PHI Group Inc (PHIL)

[keepdreaming132]

this company have ZERO potential. Henry also have other stock he used to pump this one and Henry is Barred by "FINRA from acting as a broker or otherwise associating with a broker-dealer firm". He/his company PHI (Providential Holding Inc.) is still barred by finra after he and his company lost to an Arbitration lawsuit in 1999.

PROVIDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC. (Expelled by finra)

Arbitration lawsuit

Henry other company or ticker PHIGW ~~ there was also another one but too lazy to DD since im done DDing for this ticker long time ago.

and that is not all. Arbitration lawsuit and FORM 10-KSB (JUNE 30, 2006)
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND ARBITRATIONS

* QUANG VAN CAO AND NHAN THI NGUYEN CAO VS. PROVIDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC. ET AL
* CONSECO FINANCE VENDOR SERVICES CORPORATION FKA GREEN TREE VENDOR SERVICES CORPORATION VS. PROVIDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC., HENRY D. FAHMAN AND TINA T. PHAN.
* NGON VU VS. PROVIDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC.
* VERIO VS. PROVIDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC.
* DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC. VS. PROVIDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC. AND PROVIDENTIAL HOLDINGS, INC.
* LUBERSKI, INC. VS. PROVIDENTIAL HOLDINGS, INC. AND HENRY D. FAHMAN
* TIMOTHY E. LUBERSKI VS. PROVIDENTIAL HOLDINGS, INC. AND HENRY D. FAHMAN
* NICK L. JIORAS AND MELODEE L. JIORAS VS. PROVIDENTIAL HOLDINGS, INC. AND HENRY D. FAHMAN
* KEY EQUIPEMNT FINANCE, INC., VS. PROVIDENTIAL SECURITIES, INC.; HENRY D. FAHMAN; TINA T. PHAN, CASE NO 06WL00289


and there is more. Even Day-Trader sued Henry.
ARBITRATION CASES:


The Company had four arbitration cases from day-traders against Providential Securities, Inc., a discontinued stock brokerage operation of the Company. The total amount of damages for these cases, which were closed as of June 30, 2001, was $54,505. This amount has been accrued in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

*** dont forget the hydro dam, cement company, and the supposedly "1 Billion dollar" mining company is on this old filing too. Lol...

***Remember Henry said listing to the NASDA etc, etc, etc? Here it is, the NASD Regulation busted his scheme. Henry Dack Fahman <--- you have to do a CTR+F to find Henry's section on the page. Dont worry, he is the very first one.. LOL.

Firms Fined, Individuals Sanctioned Providential Securities, Inc. (CRD#31189, Fountain Valley, California) and Henry Dack Fahman (CRD #1952649, Registered Principal, Huntington Beach, California) submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent in which the firm was censured, fined $115,000, required to offer rescission to public customers, and Fahman was barred from association with any NASD member in any capacity. Without admitting or denying the allegations, the respondents consented to the described sanctions and to the entry of findings that the firm, acting through Fahman, offered and sold shares of stock through a private “minimum-maximum” offering to public customers and made untrue statements of material facts and omissions in that the offering memorandum:
• failed to disclose that an officer of the firm could make contributions to help meet the minimum requirement;
• failed to disclose the firm’s and Fahman’s disciplinary history; and
• stated falsely that 50 percent of the minimum offering was to be used to register the firm as a New York Stock Exchange member self-clearing broker/dealer, when in fact, the funds were used to cover the firm’s regular operating expenses. Moreover, the NASD found that the firm, acting through Fahman, disclosed on the offering memorandum that the firm had three branch offices and additional full-service satellite offices, failed to disclose that the firm’s membership agreement restricted the firm to only two branch offices, extended the offering date without providing prior written notification to its investors, and falsely represented individuals in the offering as being members of the Board when they were not. The findings also stated that the firm, acting through Fahman, failed to deposit and retain customer funds received in the offering in a properly established bank escrow account, and transmitted funds to the firm’s operations bank account in the name of the issuer, failed to return customer funds when the terms of the contingency were not met, and continued to sell common stock through the private placement memorandum despite the expiration of the contingency.

and if that is not enough you can read more about other lawsuit and more of his "Acquisition/agreement/subsidiary company on this other form FORM 10-KSB (JUNE 30, 2003)