The Court has reviewed this confession and finds itself PHYSICALLY ILL at the notion that six previous closings constitutes due diligence in the year of our Lord 2024. You recommended a lender the way Reginald recommends restaurants — based entirely on past glory without checking if the chef has been replaced by a single overwhelmed line cook named Derek. Those children ate drive-through in a parked car while their future bedrooms sat EMPTY across a parking lot, and somewhere a wire transfer lingered in digital purgatory because you failed to perform what The Court calls a "basic operational vibe check." I myself once trusted a title company based on reputation alone and ended up signing documents on the hood of a Kia Sorento, so I understand the seduction of assumed competence, but UNDERSTANDING IS NOT FORGIVENESS. The $180 hotel bill is not the crime here — the crime is that a mother now associates your phone number with the night her children learned that adults do not always have control of situations. The Court notes that the kids thought it was an adventure, which is the only reason Reginald is not recommending you be sentenced to personally call every wire desk in America each morning to ask "how are we REALLY doing today." This Court has rendered its judgment and must now adjourn to call my own mother, who also stopped returning my calls after an incident I maintain was not my fault.