Hesham Zreik is a fraud. What do you think?

Blog Intentions:

1)   To warn any individuals or entities that is in business or considering to be in business with Hesham Zreik to take EXTREME CAUTION. I shared my firsthand experience here and do not wish the same will happen to you or your company.

2)   To nullify any business interest Hesham Zreik claimed to have with 3MayDay Inc.

Claim: I called Hesham Zreik a fraud explicitly via email and he has yet to prove to me otherwise. After reading this blog, what do you think?

Disclaimer: This is a long blog but for those with a financial or business interest at stake, the details will provide insights on why I called Hesham Zreik a fraud and advised all to stay away from him.

The Demand Letter has 2200 words; the email thread has 3700 words.

Credit: Special thanks to CoFoundersLab.com for taking initiatives and also went the extra mile to try to help.

How to read this blog: Start with the Background, Demand Letter, then the Email (start at the bottom).

Notes for reading the blog

Asides from Sami (Hesham’s accountant) and Tom Essa (Hesham’s IP subject matter expert recommendation), names were substituted for anonymity purposes. See references below and I suggest printing these out when reading the blog:

XX – CoFoundersLab.com executive

XXX- CoFoundersLab.com employee

XXXX – CoFoundersLab.com recommended independent arbitrator

XXXXX – Tim’s Oakland Police department contact

XXXXXX – Tim’s IP patent attorney

XXXXXXX- Tim’s technical contact to review and appraise the product Hesham built.


Background: I incorporated my company, 3MayDay Inc. on February 8, 2013.

In late February 2013, Hesham Zreik reached out to me via CoFoundersLab.com. He is a 30k+ LinkedIn connected individual (http://ae.linkedin.com/in/heshamzreik) and also owns a mobile development firm, ZGroup Mobile (http://www.zgroup-mobile.com/) in Abu Dhabi, UAE.

We formed a partnership in March 2013, with expectations that I’ll handle the business portion of the project, and he handles the technical aspects/product development. We agreed to bring in $160k each ($320k total) for the product development and it will take 6 months to develop the product.

The funds were schedule to be delivered monthly for 6 months. I did not wire every month, and also did not wire the entire half of the $320,000 total, but I did wire over $90k for Hesham’s firm to develop the product.

Months went by and the product still doesn’t work majority of the time at my end (details are provided on my Demand Letter included at the end of this blog). Hesham claimed he invested over $400k into the product development, but regardless how I looked at it, the product is not a half a million dollar product. One year since Hesham and I formed the partnership, I still don’t have a product that works consistently; things do not add up and I am deeply concerned whether I am working with a legitimate operator. I asked to visit Hesham in Abu Dhabi and he agreed to meet up two months later in April 2014. Within days before my departing flight, Hesham requested to postpone the trip and did not give a firm reschedule date.

Hesham left me no choice but to act on my belief that he is a fraud and/or in a breach of contract. I consulted with litigation lawyers and also reached out to the US Department of State, Delaware Investor Protection Unit and Abu Dhabi American Citizen Services; all were helpful but none were able to assist due to financial limitations at my end, or non-jurisdictions at their end.

I also reached out to CoFoundersLab.com so they are aware of the situation. CoFoundersLab.com reached out to both Hesham and I jointly, and offered to find an independent arbitrator for us, but said our CoFoundersLab.com profile will be remove if we can’t find a resolution between us. From the chain email in this blog, you can see how CoFoundersLab.com tried to help, but regardless of our efforts, Hesham avoided the free offer to consult with an independent arbitrator.

I emailed a Demand Letter to Hesham on 5 June 2014. The ultimatum was on or before the date of 19June 2014, Hesham needs to wire back my actual loss of $105,000 because of his fraud and or/in breach of contract action, and with a $2 million “lost of opportunity” compensation payment, due within 1 year of time.

Hesham did not accept the offer, which led me to share the incident via this blog, and let others to decide which party did not have good faiths to find a resolution and whether Hesham Zreik is a fraud.

Demand Letter

Demand Letter:

5 June 2014

Hesham Zreik

ZGroup Mobile Inc.

Airport Road, SJ Tower, 4th Floor

Abu Dhabi, UAE.

Re: 3MayDay Inc. Partnership

Dear Mr. Zreik,

The purpose of the letter is for Tim Lieu (Lieu) to:

  1. Nullify any business interest Hesham Zreik (Zreik) and/or ZGroup Mobile Inc. claims to have in 3MayDay Inc on the basis of fraud and or a breach of contract.
  2. Seek financial retributions from Hesham Zreik and/or ZGroup Mobile Inc. for suffered damages on the basis of fraud and or a breach of contract.

Partnership Formation:

On or about 13 February 2013, Lieu and Zreik formed a partnership to develop Lieu’s emergency call mobile app concept (3MayDay), with expectations that Lieu will contribute on the business development side, and Zreik will deliver the product. Both parties (Lieu and Zreik) agreed to fund the project.

Tim Lieu Responsibilities: Business Development

Lieu provided the following:

  • Contents for the website
  • User cases for the mobile app project
  • Product feedbacks
  • Testing the applications
  • Executive summaries
  • Business plans
  • Created Twitter, Google+ and Facebook accounts for 3MayDay Inc.
  • Lists of potential investors/clients
  • Outreach and met with potential investors
  • Outreach and met with Oakland and San Leandro police departments
  • Applied to the San Francisco Entrepreneur In Residence Program

Lieu also bore the cost to continue the patent application process and to reconstruct 3MayDay Inc. corporation paperwork to include Zreik as a cofounder.

Hesham Zreik Responsibilities: Product Delivery

The product to be delivered was an emergency-calling platform that allows 2-way communications (audio/text/video) between the caller and an operator, along with these features:

  • The platform works on any devices (i.e. iPhone, Android) for the caller and any operating systems (PC, Mac) for the operator.
  • Families and friends can view the video
  • Families and friends can text among each other while viewing the video
  • The caller can view texts from families and friends
  • Caller will get local emergency centers (i.e. hospitals) based on GPS location

Tim Lieu Comments on the Product Quality

On 6 April 2014, Lieu wrote Zreik an email with comments listed below: Note any first party references are for Lieu; second party references are for Zreik / ZGroup Mobile Inc.

  1. Here in the U.S., the platforms do not work consistently or properly (85% the time).
  2. It only works on a PC and Android phone only.
  3. Families and friends cannot view or listen to the call.
  4. Families and friends cannot text among each other while viewing the video.
  5. The caller cannot view texts from families and friends.
  6. Most puzzling, the teams you hired are not able to build a database/workaround to find nearby (local) emergency centers (i.e. hospital) based on the user’s GPS location. What is available are static information on a handful emergency centers. Given this is a tech-related problem, I previously asked you to reach out to Google to inquire about using their Google Map technology, but with no avail.
  7. The teams hired lack the ability to troubleshoot and fix an issue in a reasonable time, or to find a fix at all. Three to four months to realized the platform does not work on a Mac was not reasonable; same goes with the video technology to provide a consistent experience (not fixed).
  8. I am flustered with the quality of work delivered by the teams you hired.  There are 2 sides to this:
  • Basic request, i.e. update data on a website…the most simple one is the company is registered as 3MayDay Inc., and 3MayDay should be used at all times on the website/operator platform portal/mobile app, but yet 3Mayday and 3mayday were also used. I also mentioned I was unimpressed with the last website update to include screenshots on the home page, where you also agreed that was bad work.
  • Codes are written to perform actions in a specified manner (i.e. launch video streaming) all the time.  The codes should provide a consistent experience (less the occurrence of bugs/server issue), but you are well aware this is far from the truth at my end here in the U.S. , i.e. I was not able to log into the mobile app on Tuesday (4/1/14) around 8pm PST. I think the prompt was wrong credential, which I used “q” as the username, and “1” as the password.

Would you deliver these works to a Fortune 500 company? Is this the quality of work your company is known for? If not, why were they delivered for this project?

Tim Lieu Comments on Fraud/Breach of Contract Concerns:

On 6 April 2014, Lieu wrote Zreik an email with comments listed below: Note any first party references are for Lieu; second party references are for Zreik / ZGroup Mobile Inc.

1.     You, as a serial entrepreneur and owner of a mobile app developer firm, gave a quote of $330k for my 3MayDay concept with a 6-month delivery time. What do we have now?

2.     I wired $91k for the development cost, and you claimed $450k+ was spent on your end as well. The more people I talked to, the more I fail to see how the current product is a “half a million” dollar product.  I have an ill feeling to think you have not contributed the amount you claimed, and that all the development work were done because of the $91k I wired in.

3.     Invoices – I asked for a breakdown on how the funds were spent, i.e. how much was paid to which developer for what work. You said that is Sami’s job and he will address them when someone asked for them. Am I not someone? I asked for many times, but got the same reply that I was given everything already, which is an invoice number along with the lump sump figure. From a legal and accounting perspective, how is this possible if someone wants to look at the book? Imagine you invested money into a project, and the accountant told you this, does it not concerned you?

4.     Corporation paperwork – I signed and dated them for you in June 2013. It’s April 2014 now, why have you not signed them? What are you waiting for? The attorney you regularly used has deceased but I imagine you would have a replacement by now given your million dollar operations at ZGroup Mobile.

5.     Consultants’ signing the corporation paperwork – same document was delivered to you in June 2013, why have I not got a single consultant signing the paperwork? You mentioned there were 30 developers (part and full time) working on this project previously and I expect to receive 30 signatures.

6.     User case documents that I will incorporate into a manual – we spent the first month working on this with the people you hired, and you said these were documented. Why have you not send them over?

7.     Bugs/product development log report – it should be standard practices to save and logged these and you said these were also documented, why haven’t you send them over?

8.     Technical framework/architect document on 3MayDay platform – same as above, why haven’t you send them over?

Tim Lieu Comments on Things Not Adding Up:

On 6 April 2014, Lieu wrote Zreik an email with comments listed below: Note any first party references are for Lieu; second party references are for Zreik / ZGroup Mobile Inc.

I.      Why it seems like you are only willing to talk to potential investors who don’t have much background in technology, funding or in the emergency industry? I previously provided a list of seed investors and ski resorts that we should reach out to, and as a reasonable person that is fully vested into a project, I expect you to be excited and will take actionable steps to help me toward these goals, but that was the case. Your replay was, “Tim, you go reach out…”, and my response is “I can’t because I have no confidence in the delivery of the product and also will no longer put my reputation on the line anymore given the XXXXXX incident”. Recall I told XXXXXX with the Oakland Police Department in May 2013 the launch date will around August 2013, and what happened? Nothing because even till now in April 2014, I still don’t have a consistent product. I also mentioned I consider asking the San Leandro police officer to invest and you said, “Why do we need him, what will he bring to the table?” I must admit, I was more than puzzled at that moment. Had the police officer invested, we would have an investor in the emergency services industry. How will this not help our project?

II.    With your pedigree, and given the platforms work well for you in UAE, why are you not able to find investors/clients for the project? You mentioned you spoke with a few people and everyone is impressed with the product demo. What is the holdup to bring them onboard given 3MayDay is a high priority among your projects?

III.  Tom Essa – till now, I still don’t know what service he has delivered. The agreement was for him to review my patent application and to provide a formal reply so I don’t need to hire XXXXXX to construct the reply. We three spent countless hours during that stretch, but we still ended up using XXXXXX’s services and not a single thing from Tom’s service was included in the reply to the patent officer. You said Tom has experience with patents and lectures at an university, which I can’t find any information via Google; you said to trust Tom, in which I did; you told me Tom should get more than the $3k I initially gave him, I compromised and wired in an additional $4k even I said his services were not even worth the $3k I gave him initially.

IV.   XXXXXXX – given the trust erosion, I took your offer to look for a tech advisor to evaluate how much the team you hired had accomplished and how much it will cost to do the project from scratch. I don’t have a tech advisor, so I went to a cofounderslab.com network event and met XXXXXXX. I shared with him the situation and he was willing to be on a call to evaluate the products with no charge, but you refused to join the call. Obviously, his goal was to generate business, but I was clear there are no agreement and my words were as followed on my email: “Asides from getting a quote for this project, I would also appreciate if you can assess a dollar figure on how much we have accomplish in terms of development cost for this project.”. My goal was to get answers to your offer: 1) To see

how much it will cost to build the product from scratch. 2) To evaluate the products with a dollar figure.

Tim Lieu Attempts to Resolve Issue:

Lieu comments were not the first time brought to Zreik attention. Lieu hoped Zreik would have taken actions to ease Lieu suspicious that Zreik is a fraud, and to defend

Zreik’s profession reputation, but Zreik showed no desire to do so and took no action to address Lieu’s fraud/breach of contract concerns.

Hesham Zreik Fraud/Breach of Contract:

Based on Zreik nonaction, Lieu concluded Zreik failed and refused to perform on the partnership agreement. Lieu have a vested interest for the agreement to work, but after months of failed attempts for Zreik to prove he is a legitimate operator, Lieu had no choice but to act on the beliefs that Zreik is a fraud and or in a breach of contract.

 Tim Lieu Demand for Retributions: Immediate Actions Required

As a direct result of Zreik’s wrongful acts and omissions, Lieu requests the following for settlement immediately:

  1. Nullified any business interest Hesham Zreik/ ZGroup Mobile Inc. claimed to have in 3MayDay Inc.
  2. Zreik wires a total of $2,105.000 (Two million one hundred and five thousand USD) with the following schedule:

To compensate actual dollars damages Lieu lost due to Zreik fraud/breach of contract:

  • Wire $105,000 USD (one hundred and five thousand USD) to Lieu by 19 June 2014.

To compensate Lieu for punitive damages/opportunity cost:

  • Wire $2,000,0000 (two million USD) to Lieu with the following installation schedules:

o   $500,000 (five hundred thousands USD) by 19 September 2014

o   $500,000 (five hundred thousands USD) by 19 December 2014

o   $500,000 (five hundred thousands USD) by 19 March 2015

o   $500,000 (five hundred thousands USD) by 19 June 2015

Wire instructions provided in page 6.

This letter constitutes notice that unless Lieu receives the wire for the full amount by each scheduled date, (first payment is due on or before 19, June 2014), Lieu will take additional steps necessary to seek compensations. Note demands will be higher should this happen.

Let me know if you have any questions.


Tim Lieu

International Wire Instruction:


Name on Receiving Account: Tim Lieu

Originating State of the Receiving Account: XXXXXXXX

Saving Account Number: XXXXXXXX

Wire Transfer Routing Number: XXXXXXXX

Swift Code: XXXXXXXX


Email Thread:

To XX@cofounderslab.com, Hesham Zreik (Gmail) XXX@cofounderslab.com

Jun 13 at 7:07 AM

Dear Mr. Zreik,

Your tactic of going in circles and not addressing the question(s) is unprofessional.

The ultimatum stands at 19 June 2014 and I expect to receive the first wire of $105,000 USD to my XXXXXXXX account by that date.
See comments below.



On Wednesday, June 11, 2014 3:40 AM, XX@cofounderslab.com wrote:


sent from phone; pardon brevity and spelling mstks

On Jun 6, 2014, at 5:31 PM, XX <XX@cofounderslab.com> wrote:


Yes… you’ll be able to ask questions when/if you agree to speak with Mr. XXXX… the initial consultation will not result in any binding decisions. It is simply to ascertain wether or not a mediation process can work for you guys.

So, can I go ahead and introduce you AND copy this email chain?
[Tim]: Is a “Yes” or “No” that hard for you?



On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Hesham Zreik (Gmail) <hesham.zreik@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear XX,

Thanks. Is it okay for me to directly ask him this question? Let me please explain why: We are in a difficult situation in the startup and with the ideas that my partner (Mr. Lieu) has and this might be our last chance. I just need to know what Mr. Zanolla has done in the past in this field to assess whether his help will be beneficial. Again I appreciate your recommendation but these days there are lot of conferences and lot of speakers and believe me, in my lifetime i sat down with many who understood very little in their fields! Being a good speaker is something and doing one’s job is something else.

Again I appreciate all of your efforts (XXXs and your’s). I know that you have more fun things to do on your Friday’s afternoon than to hear a low quality version of “you did this and I did that”.

Best regards,

On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 12:08 AM, XX <XX@cofounderslab.com> wrote:

Dear Hesham,

You can find more information about Mr. XXXX here: http://XXXX.com

I met Mr. XXXX through a personal reference and attendance at a “Conflict Resolution” conference in New York. Mr. XXXX was one of the invited panelists as an expert on cofounder conflict resolution.

We are not receiving any compensation whatsoever from Mr. XXXX, nor are we in any way affiliated with him. Similarly we we’re not making any promises about him being able to resolve any issues… but at a minimum we think you and Mr. Lieu should give it a try before pursuing other measures.

Do I have authorization to forward to Mr. XXXX this email chain? I think it could be a good starting point for him as way of background information. This way by the time you actually speak you’re not starting from zero.



On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Hesham Zreik (Gmail) <hesham.zreik@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Mr. Lieu,

Please find below my replies.

On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:07 PM, tim lieu <tvlieu05@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Mr. Zreik,

With good faith, see comments below.

Will you take XX’s offer to consult with Mr. XXXX?

[Hesham]: I asked for more information about Mr. XXXX but initially I am in.



From: Hesham Zreik (Gmail) <hesham.zreik@gmail.com>
To: tim lieu <tvlieu05@yahoo.com>
Cc: XX<XX@cofounderslab.com>; XXX <XXX@cofounderslab.com>
Sent: Friday, June 6, 2014 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: CoFoundersLab: Seeking resolution to the dispute

Dear XX and XXX,

Thanks for your continuous support and help. I know we are somehow wasting your time and I am sorry you were brought to this.   I am in for solving the problem. I have (unlike Mr. Lieu) never said no.
Do you have an example or cases where Mr. XXXX was able to help in such cases? I hope you can share it with us.
Dear Mr. Lieu,

Thanks for your email letter. I will keep my spirit of good intentions and that you are a good person. So, unlike you, I will not be attacking you personally.

I find the letter you wrote quit amusing. For instance I don’t know from where did you come up with the figure. I mean there should be some equation behind it!?! why 2.1M not 2.2 or even 3M?

[Tim]: This is an arbitration number. It could have been $10 million.

[Hesham]: So why it wasn’t 10 millions? From my limited knowledge, this should have a base, not arbitrary number.  That was the point that I was trying to make. Anyway it’s not a big deal.

[Tim]: I’m ok with a 20x punitive damage.

Allow me please to address some of the things that maybe you forgot or you were not very accurate about:

1) The section of your responsibilities doesn’t have what we agreed on, but rather what you have end up contributing. I don’t see this being equal to my responsibilities for a period of more than 10 months. I can explain this in full details if you want me.

[Tim]: Yes, explain in full details. What are my responsibilities? What were yours?

[Hesham]: There was a clear agreement about this. To put it short, we as co-founders have to cooperate but mostly technical things were on my side and business on yours.

[Tim]: You offered to provide full details, but now the reply is “to put it short….and one sentence”??  Review my demand letter, I listed my responsibilities (business) and you agreed I accomplished those tasks; what have you done at the technical side? Again, if you forgot, review the demand letter on my thoughts on the product quality.

Here is a question: Given you claimed half a million dollar was spent, what is the salvage value for the “thing/product” you built?

2) You forgot to mention that we had lot of changes on the product itself from the inception up to the delivery. A simple example is two ways video call between two parties (which is very essential and we agreed it will be a challenge). Other example is the introduction of idea of “Verticals”, “loved ones”.

[Tim]: Disagreed. Two way video call was the initial concept (that’s what my patent was for). What I wanted was a MVP, but you suggested otherwise. We discussed this before and I stand firm on my comments,

[Hesham]: Disagree. It wasn’t there in the initial draft and initial plan. It was only when one way video call worked quickly that we thought we should add it. I remember discussing this with you on a conference call and adding it to the development plan (we agreed to develop features that we BOTH agree on).

[Tim]: I stated my thoughts already. Not going to repeat myself.

3) You also forgot to mention that you saw it working on skype on your camera on Aug/2013 (2 ways videos on mobile and desktop). This was the alpha version working fine.

[Tim]: I did not say it does not work. I said majority of the time it doesn’t work. Again, check your emails on the bugs/tech issues I reported to you previously.

[Hesham]: Why in an hour of testing that “majority” of time didn’t happen even once?!?

[Tim]: You may think an hour of testing with you is a lot of time, but recheck your emails on the bugs/tech issues I reported to you previously; those reports combined were more than “an hour” of time I spent on testing the product; you also acknowledged those bug reports and said you will check with the “team”.
4) You also forgot to mention that before our dispute came up, we agreed to do a video conferencing where i will be able to see why it is failing at your side. I was running out of options and whenever we try it, we see it working except for you. You didn’t mention that we tried it together for more than 60 minutes and for over 100 times and it didn’t fail at ALL. We agreed to do the same tests over the two following days but I didn’t find you online on those days and you didn’t answer my emails then you sent me your first bad email. To remind you, it was exactly on 26th of March, 2014.
[Tim]: See #3. I don’t see any reason to continue testing and I stated this implicitly during our interactions at that time.

[Hesham]:  I see. So you started accusing me of being a fraud. That is a very good attitude especially after a call for one full hour where things were fine.

[Tim]: YES I AM CALLING YOU A FRAUD. Review the demand letter. I gave you ample time to defend yourself.

5) You forgot to mention that we agree to split up the cost of development equally (back in March/2013) and you didn’t fulfill that part of your obligation. You also promised several times during Apr, May, Jun and Jul of 2013 to bring money from other investors but also you failed. (I am not blaming, I am just highlighting).

[Tim]: The agreement was to split the cost, but given I didn’t bring in the entire $165k, my share of ownership will be diluted accordingly  However, I failed to see how you have contributed the amount you claimed.

[Hesham]:  Yes but you don’t count this in my favor and in my belief in the system. Another partner might have said: “I fulfilled my part but you are not fulfilling yours” and then everything would have stopped and we would have lost our investment.

The product development was estimated at $320k from day one. You agreed to that. With the extra features added it jumped to $450k. All the features we agreed on are in the product and a LOT more. Why didn’t object to the number earlier?

Regarding not being able to see the value, again you are not an expert inr this field. You don’t know what we have done and how challenging it is.
[Tim]: Having more ownership because you contributed more cash is not to your favor?? For the remaining portion of your comment, re-read comment #2 from this email and the demand letter. I will not repeat myself.

6) Re Tom: it’s very good that we have all the communications recorded as we were all using “Track Changes” in the word documents. I believe it’s very easy to you to measure what he contributed. Just check how many point has been changed that neither you nor I were able to change on our own.
I see you contradict yourself on this point as you thanked him very well on what he has done and you clearly announced that this is how the job should have been done and complained that the lawyer wasn’t doing it properly as Tom has started to do it (also please mention kindly that we recruited him only 6 days before the official launch and on many days he had to work 18 hours a day for that).
[Tim]: I thank Tom as a good person gesture. I told you he did not meet the expectations, which was to provide a document that I can use for XXXXXX to submit directly to the patent office, but I ended up using XXXXXX’s services. Tom knows the time constraints and requirements when he agreed to take on the project.

[Hesham]: Yes I am not saying that he was complaining. I am saying that you should show at least some “thanks” to him especially since over 6 days he was able to show us things that your lawyer didn’t do. I am sure i am quoting you correctly saying “XXXXXX didn’t do his job” many times and “we are hiring Tom because XXXXXX wasn’t doing things correctly”. Tom was able to highlight many issues in the document; otherwise we would not have come up with so much challenges and questions.

Anyway in the case of Tom, everything was very good documented! It’s in the “Track changes”. Anybody who can see the comments will know the kind of efforts Tom has done.

[Tim]: Yes, I mentioned XXXXXX was not doing a good job, which lead to Tom’s services. You are more than welcome to present the “Track Changes”; I am ready to defend the drafts and final versions given to me is not done by a IP subject matter expert (which you claimed Tom is). Also, keep in mind a “ready to present” to the patent office document was what Tom was hired for.

7) You are not a technical expert to assess the cost of a technology is. Personally, i won’t put a price on boats since I don’t know much about them. I would rather consult an expert in the field. I believe your estimates are inaccurate and based on a simple “hunch”.

[Tim]: I am not a technical expert, which is why I took your offer to look for a tech expert. I found XXXXXXX and you declined to discuss with him.

[Hesham]: Yes. But you brought him to help solve an issue not to assess. I wasn’t consulted on anything also before the call which is very unprofessional from a partner.

[Tim]: You were not consulted?? Was it not your offer to asked me to find a tech expert to appraise what you have done?  I consulted XXXXXXX on two fronts : 1) To see if he can help with the video issues and 2) For him to appraise the system you built.  These were explicitly communicated to both XXXXXXX and you.

8)  I know lot of investors but that doesn’t mean the investment is guaranteed. Your letter infer that it’s solely my obligation and that I have failed in it.

[Tim] – I did not say that was solely your obligation. I was asking given you know a lot investors, and the product works well in your region, and they all liked it, why will they not invest? What are the holdups?

[Hesham]: Maybe because we are not in the silicon valley?! out of the startups that you know how many got funded from Dubai?

[Tim]: 3MayDay Inc. address is San Francisco. Also, am I not living in the bay area?

I know there are lot of other things that can be said but frankly I don’t see a point in saying them. Even the points above are repeated from earlier emails but you don’t want to listen.

[Tim]: I know I repeated myself a lot more than you have.

[Hesham]: I also think the same.

I am always in for a friendly solution, but If you want to take it to court then I don’t mind. Please note that so far I tolerated your language with me and most of the none sense that came with it. I know that reacting might only worsen the situation so I am always holding my temper (but not sure for how long).

[Tim]: I am a good person, but don’t take that as being weak.

[Hesham]: If you can bear my sincerity a little bit (no offense meant whatsoever and with all due respect to you): a good person won’t attack others based on non factual evidences. A good person would have given the startup he has worked on for a year two more days to test the product and know what is wrong. What if your way of testing it is wrong (which is the only explanation that i have so far)? What if you have a problem in the hardware? what if…etc.

[Tim]: I stand firm on my comments. I have no intention to attack but rather stating the facts and my thoughts. On the testing, review comments #3 and #4, and the demand letter.

Saying a person is fraud is not a simple accusation? it’s like you paid and got nothing in return! If you still have doubts then you should verify them.

Let me try to show you the other side of the coin:
1) When you failed to raise the money on Jun/2013, I didn’t call a fraud of you although you put me in a very difficult situation. Back then i was waiting for your promises of funds for over three months but nothing came out. You know how funding is important for any startup and missing the payment might clearly mean the death of it.

[Tim]: I wired you cold hard cash. Just because I can’t raise money allow you to call me a fraud? In the contrary, what have you given me in return? Read the demand letter.

2) When you were ready to invest the extra 50k in Aug/2013, you asked me to make them as part of initial seed which I did although we previously agreed together that the dead line would have been on July/2013.

[Tim]: I did request this. Aside from raising fund, I fulfilled my business development responsibilities and all I need is a product that I can demo. What did you give me? Read the demand letter in case you forgot. I think it’s fair for the $50k to be part of the initial seed.

3) When you were saying it is not working at your side, i didn’t start accusing you of lying because it was working at my side and all the other friends who tried it! even on our last test on 26th of March when it was working I didn’t tell you that you were misleading us all this time. . . . I assumed you were honest.

[Tim]: See comment #3 and the demand letter. You also acknowledged those bug reports and said you will check with the “team”.

A good person is a _fair_ person. You should state the above if you want to be fair.

Nobody is weak. I am a good and _reasonable_ person. That is why i was living up with all of this unprofessional behavior from your side. Believe me when I say: it is very easy for me to take you to court because of what you said and I will easily win. But if i win then the penalty won’t be an arbitrary number 😉

[Tim]: I am open for people to judge whether I am a good, fair and reasonable person. I am also ready to defend my case.

@XX, @XXX: In my last paragraph: I am trying just to balance the bad things that you have heard about me.

[Tim]: I stand firm on comments presented in this email and the demand letter.



Note: The email below is sent one week after XX’s email, in which Hesham Zreik has ample time to reply.

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:58 PM, tim lieu <tvlieu05@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi XX and XXX,

Thank you both for trying to help with the situation. Unfortunately, I doubt there are good faith at the other end.

Dear Mr. Zreik,

Attached is my demand letter and note immediate actions are required at your end.



On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 6:33 AM, XX<XX@cofounderslab.com> wrote:

Hi Hesham,

We met him in NYC in an event focused on cofounder legal issues, and he was on the panel of invited speakers. He’s an entrepreneurial lawyer himself as you can probably tell.

Please let me know if you have specific questions which I’ll happily try to answer, or connect you directly.



On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Hesham Zreik (Gmail) <hesham.zreik@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear XXX,

Thanks for the recommendation. Do you have any further information about the guy? Has he done earlier mediations? anything beside the file that you sent to back up why you choose him?

Thanks a lot for all of your help.

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 6:56 PM, XXX <XXX@cofounderslab.com> wrote:

Hi Tim and Hesham,

We heard from both of you that you are interested in resolving this issue. Like I said earlier, we found a mediator who can help you resolve your dispute. His name is XXXX, and he is an attorney and a mediator.

I’m attaching a pdf with his fee schedule. He mentioned to us that for startups that are not funded yet, he is willing to be flexible with his rates and offer the service at a discounted fee. I’m assuming that the costs would be split evenly between the two of you.

Needless to say, it is easy to say you’re both willing to resolve the issue. We hope you actually take the step forward and engage this professional with good faith. Please note we have zero incentive in this potential transaction other than to see you two resolve your situation.

Please confirm – each – how you would like to proceed so we can go ahead with introductions.


On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 11:54 AM, XXX <XXX@cofounderslab.com> wrote:

Hi Tim and Hesham,

We have found somebody who can mediate the dispute between the two of you.

We have heard from Tim, but we haven’t heard back from Hesham.

Hesham – does that mean that you are not interested in resolving this dispute? Please let us know.



On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:57 AM, XXX<XXX@cofounderslab.com> wrote:

Hi Tim,

Yes, we are working on it, reaching out to our contacts. I will follow up with you when we find somebody.



On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Tim <tvlieu05@yahoo.com> wrote:


Will you be able to provide suggestions for the arbitration?



On May 10, 2014, at 3:10 PM, tim lieu <tvlieu05@yahoo.com> wrote:


Please provide suggestions for arbitration.



On Friday, May 9, 2014 1:46 PM, XXX <XXX@cofounderslab.com> wrote:

Hello Tim and Hesham,

We are reaching out to you jointly in order to find a resolution to the dispute that arose between the two of you.

We don’t want to choose sides, and this is why we suggest that this matter should be handled by an independent arbiter. If you give us your permission, we will introduce you to some options.

However, if you can’t come to terms where both of you tell us that you are satisfied with the outcome, and you are not willing to seek professional support, we will have to remove you both from our platform.

Please let us know how you would like to proceed.

Thank you,