Escrow.com Is Now Asking For Photos of Personal Docs

[Cdomains]

Escrow/com Is Now Asking For Photos of Personal Documents.

I just logged in to Escrow/com and they are now asking for extensive verification including Photos or scans of ID's and other personal and business documents to be stored on their servers.

I have used them for years for all my transactions.

With all the hacks of servers happening around the world and security breaches exposing us to identity theft I have refused to give photos of my ID's and other documents to companies who request it.

I will not do business with Flippa for this reason.

I recently had my account frozen at a registrar that asked me for this and I refused.

Will you give photos of your personal ID's, bank records, etc to Escrow/com or will you use another service?

Personally, I think I am going to take my business somewhere else.

I am really disappointed about this after all these years.

---

Related:

• New Escrow.com Account Verification Process

 

[kriss05]

As the seller, I certainly do care who has my bank statements, latest utility bills, faxes of my credit card and drivers license with photo........ Thats a formula for identity theft.

Me too. Another point is if you let them go their way, soon they will require something else again and again. Escrow.com already demanded me to make expensive international call to confirm my identity in last transaction. WTF. The frog is saying: no more boiling alive for me.

 

[ResoluteDomains]

Would be nice if an escrow.com representative would come on here and clarify the changes, why some are getting this notice and so far a few have stated they havent... One would think a heads-up email would have been sent out but no, instead we get this sneaky notice at the top of the screen which looks like those "we use cookies" notices that started cropping up on websites. One would also think that if this was a new law that there would be a link provided to read about it and why its necessary and how they are protecting people's personal details which are now required by them. All in all its been quite an unprofessional manner in which we've seen this and someone from the company should come here and explain what is going on. After all, I would be a large chunk of their business originates from folks like us on this forum.

 

[DN_Hunter]

Would be nice if an escrow.com representative would come on here and clarify the changes, why some are getting this notice and so far a few have stated they havent... One would think a heads-up email would have been sent out but no, instead we get this sneaky notice at the top of the screen which looks like those "we use cookies" notices that started cropping up on websites. One would also think that if this was a new law that there would be a link provided to read about it and why its necessary and how they are protecting people's personal details which are now required by them. All in all its been quite an unprofessional manner in which we've seen this and someone from the company should come here and explain what is going on. After all, I would be a large chunk of their business originates from folks like us on this forum.

I believe most, if not all, of your concerns have been addressed in this thread. I understand it is quite long, and sometimes it is time consuming to read through pages of messages. In summary (anyone welcome to correct me if I misunderstand)

1) look at posts from username Jackson Elsegood -- he appears to be a representative from escrow
2) he mentions how they rolled out the requirement (although I disagreed with their approach in an earlier post)
3) he references and provides several links for laws and regulations (of which multiple users have pointed out that compliance is due May, 2018 -- that is not a typo, the year is 2018)

Regards,
DN

 

[GoKaizen]

Australian Bank Finds Out The Hard Way It Should Have The .COM Too
http://www.domainpulse.com/2017/01/12/australian-bank-should-have-com/
http://www.domainpulse.com/2017/01/12/australian-bank-should-have-com/

It only takes 1 dumb Escrow employee.

 

[kriss05]

Or 1 angry Escrow employee

 

[Jurgen Wolf]

Would be nice if an escrow.com representative would come on here and clarify the changes

Already posted 1 week ago: https://www.namepros.com/threads/new-escrow-com-account-verification-process.993444/

 

[maxtorz]

FinCEN is a new act...it's the way the IRS will be notified when you ahem "forget" to report that fat 10k transaction you just completed via Escrow.com LOL
They say it's against money laundering and terrorism! )
I know ALL European Union countries have signed and are part of this new program...
ALL Banks and ALL Escrow companies are now required by law to do this. I believe China and a few select countries don't participate in this program....
Domaining just got tougher for the rest of us folks...
Chinese domainers have it all made haha
Actually DN.com offers Escrow and I bet they don't ask for extensive IDs...
Anybody can verify this????????

 

[maxtorz]

We should ALL beg Frank Schilling @ Uniregistry to start an Escrow company ))

 

[Jurgen Wolf]

DN.com accounts must be verified also.

 

[Internet.Domains]

FinCEN is a new act...it's the way the IRS will be notified when you ahem "forget" to report that fat 10k transaction you just completed via Escrow.com LOL
They say it's against money laundering and terrorism! )
I know ALL European Union countries have signed and are part of this new program...
ALL Banks and ALL Escrow companies are now required by law to do this. I believe China and a few select countries don't participate in this program....
Domaining just got tougher for the rest of us folks...
Chinese domainers have it all made haha
Actually DN.com offers Escrow and I bet they don't ask for extensive IDs...
Anybody can verify this????????

FinCen is not an act. It is an agency that enforces the Patriot Act.

 

[discobull]

FinCEN is a new act...

If something established in 1990 is "new".

 

[garptrader]

With all the forum complaints about Escrow.com's policy change, it is amusing to see that the motivation was to combat the funding of terrorism and money laundering. Yet a few months ago when I mentioned that domain names COULD be used for money laundering activities, most members thought I was a looney. Now the biggest domain transfer company for the last 15 years or so is taking steps to prevent domain names from being used as money laundering vehicles. Hmmm....

 

[maxtorz]

If something established in 1990 is "new".

New to our industry absolutely. It's now getting enforced at a Global level.
I just wanted to point out to everyone that the execs at Escrow.com didn't just wake up one morning and said "hey let's make the escrow.com process more scary and implement these new requirements etc"
Pointing fingers at Escrow.com is just silly, they are a great company in my opinion.

A simple google search reveals:
"
Title and escrow-related businesses are required to report currency transactions over
$10,000 transacted in the course of business by using FinCEN / Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) Form 8300,Report of Cash Payments Over $10,000 Received in a Trade or
Business (Form 8300) "

Everyone can do their own research at this point, there's a lot more to this.......

 

[ResoluteDomains]

New to our industry absolutely. It's now getting enforced at a Global level.
I just wanted to point out to everyone that the execs at Escrow.com didn't just wake up one morning and said "hey let's make the escrow.com process more scary and implement these new requirements etc"
Pointing fingers at Escrow.com is just silly, they are a great company in my opinion.

A simple google search reveals:
"
Title and escrow-related businesses are required to report currency transactions over
$10,000 transacted in the course of business by using FinCEN / Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) Form 8300,Report of Cash Payments Over $10,000 Received in a Trade or
Business (Form 8300) "

Everyone can do their own research at this point, there's a lot more to this.......

I read https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/1020.220 -- the apparent reason for this change....

What is insane is that my government (USA) wont fully enforce our borders or immigration policy, yet it will force me to send personally identifying information over the wire to who knows where, to be stored on who knows what servers, in who knows what nation, seen and accessed by who knows what persons and potentially accessible by anyone at any hop between me and the end-point ALL THE WHILE that same government implores me to protect my identity.

Since my bank already knows who I am, where I live, and has a photo ID of me on file, I am vetted by them.. If escrow.com (for this discussion or any another company for another discussion and time) is doing business with me, and I give them my bank account info (as I have previously done), for deposits, as well as other identification that was previously asked for, then these should be assured that I was already vetted. "form a reasonable belief that it knows the true identity of each customer". Well, if my bank approves of me, and will write up a suspicious activity report, then I would THINK that it is "reasonable" to believe I am who I said I am to my bank and to anyone doing business with me and my bank. I do not need to further risk my identity.

Sure, the company will say that they have all the security measures in place to protect my information. And how do I trust the company? Are they going to send their insurance and bonding license documentation to everyone for us to inspect? Even if they do, every server gets hacked and the bottom line is that I do not want my personal information scattered all over the place when I feel that it is unnecessary.

 

[GCCinternet]

@Jackson Elsegood

The need to comply with regulations, AML policies etc should be clear to everyone and it's surely positive that Escrow.com meets all the standards which make Escrow.com the safe platform and trusted escrow.

Sellers shouldn't have problem with authorization.
Individual buyers from a civilized world also (there aren't many reasons for which an individual who has good intention can't take a photo of ID and credit card statement).

BUT
What about corporate buyers (even SMEs but especially large corp) where a manager or someone from marketing or IT team wants to buy a domain name? Whose ID he should send? If his own, ok. What if a marketing guy isn't mentioned anywhere in company registration documents? Will he pass the verification?
Or instead he will need to go to the CEO or a board member and ask for his ID? Such scenario would kill many deals. Can you imagine a regular employee bothering board members to buy a domain for $1k or 5$k? Some will but many will give up.

Asking a board member for a copy of ID would be embarrassing. Even if such an employee would already get registration docs of a company...

I don't see it positive overall... Not because of illegal intentions of a buyer but because of some personal&corp issues...

@Doron Vermaat
What do you think Doron? Efty platform allowed to practically exclude the need to pay huge commissions to marketplaces for usually no help in sale.

Escrow made a favour to marketplaces for sure... Initially I'd risk to say that I'd prefer to lose $1k in $5k deal processing through Afternic (but above $5k Afternic uses escrowcom anyway) instead of losing $5k deal because a legitimate buyer will be "verified to death" at verification process...

Thanks,
Adam

 

[carob]

1) look at posts from username Jackson Elsegood -- he appears to be a representative from escrow
2) he mentions how they rolled out the requirement (although I disagreed with their approach in an earlier post)
3) he references and provides several links for laws and regulations (of which multiple users have pointed out that compliance is due May, 2018 -- that is not a typo, the year is 2018)

It really looks like they have to identify the customer but that does not necessarly have to be a photo ID - seems Escrow.com see that as an easy a$$-covering move, but in the process they uncover your a$$.

 

[Kate]

With all the forum complaints about Escrow.com's policy change, it is amusing to see that the motivation was to combat the funding of terrorism and money laundering.

You are right, but terrorism and money laundering are just excuses to invade your privacy and control your assets to tax them or confiscate them (if there is any difference - think of asset forfeiture).

Terrorists can use fake ID if necessary but often they don't even bother to do so because a) they don't need to b) an investigation will only take place when it's too late.
Terrorists don't care about being identified after the fact.
If those laws were truly effective at reaching the stated goals, everybody would know. Those laws are made for you, for the little guys, not for the big criminals.

 

[carob]

Those laws are made for you, for the little guys, not for the big criminals.

Yes meanwhile tax havens flourish, Amazon, Google and Apple don't pay tax - governments look the other way.

 

[creataweb]

Yes meanwhile tax havens flourish, Amazon, Google and Apple don't pay tax - governments look the other way.

They have lobbyists. We don't

 

[ResoluteDomains]

It really looks like they have to identify the customer but that does not necessarly have to be a photo ID - seems Escrow.com see that as an easy a$$-covering move, but in the process they uncover your a$$.

I agree, the way its being implemented may be a bit over the top. I dont even want them seeing my banking statements or utility bills. The hypocrisy of all of this is off the scales. My government wants me to hand over PII but at the same time it tells me I need to protect my identity. Meanwhile there is always this big stink about providing photo ID when voting in the US. In my state, photo ID voting was ruled unconstitutional. But faxing or emailing my photo ID has become a requirement to do business now?

How many millions of US federal government employee's data was stolen and in the hands of hackers in China? How many accounts at Target were compromised right under their noses - even when they were warned it would happen to them and how it would happen? And that is just two examples of millions of accounts that were supposed to be "safe and under great security". BS - no server is safe.

They claim this https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-05-11/pdf/2016-10567.pdf is the reason for their enhanced verification requirements. If you read all of that you will see that lawyer's escrow accounts seem to be exempt. Isnt that nice? If the town puts up a stop sign but states that only 90% of the people they have to stop at it then there is still a change I get t-boned by someone who was exempt from stopping at it. Swiss cheese laws. Like Kate said, this stuff only to keep the little guys in check. I am not against fighting terrorism. My bank is already performing all of the duties of vetting me, ID checks, etc. And by that measure I should be "ok" in the eyes of anyone wanting to do business with me. We could probably generate enough electricity from Benjamin Franklin rolling in his grave to power a small town.

At this point it is probably more fruitful to try to find or create alternatives. They're not going to change their implementation of that law.

 

[Kate]

Bottom line: blame the government and vote wisely

 

[discobull]

A simple google search reveals:
"
Title and escrow-related businesses are required to report currency transactions over
$10,000 transacted in the course of business by using FinCEN / Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) Form 8300,Report of Cash Payments Over $10,000 Received in a Trade or
Business (Form 8300) "

What that says is that escrow.com is required to report all transactions that are in amounts greater than $10k. If there's something there about requiring all customers to produce ID, I'm struggling to find it.

 

[Jasonn]

so, what are the alternative services that aren't doing this?

 

[tomcarl]

You guys notice how none of the blogs have picked this up, usually any little story gets covered 7 different way?

Because there's a lot of wussies in this industry worried about stepping on toes

State your worries, suggestions, and complaints! Not to be a "troll" but to try and make things better!

 

[Doron Vermaat]

@Doron Vermaat
What do you think Doron? Efty platform allowed to practically exclude the need to pay huge commissions to marketplaces for usually no help in sale.

Escrow made a favour to marketplaces for sure... Initially I'd risk to say that I'd prefer to lose $1k in $5k deal processing through Afternic (but above $5k Afternic uses escrowcom anyway) instead of losing $5k deal because a legitimate buyer will be "verified to death" at verification process...

Personally, I'm not a fan of anything that makes it harder or more complicated for an end-user to purchase a domain name. A lot of sales in the $2,000 range are still often impulse-driven purchases and any extra step in the payment or escrow process might result in buyers backing out. At Efty we're currently working on integrating with two more partners that will allow you to take payments from buyers so our users will soon have several options when it comes to setting BIN prices for their domains.