I was initially very impressed with one of Mr. Phillips' numerous `sensational' books, and was particularly interested in one of his alleged sources, which I have continued to pursue for a number of years. Unfortunately, Mr. Phillips has based two of his books (The Search for the Grail and The Chalice of Magdalene) on the existence of an alleged Grail prose, La Folie Perceval, that he claims may in turn be based on the earliest Grail source. He claims that this prose is found within a manuscript preserved in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, which is catalogued as MS fonds français 12577. This manuscript does indeed exist, and it does contain an illustration that is reproduced in Mr. Phillips' book (which he claims accompanies the prose), but the Bibliothèque Nationale itself has verified in writing that this manuscript does not contain the alleged prose, La Folie Perceval. A Professor of English in the U.S., with a Ph. D. in medieval and renaissance literature, and who teaches Arthurian romance, has informed me that he is completely unaware of the existence of such a text, which would be extremely important and certainly known to Grail romance scholars if it did exist. A very well-known and respected Arthurian scholar, translator and author, in the United Kingdom, has also informed me that he is almost certain that the manuscript does not contain the La Folie Perceval prose, that he has never come across this prose, that he has not seen any reference to it in any serious scholarly work, and that he is almost certain that La Folie Perceval prose may be a fabrication. I have contacted Mr. Phillips by email and asked him for further details concerning the actual location of this prose and/or other references that discuss this document, on four separate occasions over a period of almost four years (the last time was over a month ago, addressed to an email address on his own website), but unfortunatly, he has continually refused to respond and help establish some credence concerning his increasingly dubious source. The reader is warned that, based on the results of the research I have conducted concerning this source, it is my opinion that there `may' be some significant concern about the credibility of this author, and the reader is therefore encouraged to check the sources very carefully on his/her own before seriously considering any of his `sensational' claims.