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.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
But give me back the money for the dedicated servers, I'm not finding anyone to sell my credit, I paid YOU, YOU refund me!
Why do you keep advertising your services if you can't deliver? You want to scam more people?
would you mind to point out where in your TOS we can find your "no refund on bitcoin" paragraph?
No one has said you are a currency exchange but I will say you're a scammer as you're not willing to refund him when you've not delivered the services as advertised.
I guarantee he doesn't have one - even if he did this wouldn't even apply as no service has been delivered.
I agree that there is no contract as he failed to deliver his part of the contract and therefore the tos are unimportant but I can't even find the bitcoin part in the tos.
I know that many service providers are a bit wary of refunds for clients that pay in Bitcoin. The most important reason for this is that you could be involved in a money laundering scheme. Clients who purchase a service with BTC and within a short time ask for a refund are a risk.
However, that doesn't seem to be the case here. I think I put it correctly when I say that the client ordered a VPS which he couldn't get installed. It's an unmanaged service, but to be fair: CLimited could have given him clear instructions. The dedicated server couldn't be delivered. So that's not something you can accuse the client of.
Just give the guy a refund. If you get blamed of money laundering or tax evasion you'll be able to produce the logs and communication with your former client to clear things up.
We seem to have a similiar discussion here in two different threads..
As I already mentioned in the other thread:
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/3019726/#Comment_3019726
So I doubt something like
has any legal correctness especially if it was not explicitly agreed on and mentioned in the terms.
I do not know enough yet about the background with the setup of the VPS. But if a dedicated server was ordered and simply could not be delivered, this will clearly result in a withdrawal from the contract in my opinion in which case exactly the same situation must be restored as it was before the contract which includes any Bitcoins to be refunded (as Bitcoins).
I believe it's a bit different if the customer has agreed to waive their right of withdrawal and accept the service be started immediately. But since neither seemed to have happened..BGB is pretty much where it's at.
Yep, that's basically right, but in this particular case it wasn't the customer asking for the contract to be withdrawn but the provider simply failing to deliver.
If I am right both parties agreed on cancelling the service because the provider could not deliver but he is refusing to refund the Bitcoin and forces the customer to get only funds added to his account. Which is not acceptable.
In any case it might not hurt to send a Widerruf within 14 days of purchasing just to be safe. Tbh. the Epvp thread linked on their website isn't so much PR either imho:
https://www.elitepvpers.com/forum/web-host-server-trading/4270523-climited-de-starke-vserver-zu-besten-preisen-windows-linux.html
..and the Trustpilot..
@Gam3over I'd suggest you just go ahead and refund the chap before anyone else does more digging. Especially @teamacc , who is LETs inofficial detective of choice :P
Trustpilot is already enough to sow distrust...
Your VPS are delivered.
I have explained the subject several times now, which is why I will not comment now ...
I can recommend you if it does not suit you, you can take legal assistance.
"Folgen des Widerrufs
Wenn Sie diesen Vertrag widerrufen, haben wir Ihnen alle Zahlungen, die wir von Ihnen erhalten haben, einschließlich der Lieferkosten (mit Ausnahme der zusätzlichen Kosten, die sich daraus ergeben, dass Sie eine andere Art der Lieferung als die von uns angebotene, günstigste Standardlieferung gewählt haben), unverzüglich und spätestens binnen vierzehn Tagen ab dem Tag zurückzuzahlen, an dem die Mitteilung über Ihren Widerruf dieses Vertrags bei uns eingegangen ist. Für diese Rückzahlung verwenden wir Guthaben, es sei denn, mit Ihnen wurde ausdrücklich etwas anderes vereinbart; in keinem Fall werden Ihnen wegen dieser Rückzahlung Entgelte berechnet.
**Die Erstattung erfolgt je nach gewählter Zahlungsmethode auf dem Gleichen Zahlungsweg zurück. Ausgenommen sind hierbei Bitcoin und Paysafecard Zahlungen, da diese mit hohen Gebühren verbunden sind und nicht auf dem gleichen Weg Erstattet werden können.
Bitcoin und Paysafecard Zahlungen werden als Guthaben erstattet**."
https://climited.de/index.php?rp=/knowledgebase/26/Widerrufsbelehrung.html
He is (also) complaining about the server: https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/3019666/#Comment_3019666
So you won't deliver the server AND you won't refund the money AND you're suggesting that the customer spend more money hiring a lawyer?
Nope. §357 (3) BGB says that the same means of payment must be used for the refund. A deviation from that is only valid if it was explicitly agreed on. Where in your order process to you obtain the agreement from your customer that other means of payment are accepted for refund? In your order process you only force to tick a checkbox that the customer agrees on your TOS (AGB) and privacy terms (Datenschutz). A different handling of Bitcoin is mentioned in none of them. Hiding this information on a page which isn't explicitly agreed on is not valid.
By the way, "refunding" money to a balance within a customer account is not allowed if the customer makes use of his right of withdrawal. The customer has the right to get his money paid out. This was outlined and judged by German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) back in 2005 (Az: Viii ZR 382/04) (Handelsblatt)
TL;DR: You can write a sentence like "We refund money to your balance/funds" ("Für diese Rückzahlung verwenden wir Guthaben") wherever you want, it is simply not allowed according to German law.
This is not in your TOS and nowhere referenced during checkout so not part of the contract.
Even if that's in the ToS, isn't this just keeping the client's money without providing useable service? I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure that's against most country's consumer protection laws (and I heard Germany has a pretty good one too). Plus, this just looks like a dick move for me.
I think @dfroe explained that. I am not a lawyer and cannot give any advice but if I were the customer I would pull my defence insurance and see if the provider got the balls to see if a judge follows his explaination.
How does he still have a provider tag? I might as well create a company that sell a service, and never deliver the said service and nor offer a refund in the name of "I had problems with the tax authority because of such things".
This is literally the definition of scamming.
Besides all those laws and court decisions there is of course also the Golden Rule of LET (which as a matter of course does not stand above the law, either): Don't be a dick. Also known as common sense.
This is how communities like LET work.
Not offending any particular person, we have seen people trying to scam other users from time to time, but if someone decides to leave the "Don't be a dick"-track then one should at least stay within the borders of law. In my humble opinion the thread between being a dick, violating the law, and (intentional) criminal behaviour is a very thin one.
I think a lot of people are wondering that.
Well, this thread has firmly put CLimited on my shitlist of providers I will never buy from.
.
Just found this in my messagebox
https://i.imgur.com/jQVw60A.png
is this allowed?
Seems fine since he was responding to your post: https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/156669/whats-the-cheapest-ddos-protected-vps-in-europe
Only unsolicited and/or PMed offers from someone w/o a provider tag are frowned upon.
You just noticed a message from five months ago?