I claiming that the terms of the contract between BMF and CPA were violated because CPA did not pay out to BMF.
Now I ask you and usagi if you agree. And if you disagree, to explain why.
You are just asking me to explain if I disagree. Why are you not asking me to explain if I agree? Selective reasoning?
Moreover, I will answer again: I do not know, with no evidence to verify the facts I cannot agree or disagree with your claim.