Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


A complaint about Iniz
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

A complaint about Iniz

edited June 2014 in Reviews

Hey, allow me rant for a bit about Iniz. I really want to hear your opinion on the matter.

Let me begin by saying that i am more than satisfied with my Iniz VPS.
Downtimes are barely noticeable, the performance is superb and i didn't have to contact the support at all (which is a good thing).

When i requested the VPS, I made sure to get a custom offer from Iniz where i would get on the SSD Node instead of the SATA one at the cost of 50% disk space (which i don't need).

Now, Iniz closed the SSD Node and they are moving everyone back to the SATA Node. They offer 25% more disk and RAM which i have no use for.
I can understand that they have to keep their business profitable and why they decided to shut down the node. But the SATA node is basically a downgrade for me (and the purpose of the VPS) and a breach of the agreed terms.

I wrote a support ticket asking for a cancellation and a partial refund (i paid 12 months in advance, 4 months are remaining).
The reply was only that there will be no refunds after 6 months.
This is not an acceptable answer imo. If Iniz changes the terms, i believe i have the right to cancel - the same way Iniz will cancel the VPS the moment i break their TOS.

Now it seems like (sadly) i have no choice and find a new provider.
There is not much money lost so i'll take this as a lesson.
But i still want to warn people, this is not what a customer-friendly business does.
This is a cheap shot.

«1345

Comments

  • PatrickPatrick Member
    edited June 2014

    said: They offer 25% more disk and RAM which i have no use for.

    I remember you demanded us to increase your RAM a lot more so that is not true.

    I also informed you that our merchant G2S also only provide refunds for payments made within 6 months.

    Make of that as you will, a "cheap shot" with superb performance and near no downtime? yeah ok.

    There indeed has not been a lot of money lost, but there has been enough money lost for you to start moaning over here.

    For anyone interested, we moved from SSD to SAS due to sub-par performance with 6 x 512GB Samsung 840 Pro SSDs, we then tried 8 x 240GB Intel 520s which is also showed the same. We updated our RAID FW & SSD FW was the latest ones but performance was still quite low. Our DC suggested we used Debian but that was not a option since we use SolusVM/CentOS.

    Thanked by 2rmlhhd ATHK
  • INIZ said: I also informed you that our merchant G2S also only provide refunds for payments made within 6 months.

    How's this problem of your client? If you can't deliver what he ordered refund is the most logic solution.

  • Well, if you are a customer-friendly business i'm sure you can find a way to give refunds after 6 months?
    And with "cheap shot" i was refering to the SSD Node suddenly closing, like i said i was very satisfied on that node.

  • PatrickPatrick Member
    edited June 2014

    @blubberdieblub said:
    Well, if you are a customer-friendly business i'm sure you can find a way to give refunds after 6 months?
    And with "cheap shot" i was refering to the SSD Node suddenly closing, like i said i was very satisfied on that node.

    Sure, reply back to ticket with your wire details. We'll send you a wire transfer minus any fees your bank takes on currency conversion fees which will leave you with around few quid.

    Feel free to post the whole ticket.

  • rmlhhdrmlhhd Member

    This was a good read, I love the LET banter.

    @Rockster said:

    Correct my if I'm mistaken but I'm pretty sure INIZ didn't say it was the clients problem he/she couldn't get a refund.

    Also both of you may find that the terms specificly say All sales at Iniz are final, at our sole discretion we may offer you a refund if requested within 5 days of activation of your first service only. so whether or not the node was changed your still not entitled to a refund.

    Not even a bank would give you money back after 30 days let alone 8 months.

  • GuanYuGuanYu Member

    INIZ said: There indeed has not been a lot of money lost, but there has been enough money lost for you to start moaning over here.

    I am your customer too but I am siding with your moaning client on this one.

  • ATHKATHK Member

    Now you've got what you wanted.. a refund anyone else would of just handled this in a ticket..

    Sounds to me like INIZ were being firm and to right like they said you'll end up with a few measly quid and you'll have to look for another provider which will probably not live up to the same standards of INIZ....

    Sounds a bit petty 4 months on a SATA because the SSDs weren't doing what they were supposed to be doing with performance sounds ok to me..

  • PatrickPatrick Member
    edited June 2014

    Also lets compare SAS to SATA:

    Our SAS Node:

    [[ams-nl]] root ~ $ ioping -c 10 .
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=1 time=0.0 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=2 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=3 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=4 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=5 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=6 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=7 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=8 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=9 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=10 time=0.1 ms
    
    --- . (simfs /vz/private/X) ioping statistics ---
    10 requests completed in 9001.8 ms, 12240 iops, 47.8 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.0/0.1/0.1/0.0 ms
    
    [[ams-nl]] root ~ $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync; unlink test
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 2.86749 s, 374 MB/s
    
    [[ams-nl]] root ~ $ ioping -RD .
    --- . (simfs /vz/private/X) ioping statistics ---
    31994 requests completed in 3000.1 ms, 32037 iops, 125.1 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.0/0.0/2.4/0.0 ms
    

    SATA:

    [root@nl6test ~]# ioping -c 10 .
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=1 time=0.0 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=2 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=3 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=4 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=5 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=6 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=7 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=8 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=9 time=0.1 ms
    4096 bytes from . (simfs /vz/private/X): request=10 time=0.1 ms
    
    --- . (simfs /vz/private/X) ioping statistics ---
    10 requests completed in 9001.9 ms, 14104 iops, 55.1 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.0/0.1/0.1/0.0 ms
    
    [root@ nl6test ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync; unlink test
    16384+0 records in
    16384+0 records out
    1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.96941 s, 545 MB/s
    
    [root@nl6test ~]# ioping -RD .
    --- . (simfs /vz/private/X) ioping statistics ---
    29940 requests completed in 3000.0 ms, 27141 iops, 106.0 mb/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 0.0/0.0/2.8/0.0 ms
    
  • rmlhhd said: Correct my if I'm mistaken but I'm pretty sure INIZ didn't say it was the clients problem he/she couldn't get a refund.

    You are mistaken. Patrick made this the clients problem as he can't deliver service client paid for neither refund money. Alternatives for service client paid but can't get should be optional not enforced solutions for prepaid service.

  • @ATHK said:
    Now you've got what you wanted.. a refund anyone else would of just handled this in a ticket..

    Sounds to me like INIZ were being firm and to right like they said you'll end up with a few measly quid and you'll have to look for another provider which will probably not live up to the same standards of INIZ....

    Sounds a bit petty 4 months on a SATA because the SSDs weren't doing what they were supposed to be doing with performance sounds ok to me..

    I agree i'm being a litte petty here. Iniz just rubbed me the wrong way with their single line response of basically saying just no. They could have tried to find a solution or explain to me why it's not working or allowed, but they didn't.

  • RocksterRockster Member
    edited June 2014

    @INIZ what's with all this derailing advertisement spam shit from you in this thread? No one gives a shit about that. Topic is about very specific thing. Client paid for SSD Node service, you can't deliver what he paid for neither you're willing to return him money, that's all what it matters.

  • PatrickPatrick Member
    edited June 2014

    @blubberdieblub said:
    I agree i'm being a litte petty here. Iniz just rubbed me the wrong way with their single line response of basically saying just no. They could have tried to find a solution or explain to me why it's not working or allowed, but they didn't.

    My reply was clear enough:

    We had already upgraded clients when we moved from SSD to SAS, we are not going to offer some clients more than others as that will be unfair.
    
    We're unable to offer refunds as 6 months have passed from our gateway.

    You wanted more RAM as opposed to what you said in your OP in which I said no as we already upgraded clients from SSD > SAS and now to SATA which brings your resources probably higher than all our promos.

    INIZ what's with all this derailing advertisement spam shit from you in this thread? No one gives a shit about that. Topic is about very specific thing. Client paid for SSD Node service, you can't deliver what he paid for neither you're willing to return him money, that's all what it matters.

    Sorry, did I really say come buy an INIZ VPS in any of my posts? Chill out.

  • @INIZ said:
    You wanted more RAM as opposed to what you said in your OP in which I said no as we already upgraded clients from SSD > SAS and now to SATA which brings your resources probably higher than all our promos.

    This was one of the 3 solutions i offered in my ticket. I was trying to work something out and didn't even specify any amount of ram. At the time i thought you might offer a little more performance in return for a happy client.

    Still i see your point. Like i said in my ticket, i just hope you understand the point i raised as well.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    erm... not taking sides but those results show that the SSD is performing better than the SATA

    SATA: 29940 requests completed in 3000.0 ms, 27141 iops, 106.0 mb/s

    SSD: 31994 requests completed in 3000.1 ms, 32037 iops, 125.1 mb/s

    The other results mean nothing as it is hitting the disk or raid cache which has little to no impact on real world performance.

  • J1021J1021 Member

    If the term SSD was used in the marketing of the product then this customer should receive a refund with the company covering any bank/transactions charges.

  • PatrickPatrick Member
    edited June 2014

    AnthonySmith said: erm... not taking sides but those results show that the SSD is performing better than the SATA

    That is SAS, not SSD. There is not a HUGE difference in any real time test you would do between 4xSAS and 10xSATA so performance between the migration would barely be noticeable.

    All other clients thus far have not complained or had any issues with the move. (Not had a single ticket except this)

  • FrankZFrankZ Veteran

    The short version of a long rant

    "This is chicken shit".

  • kaflokaflo Member

    If Iniz changes the terms, i believe i have the right to cancel - the same way Iniz will cancel the VPS the moment i break their TOS.

    Fair enough

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited June 2014

    @INIZ said:
    All other clients thus far have not complained or had any issues with the move. (Not had a single ticket except this)

    Ah ok, understood, not sure why you are comparing SAS to SATA then when the OP is complaining about SSD vs SATA

  • PatrickPatrick Member
    edited June 2014

    @AnthonySmith said:
    Ah ok, understood, not sure why you are comparing SAS to SATA then when the OP is complaining about SSD vs SATA

    He's on SAS. We don't have any SSD nodes anymore.

    See my first post:

    @INIZ said:
    For anyone interested, we moved from SSD to SAS due to sub-par performance with 6 x 512GB Samsung 840 Pro SSDs, we then tried 8 x 240GB Intel 520s which is also showed the same. We updated our RAID FW & SSD FW was the latest ones but performance was still quite low. Our DC suggested we used Debian but that was not a option since we use SolusVM/CentOS.

  • nerouxneroux Member

    INIZ said: We'll send you a wire transfer minus any fees your bank takes on currency conversion fees which will leave you with around few quid.

    What sort of response is this supposed to be?

    Lets look at the facts. A customer signed up for a particular plan and paid in advance for a year. So far so good. Now after eight months into this contract (with four months still to go) you suddenly decide to cancel the contract. Your reasons and if you tried to keep the customer by offering an alternative is irrelevant here I am afraid as the fact remains that the customer simply wont be able anymore to use the service under the original conditions he paid for. You changed the conditions, not the customer.

    In such a case the only sensible reaction is to offer a refund without any further discussion and cover any possible costs which might incur in this context (after all these costs originated from the fact that you closed the service). Any subtle "threats" about bank or wiring fees are definitely not appropriate. Just like excuses that your payment processor wouldnt allow them either (then get a better one).

    So again, what sort of response was this supposed to be?

  • iSkyiSky Member

    you do custom plan @iniz ? for OP, i think the term of 6 month refund is fair, as you already use almost 8 months, and patrick said you demand high ram, is like you demand more than what you paid for, not to mention the change of SSD to SAS from iniz

  • nerouxneroux Member

    iSky said: for OP, i think the term of 6 month refund is fair, as you already use almost 8 months

    The OP does not want the already used time refunded but only the outstanding one. And this is not fair or unfair, but his right.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    @INIZ said:

    Fair enough, I am not going to take sides here I don't have all the facts but the facts I do know is 6 x SSD'd will out perform 8 x SAS any days of the week in real world performance and that is based on years of experience.

  • LeeLee Veteran

    Have I missed the bit where the OP says what it actually is he has lost being on an SSD node that the alternative is no good?

  • nerouxneroux Member

    W1V_Lee said: Have I missed the bit where the OP says what it actually is he has lost being on an SSD node that the alternative is no good?

    What matters is that he paid for something which he is not going to receive.

  • PatrickPatrick Member
    edited June 2014

    neroux said: So again, what sort of response was this supposed to be?

    It was my reply, if you don't like it then thats tough luck. As most people know here I am defensive when it comes to people talking in public and not at all sympathetic.

    There are people here who got refunded when we had SSD and moved to SAS several months back and if that was an option I would gladly do it again. Do you really think I care about the money right now?

    neroux said: Any subtle "threats" about bank or wiring fees are definitely not appropriate. Just like excuses that your payment processor wouldnt allow them either (then get a better one).

    And if you knew much you would know PayPal itself doesn't deal with refunds after 45 days I think so not sure how merchant can do that when PP themselves don't give that option also 6 month is period for nearly all or most banks/credit card companies. There is no reason to get a new processor and it's not an excuse and pretty sad you think it is, as above I don't care about the money.

    If the OP didn't post a thread and requested a wire then I would have gladly paid the fee even if it was well over the refund amount. It's sad to see people try to ruin someones brand because we refused to do something that was impossible on our end.

    I wish the OP all the best to find a comparable service/reliability and resources for the amount paid.

  • INIZ said: Our DC suggested we used Debian but that was not a option since we use SolusVM/CentOS.

    That's really a good suggestion from your DC. Does SolusVM have any problems with Debian?

  • iSkyiSky Member

    @neroux sorry for my bad english, i mean.... its seems so fair that @iniz have policy about the 6 month refund. then the question is like @W1V_Lee said, what actually he has lost being on SSD node that the alternative is no good

  • J1021J1021 Member

    INIZ said: It's sad to see people try to ruin someones brand because we refused to something that was impossible on our end.

    What part of logging into your PayPal account and sending the 'refund' as a new payment manually is impossible?

This discussion has been closed.