[secretary.com] stolen domain

[OnSpec]

WOW. It gets curiousier and curiousier.

IMHO. E T H I C S F I R S T (Chris... are you there?)

As eluded to by JBeryhill above, the first thing that Chris should have done at the very start of this fiasco was to be straight up with Hal and:

1) Acknowledge any shortcomings on the deal (if any were known)

2) Put the $2,000.00 into trust with (and I hate to say it) a lawyer until this mess gets sorted out.

In that way (and I can't speak for Hal), but surely a D E M O S T R A T I O N of concern for reputation and ethics of the parties may have prevented this thread from becoming a potential entry into Ripley's famous tome.

Look, we are all over 18 and vaccinated and understand that sometimes in business... **it happens. But when it does happen, and if you value your reputation within the community, you must demonstrate that you are acting in a fair and ethical manner for all parties concerned.

Chris, if you are listening, you would be well advised to get the monkey off your back and put the $2,000 into trust and free yourself of that burden so that you can REALLY focus on helping to resolve the issue.

And Hal, if I were in your shoes, THAT is what I would be driving for, because unfortunately, no matter how many spitballs you lob over the fence at Chris, there are limitations to what he can do. I wish you all the best.

 

[ddent]

Hi all,

I don't post here too often these days, I've been very busy...

Anyway, seeing as how I've been mentioned in this thread, some information:

1) No, I am not Chadwick.
2) No, I was not involved in this transaction at all.
3) Yes, I have dealt with Chadwick, and he seems to exist as an actual natural entity, seperate from Chris (cjmacd). I bought two domains for $250 from him without issue.
4) Chris introduced me to Chadwick when I was interested in one of the two domains that Chris was considering buying from Chadwick, but for various reasons, wasn't going to. I asked to be introduced to Chadwick because the name interested me.
5) Chadwick once asked me if he thought the name was worth what he was thinking of buying it for. I remember him asking me (and I think I still have the logs around) on AIM if he should buy it, and I believe my response was a resounding yes. I'd asked him how it was going and he told me how the wife was discussing it with her husband. All this to say, if he had been planning this whole fraud from the start, he sure put thought into it, and he sure spent a lot of time on it... more time in fact than would be logical to spend on the amount of money we are talking about here.
6) Chadwick seems to have operated under the name Pagiz Interactive. There is a lot that can be found about him by googling. Lots of references to him. I don't understand why someone would go so long under a certain name, commit a fraud, then disappear. One of the things that has come to mind is the possibility that he had stolen The Real Chadwick's identity, but there is lots of evidence against that.
7) After he purchased secretary.com, I wanted to buy it, but didn't have the necessary cash. I asked him how he felt about me brokering it, and he said if I could get a reasonable amount, he would be all for it. I posted the name at a decent but not low price, but did not receive any interest. No due dilligence work was done on the deal, as I never ended up being in the position of actually needing to broker the transaction.
8) I have spent many hours talking with Chris on both the phone an AIM about this whole episode, and trying to help him get to the bottom of the deal. I know him to have spent many more hours trying to get to the bottom of this.

So hopefully this helps a little.. I hope this can be resolved as soon as possible, but based on what I know, I think its going to take lots of time and hard work on everyone involved's part.

Kind regards,

Daniel Dent

 

[cjmacd]

there were questions asked at DS and I feel it needs to be posted here as well : -Chris



Hey everyone sorry for the late reply regarding these questions. I am currently also studying for Major engineering midterms and have been unavailable all day.
I have written out in full detail all my knowledge regarding Domebase’s questions

I have tried to be as detailed as possible in this post, to give a proper background of all the dealings. Everything was done in good faith and there was some sort of procedure followed.
Hal should be able to confirm a lot for this.

Originally posted by DomeBase
Facts:

(agreed to by DotComCowboy/Hal unless I hear otherwise, not yet confirmed by Chris)

Fact #1: Person A had the registration for a name

Fact #2: Person B obtained the registation for this name.

Fact #3: Person C brokered the sale of this name to Person D.

Fact #4: The name was transferred to Person D.

Fact #5: Person D sent $X of the purchase price to Person C.

Fact #6: Person A contacted Company 1 (and/or 2) who transferred the name back to Person A.

=======================================

Questions:

-----------------------------------------------------------

Q#1: How did person B get the name? Did it expire due to negligence by Peron A and get ethically registered by Person B or was it unethically obtained by Person B?

A#1 (Hal): stolen because previous owner says it was was stolen using forged documents

A#1 (Chris): to my knowledge the domain was purchased from the original owner though I had no documentation I just went with what was told to me, at the time I had no reason not to trust Chadwick. I do recall however the name was about 1 or 2 days from expiring. Actually this is where the whole “partner” with Chadwick is derived. We were collectively scanning drop lists and whois records for top names. To go after and “let the owners know that their domain is expiring” sometimes a good technique that either results in severe gratitude from the owner or better yet if they didn’t want the name would they consider selling it instead of just letting it go.
I remember that I was the one that found that Secretary.com was a prime candidate among others (from a domainspond.com list if I recall correctly). We were going to go contact the owner regarding the name among others.
Then Chadwick told me the next day he started talks with the owner which later resulted in him buying the name, from what he told me he was talking to the owners who was a woman and I seem to remember something about them (husband and wife) talking it over.
None the less a few days later Chadwick told me he closed on $4000.
I didn’t have anything to do with the apparent buy I was too busy to contact anyone regarding their names. (an unfortunate side effect of being an engineering student.)
But it was fine that was his Baby.
That’s what I know about the domain acquisition.
Again I didn’t see any documentation and took Chadwick word, I then had no reason to question his integrity.
Also if the domain was obtained by unethical means, Chadwick has really covered his tracks at least enough to sound sincere to both Daniel (DDENT) and I.

Chadwick can respond to this much better. ( If he will return repeated attempts to msg, call etc.)


My comment: Although we can all research this -- Hal is in a unique position to confirm/document this (including, but not limited to, contacting the registrars and documenting their response to the domain community). The rest of us have no standing to contact the previous owner or registrars to confirm/document theft or not.

------------------------------------------------------

Q#2: Were there any other parties involved? For example, were there any other transactions or parties between the name belonging to Person A and B?

A#2: no comments yet from Hal or Chris

Correct I don’t know

---------------------------------------------------

Q#3: What were the terms of the broker arrangement? Was there anything in writing?

A#3: (Hal) "Chris offered me a domain, Chris guaranteed its title, Chris vouched for his 'partner,' Chris promised papers to prove clear title. My PayPal payment transmissions to Chris noted the purchase price, deposit amount, and the amount of the future payments."

A#3 (Chris):

The broker arrangement was between myself Chadwick and Hal with me acting as a liaison Hal was offered secretary.com as a domain opportunity that I was unable to take advantage of (didn’t have the proper cash flow). The negotiations started and ended through IM (AOL actually) quite a number of you that are on my IMs as personal contacts may remember me offering the opportunity to purchase Secretary.com from Chadwick.

Hal and I started negotiations and we came to a conclusion of 8000 for secretary.com which Chadwick agreed to sell it as. At the same time Daniel (DDENT) who also had Chadwick on his personal contact list was also trying to sell the name for Chadwick. His brokering post is still on all three forums.

Anyway, the conditions to the agreement was myself transferring the name from Chadwick (to get the name to enom) in order to give to Hal. Once the name was in his account, Hal (who was currently on his boat) said he would send the first $1000 that Tuesday, when he returned. And he did. Payments were made to me. And I was to pay Chadwick. 3 weeks to a month later (I’ll get the exact dates – I believe Hal already posted them earlier) Hal sent the 2nd installment of $1000

The terms were 8 payments of 1000 in total. An initial deposit to be paid after the name was in his possession then each month thereafter.
There was no formal written agreement just a verbal agreement, well typed either way both of us are clear on those conditions. Hal posted the same thing.


Some quotes from earlier in this thread -- "I personally know the owner of pagiz interactive and can contest to his integrity." "I can assure you with my reputation on the line that these domains are NOT stolen, anyone here can attest to the integrity of my dealings and I would not stand up for something or someone that I felt was not legit." "Like I said before I can attest to the integrity of this seller. "Sectretary.com was a legitimate buy and sale, I personally set up the sale, Documentation proving that secretary.com is going to be sent to Hal (dotcomcowboy) in order to prove that the name was and is legit." "Chadwick and I are trusted partners."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q#4: Where is the $X now?

A#4: (Hal) Paid Chris $2000.

A#4: (Chris) the $$$$ are in Chadwick’s possession, because it was his name. I passed off an opportunity.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q#5: Where is Person B now and what is he saying about this?

A#5: (Hal) Do not know. Ask Chris.

A#5: (Chris) MIA – have tried repeatedly to get in contact with Chadwick and they only lead to dead ends or answering machines. I did how ever manage to talk with Chadwick for about 10 seconds when I first tracked down his mother # after a bit of net sleuthing. I was disconnected from that call and then he came on IM saying that he was going to his apartment in Lexington (his main phone # which is now disconnected). Now any attempt I make results in an answering machine. – seems to be screening.
Either way He is not commenting. And has left me with a hot potato in my hand. Frankly I’m not impressed with his actions or lack there of.


======================================

Recommended Action:

Thus far, based on the above, I would say:

* If Secretary.com was stolen, then Chris should pay Hal $2,000 (and an apology to Hal would be nice).

* If Secretary.com was not stolen, then Hal should get the name back or $2,000 from whatever party inappropriately transfered it away (and an apology to Chris would be nice).

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would also recommend that Hal vigorously investigate and document here whether a theft happened because he has unique standing to do so.

I would also recommend that Chris virgorously investigate and document here what Chad says about this.

I would also recommend that there be a timeframe (couple days perhaps?) for the resolution of this investigation and a default action that happens if it is not resolved within this timeframe. If I were a broker in such a situation, I would commit to paying the $2,000... out of my own pocker if I had passed it on to the registrant... as an act of good faith until the matter is resolved.

==========================================

I would also like to go on the record to say that I will pay back Hal his 2000 once adequate “PROOF” is shown that the domain is stolen.
I did broker the deal and I did handle the funds therefore I do feel that it is my moral duty to give him back the money. Unfortunately I don’t have the money Chadwick does. So cash return would have to be out of my pocket and would be needed to be generated through the sale of my personal items. For that possible case: I ask that Hal is patent in receiving his money back. (as soon as I can generate it, shouldn’t be too hard) but right now this Engineering student doesn’t have the bank roll to indemnify Hal in the tiny window that he demands.
Also to cover myself I would require a release from Hal signed and dated saying in the event of true registrar error that he relinquishes all rights to the domain or pays the entire cost in one lump sum of 8000. the rights would be turned over to me as the ¼ owner of Secretary.com.

Best Regards,

Chris

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

If Chris put $2000 in escrow that would go a LONG ways to show real good faith --as opposed to meaningless glib replies using that same phrase.

But, even then, I am not sure what hurdle you all feel needs to be cleared for me to be released the money and made whole.

Chris guaranteed this deal; I know I sound like a broken record, but this point is important.

 

[OnSpec]

Also to cover myself I would require a release from Hal signed and dated saying in the event of true registrar error that he relinquishes all rights to the domain or pays the entire cost in one lump sum of 8000. the rights would be turned over to me as the ¼ owner of Secretary.com.

Best Regards,

Chris
[/b] [/B][/QUOTE]


1) Request for a Release: Fair in the circumstances

2) Hal paying you in one lump sum: NOT fair (Chris, you can't suck and blow) IMHO, if this proves to be the case, the original payment terms should stand. Hal paid the initial $1,000 and demonstrated good faith by pre-paying the next $1,000 installment in advance. There is no reason to believe that he will stiff you, especially after this fiasco.

3) NO- (and unless I'm missing something here), there is no reason why you should have any partial ownership of this domain. As "Broker" your consideration should have agreed to in advance, not some after the fact "condition".

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

I would also like to go on the record to say that I will pay back Hal his 2000 once adequate “PROOF” is shown that the domain is stolen.
++++++++++

Get your checkbook ready.

 

[cjmacd]

Originally posted by OnSpec
Also to cover myself I would require a release from Hal signed and dated saying in the event of true registrar error that he relinquishes all rights to the domain or pays the entire cost in one lump sum of 8000. the rights would be turned over to me as the ¼ owner of Secretary.com.

Best Regards,

Chris
[/B]

1) Request for a Release: Fair in the circumstances

2) Hal paying you in one lump sum: NOT fair (Chris, you can't suck and blow) IMHO, if this proves to be the case, the original payment terms should stand. Hal paid the initial $1,000 and demonstrated good faith by pre-paying the next $1,000 installment in advance. There is no reason to believe that he will stiff you, especially after this fiasco.

3) NO- (and unless I'm missing something here), there is no reason why you should have any partial ownership of this domain. As "Broker" your consideration should have agreed to in advance, not some after the fact "condition". [/B][/QUOTE]


sorry, I’ll clear up a few things

2) Hal paying you in one lump sum: NOT fair (Chris, you can't suck and blow) IMHO, if this proves to be the case, the original payment terms should stand. Hal paid the initial $1,000 and demonstrated good faith by pre-paying the next $1,000 installment in advance. There is no reason to believe that he will stiff you, especially after this fiasco.

----
the payment of 2000 would be out of my own pocket

Chadwick currently has the funds pertaining to Secretary.com

the release would simply have to state that IF the name were to be sold Brokered again the terms would be all in one payment.
I'm taking a 2000 hit and having nothing to show for it.

But honestly in this case the name would probably be kept and not sold to Hal. either way in the event. those decisions will be made by Chadwick, because it is his name.



and

3) NO- (and unless I'm missing something here), there is no reason why you should have any partial ownership of this domain. As "Broker" your consideration should have agreed to in advance, not some after the fact "condition

The partial owner ship would be I covering the 2000 of 8000 cost of secretary.com it makes sense that 1/4 of the name would be mine and certainly not Hal's

The remaining 3/4 ownership would be Chadwicks.

It was just simple math.
I would be expecting full reimbursement from Chadwick. then there will be no need of my 1/4 ownership, but as long as 2000 of the 8000 payment is out of my pocket. Of course I would have partial ownership.


-Cjmacd

 

[cjmacd]

Originally posted by DotComCowboy
I would also like to go on the record to say that I will pay back Hal his 2000 once adequate “PROOF” is shown that the domain is stolen.
++++++++++

Get your checkbook ready.

Hal, there is no need to get cocky. I am doing everything in my power to solve this problem, and you have not shown any patience. From what myself and others here have seen, for the most part you performed a lot of unprofessional childish acts.

Granted you were frustrated, about your apparent loss. But it doesn't warrant your actions.

I feel sorry for you, and all you do is fling what ever you can at me.

I hope your business practices improve, for your sake.

Thanks

-Chris

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

Chris,

I am just giving you fair warning: I expect to have irrefutable proof within 1 week.

Be prepared to get funds.

 

[izoot]

Originally posted by OnSpec
Also to cover myself I would require a release from Hal signed and dated saying in the event of true registrar error that he relinquishes all rights to the domain or pays the entire cost in one lump sum of 8000. the rights would be turned over to me as the ¼ owner of Secretary.com.

Best Regards,

Chris
[/B]

1) Request for a Release: Fair in the circumstances

2) Hal paying you in one lump sum: NOT fair (Chris, you can't suck and blow) IMHO, if this proves to be the case, the original payment terms should stand. Hal paid the initial $1,000 and demonstrated good faith by pre-paying the next $1,000 installment in advance. There is no reason to believe that he will stiff you, especially after this fiasco.

3) NO- (and unless I'm missing something here), there is no reason why you should have any partial ownership of this domain. As "Broker" your consideration should have agreed to in advance, not some after the fact "condition". [/B][/QUOTE]


1) Agreed

2) . "There is no reason to believe that he will stiff you, especially after this fiasco."

Do you know this for a fact? I think after this niether party will have any desire to work with each other.

Hal wants his money back NOW. The only reason he said he is contacting the registrars is becasue people here are pushing him to do so.

He was ready to take this Mary's word as extremely credible ( i think those are the words he used ) and call the domain stolen based on that conversation with her.

Therefore he has stated he has no desire to do further business with Chris and wants his money and be done with it.

With your same blowing in and out comparison he cannot have his cake and eat it too. If he wants the name if it turns out that it is registrar error and he wants the name , his terms are over with being repaid his loss.

New deal..he wants it 8K$ on handover of the name.

IF this turns out not to be a stolen name and someone was to bust my b@lls as Hal has done Chris. I certainly wouldn't want to deal with him .... yet alone be in a payment plan with him.

If he wants the name he needs to stick with finding out all the info ( as he is the only one that can and should do anyway ) and see it through. Or take his money and go home ... all is as was.

Why is that unreasonable?

3) Why should he have no ownership of the domain if its not stolen and that was his deal with Chad to get 25% of the sale?

What do you care of Chris' and Chad agreement, should they have consulted you first?

Once Hal gets his money back the deal is over. fini

my2¢

 

[cjmacd]

thanks for that post izoot


though

3) Why should he have no ownership of the domain if its not stolen and that was his deal with Chad to get 25% of the sale?


the 25% would not be because of some commission. it would be because I would be paying 25% of the entire cost. therefore of course 1/4 of the name would be mine at it's current price of 8000

I expect OnSpec just hastily responded. no harm done.

thanks for the input.

 

[OnSpec]

IZOOT

1) check

2) some good points made I agree that the 2 parties may never want to cross paths again. It was unreasonable IMO for Chris to simply assume any new deal solely on his terms. Obviously they are free to negotiate whatever deal they want.

3) If its not stolen, Hal should get first crack at the agreed upon price (ie $8,000). In that instance I certainly don't see any shared ownership. And finally, I have no interest in Chris and Chad's agreements and I'll ignore your last question.


Chris, the post was not made in haste. Good luck with the outcome.

 

[cjmacd]

Originally posted by DotComCowboy
Chris,

I am just giving you fair warning: I expect to have irrefutable proof within 1 week.

Be prepared to get funds.

I'm happy for you Hal

 

[cjmacd]

Originally posted by OnSpec
IZOOT

1) check

2) some good points made I agree that the 2 parties may never want to cross paths again. It was unreasonable IMO for Chris to simply assume any new deal solely on his terms. Obviously they are free to negotiate whatever deal they want.

Hal has done and said some hurtful things to me, both privately and publicly, while I have been trying to help him. I won't let this effect our business relation or our friendship.
Once this is done it will probably be gone from Hal forever.

Either way that decision would be up to Chadwick. (it would be his name)

though I would have $2000 worth of say.

3) If its not stolen, Hal should get first crack. In that instance I certainly don't see any shared ownership. And finally, I have no interest in Chris and Chad's agreements and I'll ignore your last question.

I can see that Hal would not get a second chance at this name.

And shared ownership is based on the fact that I paid Hals part.

So technically it would be me purchasing the name.

Hal will in no way benefit for me losing out on my own $2000

It’s completely unreasonable for anyone to ask that.

In any event this is all just in the case that there is proof.

- Chris

 

[DomeBase]

Hi Chris,

Thank you for responding to my questions at the other board.
I am not commenting to get invovled in the discussion here, just to say that the odd frowny faces in my post quoted here are an artifact of copying and not in my original post. It could give an odd impression (even odder than I usually am) otherwise. Best wishes to all involved.. as well as to my old friends at DNF.
:-D

Sincerely, DomeBase

 

[.biz]

I didn't read the whole thread, just read bout 60 messages and wanted to raise one point

What happen if DotComCowboy made up all the story by transferring the name to his friend and blame that the domain was found stolen?

So that he can avoid paying $6,000 and possibly get first $2,000 back.

I'm neutral, but just want to bring up some possibilities.

 

[.biz]

I may be wrong in the previous post, anyway, just a thought.

Old whois

Registrant:
Secretary Resource Service (SECRETARY-DOM)
730 S. 12th Ave
Cornelius, OR 97113

Domain Name: SECRETARY.COM

Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Gallegos, Mary (MG551) [email protected]
(503)359-xxxx
Billing Contact:
Gallegos, Mary (MG551) [email protected]
(503)359-xxxx

Record last updated on 05-Jan-2000.
Record created on 09-Sep-1995.
Database last updated on 10-Feb-2000 15:20:08 EST.


NOTE: edited out last 4 digits of the phone number.

 

[WebCat]

I for one, DEEPLY appreciate the efforts made by domebase, OnSpec, Daniel Dent and MANY others (including DCC and cjmacd) to help shed more light on this troubling incident! You guys make me proud to be a domainer!

Originally posted by Chris (cjmacd)
I would also like to go on the record to say that I will pay back Hal his 2000 once adequate “PROOF” is shown that the domain is stolen.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Originally posted by DotComCowboy
Chris,

I am just giving you fair warning: I expect to have irrefutable proof within 1 week.

Be prepared to get funds.

Get your checkbook ready.

Wouldn't it be fair to say (again) that in the event this domain WAS NOT STOLEN, then Hal has an issue to settle re: HIS DOMAIN with eNom, NSI and (former registrant) Mary Gallegos?

In that case, Chris (and Chad) would be 100% in the clear, and REGARDLESS of the outcome for Hal with Enom and the others, and even if Hal loses the domain, Hal would still owe Chris and Chad $6,000.00. It would be grossly unfair to try and make Chris and Chad responsible for any potential loss by Hal because of a registrar error or misdeed with his domain. That would be between Hal and the Registrars, NOT Chris or Chad.

DotComCowboy, A LOT rides on your coming "irrefutable proof" of this alleged domain theft. The integrity door swings both ways.

IMHO,
WebCat

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

What happen if DotComCowboy made up all the story by transferring the name to his friend and blame that the domain was found stolen?
+++++++++++++++++

..my "friend" --who just happened to be the original registrant of the domain name?

I think you have been reading too many conspiracy theory novels.

 

[.biz]

Originally posted by DotComCowboy
I think you have been reading too many conspiracy theory novels.

so the novels are to be blame.