[secretary.com] stolen domain

[Mr Webname]

Of course not, but this was your accusation:-

"DNF management hasn't done the right thing either. They haven't enforced fair trading on their boards. "

What I am saying is that this sale was not conducted in or through DNF so why should anyone expect DNF to get involved in what at the moment is a civil dispute?
If it is subsequently proved that any DNF member carried out any fraudulent activity then I am sure that DNF will consider its options in this matter, but until that proof is available and verifiable I would be most surprised to see DNF taking any sides in the issue - to do so would be wrong IMO.

It is not that no one is sympathetic to your plight Hal - earlier this year I was conned out of over $2k by a member here (he no longer comes here) and I know how I felt about that. However, by taking things through the proper channels and keeping a level head I ended up getting all of my money back and returning ownership to the original loser - he and I are now on friendly terms and all is well.

It can take sometime to prove events and track down those concerned but it can be done and I wish you the same success as I had, but I still do not believe that DNF has any liability here.

 

[izopod]

Originally posted by izopod
Recommendation: Mr W., Izoot, WebCat, and yes J. Berryhill--- It's time to let the affected parties work this out under the watchful eye of the "domain community".

Remember we are here to help, not obfuscate the situation by inneundo, hyperbole, and outright imaginative speculation.

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

Mr. Webname,

I am trying to take the proper measures.

I have been extremely patient. It has been 10 days.

Chris takes my money in a deal that involves stolen property and I give Chris time to make restitution and he has the nerve to come on here saying that I (Hal) should get better business practices!

I just want my money back.

I want the seller to indemnify me as promised.

Yes, it is an issue of community.

Perhaps if you were the man out the $2000, you could be more easily pursuaded that the board should not allow a member to be a part of the community if that person takes advantage of another DNF member, such as by breaking promises, being party to a fraud, etc..

 

[namedropper]

Originally posted by DotComCowboy
Perhaps if you were the man out the $2000, you could be more easily pursuaded that the board should not allow a member to be a part of the community if that person takes advantage of another DNF member, such as by breaking promises, being party to a fraud, etc..

If I were out $2,000, I'd doing my damnedest to provide proof of the accusations instead of complaining that DNF doesn't take action against someone solely upon my version of what happened.

Once there is solid proof, then DNF will, I'm sure, take whatever actions need to be taken. Until then I can't understand what you expect them to do.

 

[Jack Gordon]

Originally posted by namedropper


If I were out $2,000, I'd doing my damnedest to provide proof of the accusations instead of complaining that DNF doesn't take action against someone solely upon my version of what happened.

Once there is solid proof, then DNF will, I'm sure, take whatever actions need to be taken. Until then I can't understand what you expect them to do.

I have to agree with Dan. I have been following this from the beginning and have tried to say something a few times, but the fact is that I am having trouble sympathizing too strongly with you because it does not appear that you are making much of an effort to dig up that evidence as only you are now uniquely qualified to do.

Instead you have been hounding chris to do something he appears incapable of doing, and antagonizing him when he doesn't deliver. And you have been imploring DNF to do something that they have no business doing without that evidence.

Were it me, I would have worked from behind the scenes to get that evidence first, then present it to chris and if that didn't get results, then to law enforcement. As a last resort, I would have brought this to the DNF community, evidence in hand, and asked for some satisfaction there. Problem is, revenge in that form doesn't pay anything. It would have been in your interest to be as cooperative as possible and gain allies instead of charging full steam ahead without anything to back you up.

As you say, you are now 10 days out and have accomplished nothing. Perhaps it's time to rethink your strategy.

Just my 2 cents. I still hope this can be resolved amicably and you can all move forward.

 

[izopod]

Again, we can all say what "we'd do" in a situation like this till the cows come home. That's really easy, however until you are put into someone shoes--especially after they apparently lost 2K---then can you know what a person is going through. Obviously some rationale goes out the window. People have lost a lot less on DNF and went ballistic. DCC has been critical of Chris, as I would have too, but hasn't "crossed" the line in my point-of-view.

As, I've said all along, DCC did the right thing to bring this to the DNF community, and from what I gather, he did give Chris some time to get with his "close associate". I was critical of Chris for being a little "non-chalant" in dealing with DCC--read the earlier posts, before we got on him. I suppose I could criticize DCC for not having absolute proof of what happened, however I opted for a little "understanding" in this whole mess.

Take a step back of high pedestal, and realize all someone wants is his money back. Whether he can do that legally is one thing, but morally, hopefully you can realize that we'd all want our money back.... Have just a ounce of sympathy, and realize that DCC isn't going to be perfectly rational here. Obviously he is going to be very one-sided.

 

[namedropper]

I have sympathy for him. I understand he isn't going to be 100% rational. Of course, as you weren't involved, you don't have an excuse. Don't assume that giving suggestions on how to better handle himself means that we are attacking him, baiting him, being unsympathetic, on a high pedestal or whatever else you want to toss out.

Acting calm and rational gets things done. Acting irrational and full of accusations against third parties (like DNF and the other posters here) hinders things. I think we did more to help him by forcing him to face facts, because his intiial strategy was to just try to bully someone into paying him back by making public accusations with insufficient proof.

 

[Jack Gordon]

Please don't get me wrong - I am sympathetic and my words are my own. I just see a situation that I think could have been handled more effectively, and am sharing my thoughts on it.

 

[izoot]

Izopod no one is saying Hal shouldn't get his money back. I think its
safe to say that we all want him to get the cash or the domain.

He is understandably upset, $2k is a good chunk of change. I think
we would all be pissed off, but there are ways to handle things and
ways not too. And I am not implying that Chris should not be concerned,
he should be very concerned about getting this resolved.

But you don't publically call people thieves until you have hard proof.

In any case, all Hal had to do is contact the registrars involved. Get the
documentation that convinced them his name was stolen or if it was
a unjust choice by them to remove the name from Hals account.

Hal fought doing that until prodded in the threads he started on these
2 sites, he says thats in the works now, how hard was that? Hal could
have saved 10 days by not making such a scene and avoiding doing
the little bit of legwork on his end and this very possibly could have been
resolved already without all the drama.

And ...

If Chris was to refund the money without that proof of it being stolen
property and it turned out that it wasn't stolen but unjustly taken from
the registrar ... then Chris would be out the $2k and have no recourse
to recover his money or name without the paperwork that Hal was the
only one able to get it.

Now that would be unfair as well and the old adage " innocent til
proven guilty" still applies here doesn't it or is it "guilty til proven innocent"?

Hopefully this will be resolved quickly and painlessly to both parties satisfaction.

 

[izopod]

Originally posted by izoot

Hopefully this will be resolved quickly and painlessly to both parties satisfaction.

That's all anybody needed to say....

 

[Duke]

I just read this thread for the first time today (wish I hadn't as it is a very sad situation for everyone involved). One thing that jumped out at me from the middle of the thread was that this Chadwick is supposedly from Kentucky. That immediately set off alarm bells because I recalled that the scam artist in the infamous ouch.com debacle (search the archive if you can stand reliving that one) also listed Kentucky as his home. As I recall they took some time setting up a believable identity before pulling the scam and disappearing (there was a connection to Russia in that mess). Could be a coincidence but since no one really lives in Kentucky I doubt it!

Since Chris was the front man I think he is in the toughest spot especially if the domain proves to have been stolen and not lost through a registar error. I have had many good deals with him so I hate to see him caught up in this and I am even more sympathetic to Hal as he is the one currently sitting on a major loss. I truly hope it gets sorted out and these guys come out OK as I am very concerned for both of them.

 

[WebCat]

I must say, one piece of very strong circumstantial evidence on Hal's part is- NO ONE seems to be able to get ahold of this mysterious Chad character. Dispite being the CENTRAL CHARACTER in this sad drama, he appears to have vanished.

Since if all was 100% legit, he would be hanging around waiting to collect his additional $6,000.00 and defending the transaction, it's a pretty safe bet he's gone for good. Cjmacd (Chris) and ddent (Daniel) have both tried to reach him without success.

Criminal prosecutors call this kind of flight "Consciousness of guilt". Remember OJ and the white bronco?

Sad WebCat :-(

 

[beatz]

I've been following this thread for a while now and all i can say is that the thing that jumped at me the first time it was mentioned, is the "stolen" part coming from that lady.I mean it might indeed be stolen, but how often have we heard/read/been accused of a domain being "stolen" when in fact the original (enduser)owner had not renewed or a registrar had screwed up but the original/former uninformed owner calls it "stolen" .Until it's not a 100% proven, that the domain *indeed* was STOLEN, i would recommend to not make judgements on anyone involved.

Hey, i mean what about THIS version: The lady just claimed it was stolen but in fact has stolen the domain herself from Hal by setting up that mysterious "someone used a fake ID" scenario ?!

Not saying this is the case - just pointing out that nothing is proven til its proven.

Second recommendation:

Everyone should read and reread everything Mr. Berryhill has said in this thread until you get it - he's hitting it on the nail.

I wish everyone involved this matter gets solved quickly.

 

[bidawinner]

Once again.. Hal.. have you considered seeing if the woman would complete the transaction.. ? Maybe she dosent NEED the (or want) media attention surronding a domain name.. especially if the name wasnt stolen but rather she forgot to renew and used he political status to get the name back .. Maybe she wouldnt want that brought to light ?

http://news.statesmanjournal.com/Legislature/legislator.cfm?i=18

On the other hand even if it was stolen from her..she may be interested in selling the name ANYWAYs .. she may agree to continue the sale... she may accept 2k or 3K for the name...which is cheaper than what you would have paid.


just some options...

I skimmed over the thread aagin..I may have missed it..
but have ou spoken with MG at all ?

I am not saying forget about trying to get your money back and get the thrief etc..
just saying maybe it could still work out to where you get the name..someone gets a nice check.. and then..after a few months or a year or whatever they catch the thief and he gets his justice

 

[jberryhill]

The Kentucky thing did have a familiar scent.

Chris is obviously a bit naive, and hopefully will have learned a valuable lesson when this is done. People do learn from their mistakes.

I can't figure out for the life of me what Chris thought he was doing here. If there is going to be an "escrow agent" for a time payment deal, then that agent had better darn well hold the domain name until all the payments were made. Suppose Hal didn't make any further payments... what was Chris' plan to get the name back? Or hadn't he thought of that either? It boggles the mind.

"breaking promises, being party to a fraud"

I believe Chris understands that he owes you $2K once it is shown that the domain name was stolen. On the assumption the domain name was stolen, it would appear that Chris was conned and his naivete was used to make him a tool of the con man. That does not at all relieve him of responsibility for the promises he appears to have made to you (although only the two of you know what he promised, exactly), but it does not make him liable for fraud. He would be liable on a warranty theory, which is a world apart from the willful deception required for fraud.

Chris definitely needs to stay away from being a "broker", or whatever it is he thought he was doing, until he gains a better handle on the fact that putting together a deal means taking into account the things that can go wrong, and not assuming everyone is going to do what they are supposed to do.

 

[C0113c70r]

Originally posted by DotComCowboy
Mr. Webname,

I am trying to take the proper measures.

I have been extremely patient. It has been 10 days.

Chris takes my money in a deal that involves stolen property and I give Chris time to make restitution and he has the nerve to come on here saying that I (Hal) should get better business practices!

I just want my money back.

I want the seller to indemnify me as promised.

Yes, it is an issue of community.

Perhaps if you were the man out the $2000, you could be more easily pursuaded that the board should not allow a member to be a part of the community if that person takes advantage of another DNF member, such as by breaking promises, being party to a fraud, etc..

I'm just curious, but has anyone even bothered to report this matter to the FBI's Internet Fraud Complaint Center?

-- C0113c70r

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

Yes, I have spoken with Mary Gallegos several times.

Yes, she told me she reported it to the FBI.

No, she told me she is not interested in selling the domain name.

Yes, I am still gathering documentation. Some possible evidence has already been obtained.

 

[WebCat]

So..... it's been 48 hours and two full business days since DotComCowboy's last post. Any progress?

With two (or more) DNF members in good standing, and three DN communities involved, and with so much at stake, I think regular updates would be helpful!

Or should we all assume that no news is....... no news?

WebCat

 

[Mr Webname]

Best left to those involved IMO.

 

[WebCat]

Originally posted by Mr Webname
Best left to those involved IMO.

Too late. When DotComCowboy decided to go public with this and started this thread, it became all of our business.

The outcome of this deeply affects everyone at all three communities, no matter what it is. If someone can grab our domains by forging an ID, then we are all at risk.

If on the other hand, a registrar can arbitrarily and without due process transfer a domain away from the owner to a person with political clout, then things are even worse. That is frightening.

In my heart, I would rather not know about this, but it's too late. It has become public domain (no pun intended). Every member of all three communities deserves to know the outcome.