Gulf Coast Western

Independent Sources

Shown for context — not merged with USAComplaints' own numbers.

Contacts & Login

• Official website (Gulf Coast Western): https://www.gulfcoastwestern.com/
• Main line (toll-free), company contact page: +1 (800) 284-1782
• General inquiries: [email protected]
• Dallas office line, company contact page: +1 (972) 284-0600
• Fax, company contact page: +1 (972) 284-0610
• Management team (concerns about a representative): [email protected]
• Partner login (existing joint venture partners): https://www.gulfcoastwestern.com/login

Locations

Gulf Coast Western: cold calls, joint-venture questions and where to go (checked October 12, 2026)

Gulf Coast Western, LLC is a Dallas company that sponsors oil and gas joint ventures. Its website says only "accredited investors" may participate and that it "does not offer or sell securities". Most readers reach this page for one of three reasons.

You received a sales call or mailing about an oil and gas venture and want it to stop.

• Tell the company directly. Its contact page lists 800-284-1782 and 972-284-0600 and [email protected]; its Due Diligence page gives [email protected] as the address for the management team. Ask it to put the number on its own internal do-not-call list and write down the date you asked: the FTC's FAQ says that if you ask a company not to call you, "they have to stop", and to "write down the date you asked them to stop". In its BBB replies the company said it entered the consumer's number into its "internal do-not-call system" and that its representatives are instructed to enter a person's contact information into its "internal do-not-call list" if asked.
• Register the number at DoNotCall.gov or on 1-888-382-1222. The FTC's FAQ says a number should appear on the Registry the next day, that it can take "up to 31 days" for sales calls to stop, and that the Registry "doesn't block calls".
• The same FTC FAQ page has a "Report Unwanted Calls" section. It also says that "Business phone numbers and fax lines are not covered" by the Registry, which matters if the calls reach a workplace line; one of the BBB replies below makes the same point.
• In a reply to a BBB complaint about a call to a number on the Registry (October 2024), the company said any such contact was "inadvertent" and that it contracts with an independent third party that screens numbers against the Registry before it places marketing calls. That is the company's statement, not a finding. The complainant rejected that response on BBB, saying the number had been on the Registry since May 2009.

You are an existing partner with a question about a joint venture. The website has a Partner Login page, and the company's Due Diligence page says it equips partners with "extensive information about each opportunity". Phone and email routes are above.

You are deciding whether to invest.

• Read the SEC's publication "Oil and Gas Scams: Common Red Flags and Steps You Can Take to Protect Yourself" (dated July 31, 2007), which the company's own Due Diligence page also points readers to. It lists unsolicited materials, "can't miss" wells, pressure to invest quickly and promised high returns as warning signs, and says to check the answers yourself rather than rely on the promoter.
• Ask for the offering memorandum for the specific venture and ask what securities-law exemption the offering relies on. The SEC publication adds a "Know the salesperson" step: "find out whether the securities salespeople who contact you are licensed to sell securities in your state". An EDGAR company-name search for "gulf coast western" returned "No matching companies." on October 12, 2026; that search covers company names only and is not a search of every Form D filing.
• The Alabama, Pennsylvania and Colorado matters described below show that state regulators have treated this kind of interest as a securities question; the company's position is that its joint venture interests are not securities. Its own Current Opportunities inquiry form asks visitors to confirm "I understand and meet the definition of an 'accredited investor' for securities law purposes".
• The company's Tax Advantages page says to "consult a tax professional" and that net revenue from a producing well is treated as self-employment income (Schedule C). The same page says that "most partners" are "getting to write off 100% against their ordinary income" and that "The self-employment tax rate is 15.3%". On risk, the Partnering With Us page says: "Because of the risk involved in oil and gas partnerships, only those individuals who qualify as 'accredited investors' may participate"; the company's site also carries a forward-looking-statements disclaimer saying results "may differ materially", and the SEC publication says "Every investment carries some degree of risk".

Where to complain. Your state securities regulator (NASAA's "Contact Your Regulator" page lists them), the SEC's tips and complaints page (sec.gov/tcr), the FTC for Do Not Call complaints, and the Better Business Bureau.

State securities regulators: Alabama (2010-2011), Pennsylvania (2010-2013) and Colorado (2009-2012)

The three actions below were opened by state securities regulators between 2009 and 2010 and are described from the primary documents we could open; each ended with the order withdrawn or vacated, or the claims dismissed. The 2011 Alabama vacate order states that it is not a determination that the interests are not securities, and the 2013 Pennsylvania withdrawal order makes no new finding; the details are below.

Alabama. On March 3, 2010 the Alabama Securities Commission issued Cease and Desist Order No. CD-2010-0013 against Gulf Coast Western, LLC, its then co-chief executive officers Charles Reed Cagle and Matthew H. Fleeger, and an associate vice president. The order alleged that a representative made a cold call to an Alabama resident on or about January 22, 2009 and that units of general partnership interest in the Vacherie II Joint Venture were offered without registration; it also alleged that the respondents mailed approximately 100 or more parcels to Alabama residents between October 2008 and April 2009, and that the offering memorandum "failed to disclose the 2007 C&D" naming Mr. Cagle in an earlier Alabama proceeding, which the Commission alleged constituted an omission of material fact. The respondents disputed the misrepresentation allegation, and the later order records that the 2007 order had been vacated as to Mr. Cagle.

In November 2011 the Commission issued an Order to Vacate (No. OV-2010-0013), based on a no-action letter (No. OP-2011-1347). The order records that the company and Mr. Fleeger committed to describe Alabama proceedings accurately and to offer joint venture interests to Alabama residents only if they are accredited investors under SEC Rule 501. The Commission also wrote that it "is not herein making a determination that the joint venture interests are not securities" and that "It continues to be the Commission's position" that such interests constitute securities under the Alabama Securities Act. The order recorded that four of the five Alabama participants had signed affidavits stating that they had no complaints against the company or the ventures (the Commission said it questioned whether the ventures could operate as true general partnerships), and that in August 2011 the company offered to repurchase a quarter-unit interest that had been offered and sold to one Alabama resident after the March 2010 cease and desist order, with interest at 6 percent on the principal, which the resident accepted.

The vacatur is conditioned: the order says all future activities of the company and Mr. Fleeger directed at Alabama residents are "subject to compliance with the stipulations and conditions set forth in No Action Letter No. 2011-1347", and that the Commission "may periodically review RESPONDENT GCW's records" for compliance. It separately vacated the order as to Mr. Cagle and another respondent.

Pennsylvania. On October 19, 2010 the Pennsylvania Securities Commission issued a Summary Order to Cease and Desist to the Opelousas III-B Joint Venture, Gulf Coast Western, LLC, Mr. Fleeger and Mr. Cagle. The respondents requested rescission and an administrative hearing was held on September 29-30 and November 29, 2011. By an Order to Withdraw dated January 9, 2013 the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities withdrew the summary order, reciting "the representations and undertakings filed with the Bureau by Respondents" about future compliance. The Summary Order had been issued "finding violations of the 1972 Act"; the January 9, 2013 Order to Withdraw withdrew it on the basis of the respondents' "representations and undertakings" and makes no new finding. The order is hosted on the company's website; we did not locate a copy on the regulator's site.

Colorado. The Colorado Securities Commissioner sued the company, Mr. Fleeger and others in 2009; that case is described under litigation below. According to the company's January 24, 2012 release, it ended as to the Gulf Coast Western defendants that month by a dismissal with prejudice after a settlement.

No SEC enforcement action naming the company, and no further state order, was identified in the sources checked on October 12, 2026; the Texas State Securities Board's own enforcement database was not searchable from the tools used.

Gulf Coast Western: how its joint ventures work, according to the company

Gulf Coast Western says it was founded in Dallas, Texas in 1970. Its About Us page says it "serves as the Managing Venturer of Oil and Gas General Partnerships, otherwise known as Joint Ventures" for exploration, development and acquisition of oil and gas reserves "primarily located in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Colorado". Its Our Operations page says its footprint has expanded to "premier producing basins across the southern and western United States" through non-operated working interests in projects led by other exploration and production companies, and its home page names Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Occidental Petroleum, EOG Resources, Devon Energy, Marathon Oil, Matador Resources and Civitas as companies it aligns with.

Participation is limited to accredited investors: the Partnering With Us page lists a net worth over $1 million excluding the primary residence, or income over $200,000 (or $300,000 jointly) in each of the last two years, among other tests. The company says it has "more than a thousand accredited partners" and "hundreds of producing wells"; these figures are the company's own and were not independently verified.

BBB lists the entity as a limited liability company (incorporated 2007-10-29 per BBB's page data), with Matthew H. Fleeger as President/CEO, John Engel as V.P. Operations and Jon Whitaker as General Manager. The Alabama and Pennsylvania orders name Mr. Fleeger as co-chief executive officer in 2010 and 2011; Mr. Cagle, named as the other co-CEO, resigned as an officer on July 22, 2011 according to the Alabama order.

The company's Tax Advantages page says that "Historically, 70% to 80% of GCW's Drill and Test Capital Contributions have been treated as IDCs" (intangible drilling costs) and describes deductions for partners; it tells readers to consult a tax advisor and that "current law is subject to change". The Partner Reviews page carries testimonials selected by the company.

Complaint and review record (as displayed on October 12, 2026)

BBB. The BBB profile for Gulf Coast Western LLC, Dallas, shows a BBB rating of A+, BBB Accredited, with "3 total complaints in the last 3 years" and "1 complaint filed in the last 12 months". Two complaints were visible on the complaints tab: one from August 2024 filed as a sales and advertising issue (the complainant said the company phoned the person's workplace several times to invite investment although the person had never done business with it) and one from October 2024 filed as a customer service issue (the complainant said the company telephoned a number on the National Do Not Call list). Both are marked Answered. In the August reply the company said business numbers are not covered by the Registry and that both numbers had been removed from its database; in the October reply it called any such contact "inadvertent", and the complainant rejected that response, saying the number had been registered since May 2009 and that a third party doing the work "does not exempt" the company. The reviews tab shows 4.92 out of 5 stars from an average of 60 customer reviews. BBB's raw page data gives accreditation since 2010-04-12 and a file opened 2010-03-12.

ComplaintsBoard. A thread titled with an accusation of fraud was opened by a user on February 27, 2011; the opening post reads like company promotional text, and the page shows 54 comments, with the review last updated February 13, 2026. Comments are unverified user statements. Examples include a February 2012 commenter who wrote that the first well in a two-well program was a dry hole and that cash-flow dates set by the company were missed (the same commenter wrote that they did not then view the company as a fraud and viewed it as providing optimistic projections), 2014 commenters describing cold-call sales pitches, a commenter who wrote that the financial projections used a peak production rate without mention of production decline, a May 2024 comment that two phone numbers disconnected immediately, and a November 2025 comment about an LLC membership issue followed by a February 2026 note from a commenter with a near-identical name that communication problems were resolved. No company reply appeared on the page.

Trustpilot. The Trustpilot review pages for gulfcoastwestern.com and www.gulfcoastwestern.com returned "page not found" on October 12, 2026.

This site. As of October 12, 2026 no complaint in this site's archive is linked to this company. The BBB and ComplaintsBoard figures above are from different sources and are not combined.

Court cases involving Gulf Coast Western (from public dockets and company releases)

Four matters were identified in the sources checked on October 12, 2026. A case caption or a complaint states what one side alleges, not what a court found.

• Fred J. Joseph (Colorado Securities Commissioner) v. HEI Resources, Inc., et al., No. 09CV7181 (Colorado state district court). The company's January 2011 release says the suit was filed in July 2009 and alleged unregistered securities in oil and gas partnerships; its January 2012 release says only "2009". According to the company, it responded with a countersuit against the Commissioner; its releases say that a January 6, 2011 order denied the Commissioner's summary-judgment motion and ruled for the company's motion for partial summary judgment after finding the joint venture interests "strongly presumed not to be securities", and that a settlement reached on January 17, 2012 led to an order of dismissal with prejudice, issued by the court on January 24, 2012, of all claims against the Gulf Coast Western defendants "without payment of disgorgement, rescission, restitution or other monetary amounts". The company said it left Colorado operations in 2011 and agreed not to reopen a Colorado office for three years or to sell interests to Colorado residents for two years unless the case against HEI Resources was won. We did not obtain the court's own orders.
• Emmons v. Fleeger et al., No. 3:13-cv-00284 (S.D. Tex.). An investor sued the company's chief executive, a former co-chief executive and two other individuals on August 7, 2013, alleging violations of the federal racketeering statute (RICO), common-law fraud and civil conspiracy in connection with a 2009 joint venture purchase. The company itself is not a named defendant. Mr. Fleeger and Mr. Cagle moved to dismiss for improper venue; on April 3, 2014 the court granted the motion in part, stayed the case pending the plaintiff's claims before an arbitrator and administratively closed it. The docket shows no later entries.
• Clauss v. Gulf Coast Western, L.L.C., Nos. 4:18-cv-00022 and 4:18-cv-00023 (S.D. Iowa, consolidated). Two Iowa state-court money-judgment petitions by the same plaintiff, both removed by the company on January 25, 2018. The notice of removal in No. 4:18-cv-00023 describes a $4,500 claim for alleged Telephone Consumer Protection Act violations (three unsolicited sales calls to a home number the plaintiff said was on the Do Not Call list); the docket for No. 4:18-cv-00022 does not state its claims. The court consolidated the cases on February 1, 2018. On June 14, 2018 the court granted the company's summary-judgment motions and dismissed the consolidated case; judgment was entered for the company on June 18, 2018. The order itself was not available to us, so its grounds are not stated here.
• Kash Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Gulf Coast Western, L.L.C., No. 6:16-cv-00380 (W.D. La.). A commercial dispute between oil and gas companies, removed from a Lafayette Parish court on March 22, 2016. The company's civil RICO claims against the other parties were dismissed with prejudice on April 6, 2017. The claims between the company and Kash were dismissed with prejudice on July 21, 2017 under a sealed settlement agreement, and those between the company and ISLA Resources and Louis Bernard on November 13, 2017. A motion by ISLA Resources and Mr. Bernard for sanctions against the company's counsel was denied as premature and dismissed without prejudice on July 31, 2017. This was not a consumer case.

Is Gulf Coast Western Legitimate?

Gulf Coast Western, LLC is a Dallas oil and gas joint-venture sponsor with a street address, phone lines and named management (Matthew H. Fleeger, President/CEO, per BBB), a BBB profile accredited since April 2010 with an A+ rating as displayed, and a company history it dates to 1970. Regulators in three states challenged the sale of its joint venture interests between 2009 and 2010; the Alabama and Pennsylvania orders were later vacated or withdrawn and the Colorado claims against the company were dismissed with prejudice in January 2012, according to the orders and the company's releases.

The central open question for a reader is not whether the company exists but how its interests are classified. The company says its joint venture interests are not securities and that it "does not offer or sell securities"; the Alabama Commission wrote in its 2011 order that it "continues" to regard such interests as securities under Alabama law, and the Colorado court's preliminary ruling, as the company reports it, was that they are "strongly presumed not to be securities". Its own inquiry form asks visitors to confirm they meet the accredited-investor definition "for securities law purposes". Neither position is a finding about the quality of any particular well or the likelihood of return. Complaints in the public record (BBB, ComplaintsBoard) concern telephone solicitation and disappointing well performance; they are allegations, and BBB also displays 4.92 out of 5 across 60 customer reviews. The company's own page says the risk involved in oil and gas partnerships is why only accredited investors may participate; readers should read the specific offering documents and, if in doubt, speak with their state securities regulator.

Court & Public Records

Frequently Asked Questions