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.
VolumeDrive Being Sued!
Yes this is a repost from WHT
Data Sales Co., Inc. v. Volumedrive, Inc. Filed: October 23, 2013 as 3:2013cv02626 Plaintiff: Data Sales Co., Inc. Defendant: Volumedrive, Inc. Cause Of Action: Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty
For those that don't know, Data Sales is who they got financing/hardware from.
Source
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/pennsylvania/pamdce/3:2013cv02626/96153
Thanked by 1karistuck
Comments
Ouch!
Does anyone have the court documents?
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1328931
Looks like the OP will post it there soon
it hurts
y am I not surprised =x
@sundaymouse that fits
Unless the court comes out with a ruling against volumedrive i don't see the big deal there. In USA everyone is suing everyone else for whatever reasons.
Ain't that the truth. It's no wonder we're all so on edge these days. Can't hardly look at a person without giving them a reason to sue you. I keep saying lawsuit precedent is as good as written law, it's going to bite us all in the ass.
So whats the story - Volumedrive has not paid their lease? Or there is something else?
You didn't hear/read about the fiasco?
Better start now because you've got a lot to read, 123 pages to be exact.
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1296858
Well that seems to be what Burst.net claimed when volumedrive "ran away" from them to their current location. Guess we will find out soon if there is some truth to it, the dates seem to match quite well when you think about it.
We are not going to make any comments on any ongoing legal matter.
Is it not at all unusual for former business partners / competitors to abuse the legal system for frivolous, unsubstantiated claims. Large companies receive frivolous lawsuits all the time.
We are very confident about the outcome of this case, and there isn't any cause for concern on any services that we provide.
No offence but you would say that anyway. Not that I am suggesting you are not being truthful but time will tell.
God damn, talk about a comment.
@mcmyhost - I dont really follow the political drama, there is always someone who is not flavour of the month. I have a hard enough time keeping up with the carrier issues.
So in summary - what are we saying - VD leased some kit of X company, they claim they were not paid(?) and now suing. I dont have access to the legal documents to tell the real case issues. But it seems this is a matter for VolumeDrive's and the plaintiff's lawyers.
I understand there is an outage at VolumeDrive, how major is that? How many people affected?
Except that they are not business partners or competitors. They are a leasing company that you did not pay. Additionally, you are not a large company targeted in some shakedown
smh.
Someone on WHT paid for all the court docs $5, and they managed to upload them to their site.
http://turtle.dereferenced.org/~kaniini/volumedrive/
I had a read through... and Man, i can't believe how much damage josh did to Data Sales.. I mean.. He even gave a fake address and the sheriff report couldn't locate him.. What a joke.
@MarkTurner,
We do not have any outages or issues currently with our network or service.
Wish you all the best Josh and VD
He even gave a fake address and the sheriff report couldn't locate him.. What a joke.
This is our mailing address where we receive all of our corporate mail, not a physical address, this is perfectly legal.
Maybe those bills could be paid if VolumeDrive CEO sold off a couple of their exotic car(s) ... as mentioned in the WHT thread
That he got ticketed for DUI in!
Could someone summarize the important points in these documents? :P
Intoductory-Bla-bla, "claims which are being contested"-Bla-Bla, Legal-Bla-Bla.
Oh my god, all the equipment together costs $107,635.00.....
From a quick read through, it seems that Burst.net was indeed correct. Bottom line is that VD left the Burst facility with many of the servers, taking them to their current location but should not have.
The paperwork would suggest that VD is in significant debt to the leasing company and not just recently. It would also seem likely that a condition of getting all the equipment from the leasing company was that they were not allowed to remove said equipment from the Burst.net facility, at least not without permission from the leasing company.
But they went ahead and did it anyway. Or at least took some. This would again explain why some people were back online eventually but others had their servers left behind, presumably when Burst.net realised what was happening they blocked any further removals.
The loooooooong thread on WHT about this ended up with many people turning against Burst.net claiming downtime and holding servers hostage was actually Burst's fault and not VD. This claim would 'appear' to show that VD were in fact the ones in the wrong and Burst were not.
But just my view :P
@W1V_Lee Interesting summary. It's a tough read no doubt. Question though, if you happened across the answer to this, did Burst hold the servers because the leasing company said they had to remain there? That would be a strange stance to take if the relationship was between VD and the leasing company, unless Burst played the middle man in the transactions in some way.