.

The crowning touch...Miller/McFarland either separately or together are suing this site and the EDitor for defaming their good names? Oh, God, I laughed until the tears ran.

Miller and McFarland have done more damage to their own names than ten of these sites could have done in ten years. They have exposed themselves as nasty evil mean-minded pricks who I would not trust to take care of anything financially related. I wouldn't even want them to know me, period. (The guy above really creeps me out, that McFarland dude)

So, Miller/McFarland/Federated Financial are suing for defamation and other assorted malarkey.

This citizen can attest that what they are doing is far worse and may someday bite them in the a$$. After all, how can they convince a judge that they are being defamed when they have committed the very same act all over the Internet themselves for the past 2 years or more!? It'll never wash.

The ignorant fools have ruined themselves and have no one else to blame. They are obviously self-destructive losers, possibly in need of therapy.

Keep the laughs rolling in, Stevie and Chris. You clowns have already LOST.

Exposure hurts, but it must sting twice as bad to realize you have exposed yourselves in a very unflattering light. You morons have assassinated your own characters, LOL.

Miller/McFarland-0.
Rip-off Report/EDitor-1

Hello there Everyone,

I hope that this rebuttal finds you in good spirits and health.

PUBLIC NOTICE: By discovering there's a convicted felon behind the scene of Federated Financial Services, and actually seeing a disturbing photo of him, one with common sense will easily come to the right conclusion of which business is telling the truth and which business is merely trying to smear the other through the implementation of hate sites.

LET'S LOOK AT A FEW FACTS:

1. Federated Financial Services is a thug organization run by a convicted felon. The rapidly growing number of unacknowledged and unresolved grievances clearly shows this.

2. Ed Magedson runs a consumer advocacy website for victims of unscrupulous business practices to post their grievances.

3. Federated Financial Services fails to come forward in the public eye and address and resolve complaints/reports. Basically they're content in having complaints/reports accumulate and are blatantly telling all those with legitimate grievances to go F%CK THEMSELVES. Doesn't Federated Financial Services know how unprofessional it is to blow of angry customers?

4. The rip-off report has a rebuttal feature for businesses that feel they've been unjustly reported. The rebuttal feature is used to counter claims and statements made against a company that are untrue in nature or flat out erroneous.

NOTE: I do understand this REBUTTAL feature is NOT available to those that contact Rip-off Report and threaten them with bodily harm. Speaking of that, I think Mr Steve Miller and Christopher McFarland left out very important information when posting their website information. Also, Rip-off Report does not, never has, and never will charge for the rebuttal feature as Mr Miller and Christopher McFarland have been falsely telling people.

Rebuttals are filed by the owners of companies and their employees all day long. Anyone can look back as far as 1998 and see that there are rebuttals from business owners and employees defending their company! Mr Miller and McFarland, how stupid do you think we are?

5. Legitimate businesses that have nothing to hide DO NOT establish hate sites that attacks ones reputation, while infringing on the publics right to free speech. "An eye for an eye" IS NOT a creed of ethics.

6. All businesses that find it more convenient to attack the creator of a consumer advocacy program with frivilous allegations, than to resolve consumer grievances have some major issues.

With these facts in mind, it's easy to determine exactly which business is telling the truth and which business is merely trying to distort reality.

Until next time, take care Everyone cause I care, Aloha from Hawaii and God Bless.

Hey there Everyone,

I hope that this rebuttal finds you in good spirits and health.

PUBLIC NOTICE: Disregard any and all websites which have something bad to say about the rip-off report and it's creator. They're all just smear campaigns! Federated Financial Services is definitely an unscrupulous business. Their attacks against this website and it's creator speaks volumes.

Unscrupulous businesses like Federated Financial Services, often find it easier to attack the creators of consumer advocacy sites, while infringing on consumers right to free speech, rather than address, explain and resolve complaints/reports in the public eye.

This act alone, clearly shows bad intentions. It also shows how Federated Financial Services is comprised of nothing but thugs and strong-arms. Federated Financial Services is obviously nothing but a strong-arm organization. A company that had nothing to hide would definitely be willing to come forward to address and resolve complaints, instead of trying to sweep them under the rug.

If Federated Financial Services honestly feels that they've been reported unjustly, then they should have no problem proving it. Federated Financial Services, like all other unscrupulous businesses, instead promote hate sites that oppose consumer advocacy and free speech. Gee I wonder why?

Any decent human being would know, that Ed the founder of this site is a good person and Federated Financial Services are bad people. So unless you see Ed being wanted by the FBI, use your common sense and know that companies that are not willing to resolve consumer issues in the public eye are NOT to be believed.

Until next time, take care Everyone cause I care, Aloha from Hawaii and God Bless.

OBSERVATIONS OF PHOTO: Federated Financial Services must not have many employees, or they definitely would have picked a better photo than the one they have chosen! This dudes face has deceit written all over it. LOL. Not to mention dirty looking. LMAO. I think I saw a booger hanging out of his nose.

Christopher R. McFarland, the current in-house attorney and a partner at Federated Financial Services (FFS), is running day-to-day operations with Steve Miller, threatening employees and consumers who dare mention the problem of clients, who have bills which were not paid on time by contractual terms. McFarland is also the one who heads up the operations, which writes the letters for another rip-off, www.lawyersletters.com.

Because Federated Financial Services began having little success with scamming people out of their money, as the courts are on to Miller and it has been pretty easy to show that FFS has not been paying the bills they said they would, Steve Miller needed to bolster the company's leverage by the use of intimidation and force. Miller hired a used car salesman and disbarred Pennsylvania attorney, Christopher R McFarland, now partner. This man is one of the few people I know who takes joy in using illegitimate means physical violence and threats of physical force and legal exploitation to get people to capitulate; often dropping their charges or lawsuits.

The next couple of anecdotes give a good idea just how scary things have become since Miller got his hired gun. Not too long ago, many of us saw Christopher R "Chris" McFarland and Steve Miller chased a FFS employee out of the building. The employee told the truth to a customer when Federated did not pay their bills on time after the customer sent his money to Federated per agreement. He revealed that occasionally that is how they make extra money... by intentionally holding clients' money, keeping the interest made and passing on the penalties to the client. McFarland physically restrained the employee, shoving him up against the wall and threatening to "F*CK him up royally unless he fix the mess." They had the employee sign documents and McFarland gave him "the laying on of hands" as Chris likes to call it.

Recently, within the last couple of weeks, Miller and McFarland came back to the office after going to court. They were mad because things did not go well for them They were very vocal, yelling and screaming the rest of the afternoon. Miller got on the phone to call his friends and partners in for a "strategy meeting."

In the course of the meeting, they were actively throwing around ideas of how to make the judge and the other attorney pay. McFarland bragged how he had the opposing counsel "shaking in his boots." They said they would have to let the judge and the bailiffs know how powerful they are, calling the Judge in the case all kinds of names.

When Miller left the building, McFarland began an anti-semitic tyraid. He was talking crazy, about how Shakespeare had the right idea in killing all the lawyers because it was a good way of getting rid of a bunch of jews and jew lovers. McFarland knows Miller is a jew, but I don't think Miller really knows how McFarland really feels. It is truly scary.

In case you think this is made up, just check out the recent rap sheet on McFarland




WOULD YOU LET THIS MAN BE YOUR LAWYER OR SELL YOU A CAR, OR RUN YOUR COMPANY? WELL, STEVE MILLER LETS THIS MAN RUN HIS COMPANY.

I am told this case actually involves McFarland beating someone up to drop their lawsuit against FFS. In this case Miller needed McFarland to "take care of a company problem" and he viciously attacked a client. Fortunately, the police were called before he was able to make his getaway and he was arrested. It scares me to think someone could have died.

Holy Hell, it seems that FFS takes cues from scenes from "The Godfather." Reading about other Florida businesses on this website, it also looks like an affiliated business, Fashion Rock uses the same tactics, using another disbarred attorney who represents himself as in-house counsel also and throws his weight around. I mention this because McFarland is often in communication with someone named Mr. Jans from Fashion Rock.

I know of no case where Mr. Jans physically attacked someone, like "Killer" Chris McFarland, but just look at the photo someone posted of Jans. He looks too wimpy to attack someone without rebuff. He probably is used to intimidating female detractors only for his company.

For those who may need further proof, here is the link to the information, which can be checked out on the Internet.

http://www.pbso.org/corrections/index.cfm?fa=blottersearchwp&requesttimeout=500&start_date=01%2F01%2F1995&end_date=05%2F16%2F2005&last_name=Mcfarland&first_name=Chris&street_name=&
city_name=&statute=&arrestingAgency=&recsperpage=5&
process=Process+Search

Several of our clients have also had the unfortunate occasion to use the "services" of this so-called "non-profit" organization. After reading about other horror stories they have expressed the wish that they had read these stories before getting tangled up with FFS. Many of the complaints deal with the abuse of our not-for-profit (NFP) status.

Additionally, I have reason to research the recent legal entanglement of FFS and the recourse many people have had to resort to in order to force them to meet their obligations. In my opinion, Steve Miller is more interested in tying up the funds of clients (often for his own enrichment, albeit temporarily) and getting clients contractually bound to him, than he is in helping people.

[HERE IS A LIST OF RECENT LAWSUITS AGAINST FFS.]
(I am sending the documents separately.)

1. FEDERATED FINANCIAL flsdc 0:2001cv07089 06/27/2001 440 08/05/2004
FORRY vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

2. FEDERATED FINANCIAL flsdc 0:2001cv07542 09/28/2001 442 05/28/2003
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

3. FEDERATED FINANCIAL flsdc 0:2002cv60756 05/30/2002 710 01/15/2003
BAVING vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

4. FEDERATED FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. flsdc 0:2002cv60756 05/30/2002 710 01/15/2003
BAVING vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

5. FEDERATED FINANCIAL CORPORATION OF AMERICA insdce 1:2004cv00426 03/04/2004 890 04/19/2004
DANIELS vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL CORPORATION OF AMERICA

6. FEDERATED FINANCIAL RESERVE CORP. paedce 2:2003cv04554 06/30/2004 190 09/16/2004
FEDERATED FINANCIAL RESERVE CORP. vs. 320 FOODS, INC.

7. FEDERATED FINANCIAL RESERVE CORPORATION ohsdce 1:1999cv00937 11/05/1999 190 03/26/2002
MODERN SALES TECHNOL, ET AL vs. TODAYS DESTINY INC, ET AL

8. FEDERATED FINANCIAL RESERVE CORPORATION alsdce 1:1998cv01206 12/03/1998 190 01/12/1999
CONNOR vs. LEASE ACCEPTANCE, ET AL

9 FEDERATED FINANCIAL RESERVE CORPORATION miedce 2:1994cv72652 06/22/1998 890 09/15/1998
JONES vs. FED FIN RSRV CORP, ET AL

10. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC txsdce 4:1999cv00245 01/26/1999 422 02/23/1999
IN RE: MALONE COMPANY INC, ET AL

11. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC okwdce 5:1995cv00602 04/18/1995 220 10/04/1995
FEDERATED FINAN SVC vs. MADOUX, ET AL

12. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC okwdce 5:1995cv00602 04/18/1995 220 10/04/1995
FEDERATED FINAN SVC vs. MADOUX, ET AL

13. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC txsdce 4:1999cv00946 03/30/1999 422 06/09/1999
IN RE: MALONE COMPANY, ET AL

14. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC okwdce 5:1995cv01106 07/24/1995 220 09/16/1996
FEDERATED FINANCIAL vs. GORDON, ET AL

15. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC okwdce 5:1995cv01106 07/24/1995 220 09/16/1996
FEDERATED FINANCIAL vs. GORDON, ET AL

16. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC okwdce 5:1995cv01449 09/15/1995 140 11/20/1995
FEDERATED FINANCIAL vs. MILLER

17. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES INC txsdce 4:1997cv03465 10/17/1997 290 11/25/1998
FEDERATED FINANCIAL vs. REAGAN, ET AL

18. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. lamdce 3:1995cv00074 01/24/1995 140 09/26/1995
FEDERATED FINANCIAL vs. WARMACK, ET AL

19. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. okedc 6:1995cv00187 04/26/1995 220 02/12/1996
FEDERATED FIN SVC vs. TEXOMA FORD TRACTOR

20. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. txndce 3:1997cv02615 10/24/1997 290 10/29/1998
FEDERATED FINANCIAL vs. JOHNSON COUNTY., ET AL

21. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. txndce 3:1998cv02995 12/22/1998 950 07/29/1999
FEDERATED FINANCIAL vs. JOHNSON COUNTY., ET AL

22. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. flsdc 0:2001cv07089 06/27/2001 440 08/05/2004
FORRY vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

23. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. flsdc 0:2001cv07542 09/28/2001 442 05/28/2003
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

24. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. flsdc 0:2002cv60756 05/30/2002 710 01/15/2003
BAVING vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

25. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. COM flsdc 0:2002cv60756 05/30/2002 710 01/15/2003
BAVING vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL

26. FEDERATED FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.COM laedc 2:2000cv00803 11/12/2004 820 05/23/2000
IBUSINESSES.COM LLC vs. FEDERATED FINANCIAL