Zakir complaint — CCO says the internal review is complete and proposes a call — 2026-09-11

Brandon's second direct email to Raya and Rob Zakir on the formal-notice thread, sent 10:39 AM ET on the day Derek had promised them the document package. JT and Derek copied. Six sentences; no figures, no documents, no decision stated.

Summary

• Brandon tells the clients "We've completed our internal review" and proposes "a brief discussion about the portfolio, historical timeline, and associated fees."
• He offers a phone call "later this morning or early this afternoon" on 2026-09-11, or "next week," and asks for a number to reach them at.
• The email does not attach or mention the document package Derek promised for 2026-09-11 (agreements, Schedule A, fee schedules, the four reports), and does not state a resolution, credit, or figure.
• Sent one minute before Brandon told JT on Teams "Just sent them an email. Calling you in 2." By 12:14 PM ET Brandon wrote to JT "It doesn't look like they're going to respond to me anyways..."; at 3:44 PM ET, "no response..." No reply from the Zakirs inside the sweep window (ends 06:30 ET 2026-09-12).
• The thread beneath carries the full prior exchange: Brandon's 2026-09-07 acknowledgment, Derek's 2026-09-03 response with the 2026-09-11 and 2026-10-02 dates, and Raya's 2026-09-02 formal notice.

Decisions

• Brandon Drespling, as CCO: the Firm's next step with the Zakirs is a live conversation, not a written package. Whether this substitutes for or precedes the 2026-09-11 document package Derek promised is not stated.

They asked me for

• Nothing raised. JT is copied only.

I asked them for

• Nothing raised.

Concerns and frustrations raised

• Nothing raised in the email itself. On Teams the same day Brandon read the silence as the clients declining to engage ("It doesn't look like they're going to respond to me anyways...").

What they are focused on

• Brandon Drespling: getting the Zakirs on the phone before anything further goes out in writing.
• Rob and Raya Zakir: not on record in this window; their last written position (2026-09-02) demanded documents and a reimbursement plan, and said they would escalate if no substantive written response arrived "by end of next week."

Doable / not doable / needs a decision

• A call before the package → the Firm's choice, but Derek's written 2026-09-11 date for the package passed with this email instead. Needs a decision on whether the package still goes out on its own, and when.
• The clients' 2026-09-02 escalation clock ("end of next week", read literally as 2026-09-11) → has now run; whether they act on it is theirs.

Action items

Mine

• Nothing assigned to JT in the email. The supporting analysis is already in the Box matter folder and the fee-reconciliation site (see the 2026-09-11 Brandon Teams record). — (Notion: not pushed)

Theirs

• Reply with availability and a phone number — Rob and Raya Zakir — no target set
• Decide whether the 2026-09-11 document package still goes out, and on what date, now that the promised date has passed without it — Brandon Drespling and Derek Eichenwald — target not set

Suggestions for me

• The clients' own deadline language and Derek's promised 2026-09-11 package date have both lapsed without documents going out. If Brandon wants the call first, the package date should be restated to the clients in writing so the record shows a date the Firm set and kept.
• Brandon's email says the review is complete; the credit decision that the review was meant to produce is still not on file anywhere. Ask him for it before the call so the number is not improvised live.

Notable quotes

"We've completed our internal review, and I think it would be beneficial for everyone to have a brief discussion about the portfolio, historical timeline, and associated fees." — Brandon Drespling

"Would you be available for a quick phone call later this morning or early this afternoon? Next week works as well if that's more convenient for you." — Brandon Drespling