discuss [Resolved] Domainer Loses $26k On A Stolen Domain!

[Silentptnr]

Darn! Another scam and this time it is an experienced domainer James Booth.

James must have thought he was making a sound acquisition as he transferred approximately 26k to escrow for CQD.com. Instead, after completing the escrow, the domain was taken from his account by the registrar without notification and returned to the "true" owner.

Turns out the person that sold him the domain CQD.com, may not have been the true owner.

Apparently this incident involves several parties including the registrar and the escrow.


Thanks to Theo over at DomainGang for the tip on this.

 

[spoiltrider]

When did you file the UDRP Rebecca? Did you get a domain lawyer?

i have files being reviewed at ICANN. i filed on their site back in Jan. It was one of the very first steps i took to remedy getting my domain (business) back (up and running).

 

[tonyk2000]

i have files being reviewed at ICANN

They will do nothing. Guaranteed. Icann is not a proper authority to resolve this issue.

 

[equity78]

i have files being reviewed at ICANN. i filed on their site back in Jan. It was one of the very first steps i took to remedy getting my domain (business) back (up and running).

Ok but not a UDRP, you just went to ICANN and told them your domain was stolen.

 

[spoiltrider]

They will do nothing. Guaranteed. Icann is not a proper authority to resolve this issue.

i understand this. it is part of the "process" though.

 

[tonyk2000]

it is part of the "process" though.

Icann has no power to return the domain name, even if they wanted to. Moreover, there is nothing they can explain or clarify to any authority that has such powers. Unfortunately.

 

[spoiltrider]

I mentioned the UDRP I doubt she even knew what a UDRP was.

...ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy... yes i looked it up back on december 27th. Using the UDNDRP is the only way that I am aware of, to tend to this outside of the courts. However, with that being said...it's not an option between burns and booth - i suppose.

i (fo sho) know more about graphic design, dealing with printers, building web sites, PPC advertising, SEO, google analytics (and in my case the loss thereof)blah blah blah...real estate and ovvvvv course horses...but i am learning a lot now about what a unregulated industry domain selling/reselling is. i'm also learning about forums like this one and how to maximize the info...i've only used them for vetting purposes. - bummer there is no horse emoji here.

 

[Kate]

At best Icann will do only one thing: review whether the handling of the transfer was done in a compliant manner. That is, technically compliant. Of course, the hacker followed the normal channels to move the domain out so he is technically compliant... the registrar wasn't hacked after all.
But expect no redress: even if they find non-compliance, the failing registrar might get a slap on the wrist, possibly a notification of breach of registrar agreement. But they will not return the domain to you. Only a UDRP or court ruling can forcefully reassign the domain to somebody else. UDRP is a waste of time in this case.

 

[Silentptnr]

At best Icann will do only one thing: review whether the handling of the transfer was done in a compliant manner. That is, technically compliant. Of course, the hacker followed the normal channels to move the domain out so he is technically compliant... the registrar wasn't hacked after all.
But expect no redress: even if they find non-compliance, the failing registrar might get a slap on the wrist, possibly a notification of breach of registrar agreement. But they will not return the domain to you. Only a UDRP or court ruling can forcefully reassign the domain to somebody else. UDRP is a waste of time in this case.

Or somehow like Booth or his lawyer did.

 

[tonyk2000]

Or somehow like Booth or his lawyer did.

Indeed, it is what likely happened. The domain transfer back to Rebecca from mr. Booth was not peformed in compliant manner. No transfers should occur after a phone call with (or without) "investigation" performed by registrar. We may or may not like ICANN policy on transfers, we may also beleive that Rebecca is rightful owner, but Netsol later reversed their incorrect action so they are now "compliant".

 

[spoiltrider]

cqd.com is currently on lockdown at network solutions.
no one has the right to say booth "owns" my domain.
the domain is going no where, right now.
this is the biggest fubar mess, eVer (for me anyway) and network solutions and 5-7 other entities involved know it too.
how can something so simple become so complex and layered and convoluted and drawn out?
ruled by greed.
there are so many facets to this situation. it's really not rocket science. it's just simple and extremely pathetic.

 

[tonyk2000]

cqd.com is currently on lockdown at network solution

Do you mean that Netsol was ordered by some cometent authority to administratively "lock" the domain name so the current registrant is unable to manage it any aspect (including ownership transfers), or voluntary elected to do so? Do you have any reasonable confirmation?

no one has the right to say booth "owns" my domain.

It is technical fact that the domain name is currently registered in his name. He is current registrant, and which is why I prefer to use "current registrant" term in posts here. It does not mean that he has legitimate title to the domain. This is what the recent Netsol-related discussions were about:

- They have an obligation to make sure that the domain transfers between account are technically compliant with their "Registrar accreditation agreement". They have no need to know wheter the domain was sold or is it a gift for example.

- The first transfer, from your Netsol account to Booth, was performed in technially complait way. Indeed, somebody who hacked your e-mail was able to confirm everything by clicking authorization links.

- The second transfer, from Booth back to you, was peformed by somebody at Nersol, and not in technially complaint way. There is nothing in "Registrar Accreditation agreement" (and in subsequent "Rules on domain transfers") that allows Nesol to administratively perform such transfers because somebody called them and asked for it, even explaining some good reasons.

- The lawyer who is working for Booth was like able to call right people at Netsol (which is hard thing to do), and explained them their last action was incrrect and that, by doing so, they are incomplant with "Regstrar Accrditation Agreement" (their bible). So netsol reversed their technically incompliant action, by moving the domain back to Booth.

So, here:

The Director of Fraud and Abuse at Web.com did a 3 MONTH investigation in to this case and returned the domain to me as I purchased the name by all the relevant legal channels.

current registrant is "overstating" the role and importance of this 3-moths investigation. NetSol did not say that Booth has a legitimate title to the domain. They are not in position to make such findings. They simply moved the domain back to him to remain technically complaint with their accreditation agreement.

 

[offthehandle]

How was the 4th step you mention above of contacting the 22 year registrant to notify or verify concurrence of transfer bypassed? Or was it?

A 3 month investigation/verification as stated did not include any interaction with the registrant of all those years????

This is the strange missing piece to the puzzle, imo. Seems really incomplete and incompetent on the part of the registrar to conclude any and all “investigation” without such contact via email, telephone or other contact if it was truly an investigation. Maybe a letter was sent? Years back, I got renewal notices in the mail from them but can only assume that system no longer exists.

 

[spoiltrider]

How was the 4th step you mention above of contacting the 22 year registrant to notify or verify concurrence of transfer bypassed? Or was it?

A 3 month investigation/verification as stated did not include any interaction with the registrant of all those years????

This is the strange missing piece to the puzzle, imo. Seems really incomplete and incompetent on the part of the registrar to conclude any and all “investigation” without such contact via email, telephone or other contact if it was truly an investigation. Maybe a letter was sent? Years back, I got renewal notices in the mail from them but can only assume that system no longer exists.

right off the handle!!! that is my thought exactly! no letter (return receipt request, fed ex, ups, courier, etc) no phone call. no email. no knock on my door. no drive by shooting, no cats hanged in a tree with a tag on its paw...no nothing! none. null. zilch. void. nadda. non existant!
how is/can a truly valid, authenticated and thorough "investigation" be conducted if the victim (me) is never contacted or interviewed? ...really?
what are the start and end dates of this "investigation" by the web.com person in nova scotia canada, tom lam. funny, booths attorney is also located in canada...toronto, ontario, canada...
they aren't even in the USA. ….hmpf.

and, where is my blue ink signature on the sale docs, which are where?

 

[Keith]

My latest take on this situation...

Initially I thought Booth was clear based on the communication chain. Now, I feel he knowingly has stolen property and refuses to give it back. He was duped and wants someone else to pay for his ignorance.

I wouldn’t do business with him and was actually offered $50k recently by him for an LLL I own...

 

[offthehandle]

what are the start and end dates of this "investigation" by the web.com person in nova scotia canada, tom lam.

How did you communicate or contact the investigator or know he specifically was responsible?

 

[spoiltrider]

How did you communicate or contact the investigator or know he specifically was responsible?

on february 28th i wrote an email to [email protected] because of a direct verbal converation with network solutions. they told me to write the above.
then:


On Mar 7, 2018, at 1:23 PM, RJB <[email protected]> wrote:

tom,
i was given your name from amanda at the abuse line.
i called the number she gave me but there is NO ANSWER!!!!!!
director WHO did investigation
tom
902-749-2746
[email protected]
PLEASE CALL ME ASAP REGARDING THE THEFT OF MY DOMAIN cqd.com TO A RESELLER JAMES BOOTH from a party in California!
I DID NOT AUTHORIZE ANY TRANSFER OF MY DOMAIN cqd.com!
you have never spoken to me.
i never signed any thing regarding the sale or transfer of my domain
please call me asap!
i AM THE RIGHTFUL OWNER OF MY DOMAIN SINCE 1996!!!!
I DID NOT COLLECT ANY FUNDS FOR THIS FRAUDULENT TRANSACTION!!
rebecca burns
352-870-5272


THEN: I HEARD FROM HIM:

On Mar 7, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Tom Lam <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Ms. Burns,
I am currently on a conference call. I will return your call at 2:15PM EST.
Kind regards,
Tom Lam
Director: Abuse and Fraud

(but only by email as above)

THEN:

On Mar 7, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Tom Lam <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Ms. Burns,
I apologize – I got pulled into another meeting. I will call you at 3pm EST
Tom Lam
Director: Abuse and Fraud

"another meeting"

THEN by March 8th:
On Mar 8, 2018, at 10:56 AM, RJB <[email protected]> wrote:

WHEN AM I GOING TO GET MY CQD.COM BACK IN MY ACCOUNT, in MY POSSESSION?

it is MY domain!

my domain was STOLEN, hijacked, abducted…whatever you want to call it FRAUDULENTLY SOLD and Tom Lam conducted his “investigation” without ever contacting/interviewing me, etc and AIDED IN TRANSFERRING STOLEN PERSONAL PROPERTY TO A domain reseller!

TOM LAM: show me PROOF that i am the “seller” of my domain!

I will show PROOF that I am a VICTIM of THEFT!
You will NEVER find money transfered or given or put in my hands or bank account!

YOU HAVE ALLOWED MY DOMAIN TO BE STOLEN!


I WANT TO SPEAK TO TOM LAMs SUPERVISOR.
THERE HAS GOT TO BE SOMEONE HE IS HELD ACCOUNTABLE TOO!

rebecca burns
352-870-5272

rightfull owner of CQD.com for 22 years!!!!!!!


I DID NOT AUTHORIZE THIS SALE!


tom lam called me back. i have the phone record of the calls that connected.
i was crying and cussing him out!
the phone call ended badly and abruptly.

 

[spoiltrider]

My latest take on this situation...

Initially I thought Booth was clear based on the communication chain. Now, I feel he knowingly has stolen property and refuses to give it back. He was duped and wants someone else to pay for his ignorance.

I wouldn’t do business with him and was actually offered $50k recently by him for an LLL I own...

he offered you 50k for your three letter domain? and he "got" mine for 25k...wow.

 

[johname]

he offered you 50k for your three letter domain? and he "got" mine for 25k...wow.

Keith's domain probably didn't have a Q in it

 

[wwwweb]

he offered you 50k for your three letter domain? and he "got" mine for 25k...wow.

Well different letters have different values, CDC would be worth much more than CDQ etc... no one domain is worth the same based on just any 3 letters. Some are cheaper, some are more. He got yours for about $5-10K wholesale discount to what the market was bearing around that time. As he has stated sometimes he is only looking to make a few K, and not a large %, as a flip, if you had not found out it was stolen, it would have already been sold most likely, and no longer his problem.

I can't believe Z M is still behind this, he has more to lose than gain, if Rebecca gets this to the right stage, a domainer will get little sympathy in the media, and if she can win this in court, this case will really haunt a lawyer who is about domainer rights.

 

[offthehandle]

the phone call ended badly and abruptly.

Did you call him back and apologize? That might help your case out. We all feel your extreme anger and know its justified, but directing it to the person who needs to help you can’t further your goal. I know you are trying to do this out of court, perhaps someone else in Web(.)com? I have mentioned several times about getting this into the news...

 

[wwwweb]

Did you call him back and apologize? That might help your case out. We all feel your extreme anger and know its justified, but directing it to the person who needs to help you can’t further your goal. I know you are trying to do this out of court, perhaps someone else in Web(.)com? I have mentioned several times about getting this into the news...

It would be interesting to know the context of the call, most likely he made the call to return the domain to the yanked account, so he would have to justify it, rather than admit his mistake, or reasoning. We all know how these customer experiences go, they put the onus on you to back up your story, and every scenario really comes back to the same step 1, legal action. I wouldn't apologize to him, it would just make him feel more justified, I would call him to testify, and then you can ask him the hard questions on what happend.

 

[spoiltrider]

this just really chaps my ass. so many comments that are not true that i wanted to respond to. i wasn't on this forum when this was written, way back on page 1.
(booth is red, burns (me) is green)

↑
@BoothDomains Why you did not call Rebecca?

"I did."
(no he did not.) show the connected call to my number (of over 8 years) which would prove the "conversation" with me. i promise there would be multiple and lengthy calls discussing how and why you would be buying my listed at SP $150k domain at a greatly reduced (fire sale) price of $25k. this would not be a 1-2 minute rounded up call on the phone record(s).

"The whole thing is really fishy."
yes, it is. and it stinks.

"I called, emailed and did all the checks."
show the connected call to my number.
show the emails.
what are "all the checks"? please explain.

"It seems she told Web.com one of her employees sold the name without her authorization which is a lie."
seems i told....?
one of my employees? who? what was/is the name? i haven't had any employee since 2000, when i went solo and back to my studio above the garage the year my only child started kindergarten and i focused on being a mom first and foremost.

"I have all the emails from her."
all the emails?
what emails (from me)? where are they?

i am asking for authentic and honest documentation.

 

[spoiltrider]

Did you call him back and apologize? That might help your case out. We all feel your extreme anger and know its justified, but directing it to the person who needs to help you can’t further your goal. I know you are trying to do this out of court, perhaps someone else in Web(.)com? I have mentioned several times about getting this into the news...

i did not and will not apologize to him. this should never have happened. he should be apologizing to me.
i am working on getting in mainstreamed...crossing t's and dotting i's. : )

 

[spoiltrider]

It would be interesting to know the context of the call, most likely he made the call to return the domain to the yanked account, so he would have to justify it, rather than admit his mistake, or reasoning. We all know how these customer experiences go, they put the onus on you to back up your story, and every scenario really comes back to the same step 1, legal action. I wouldn't apologize to him, it would just make him feel more justified, I would call him to testify, and then you can ask him the hard questions on what happend.

i want him fired. he's a person with a title, that he can't hold up too. he avoided my phone calls. he ran away from my frantic inquiries. he had no explanation or answers for me. he punted me to the next person...he can call himself anything he wants, but he's not a investigator.

 

[offthehandle]

Going the legal route as has been explained by others many times is expensive, and your domain name value is probably equal to your future legal expenses, let alone and not counting the emotional toll. It’s truly sad that the registrar won’t re-investigate or re-open this matter to involve you. By taking a “position” like you have (out of anger and frustration) does not bring them closer to review this, you just are pushing them away.

Not being involved, but from all I have followed on this thread that happened is it appears on the surface as either
A. the evidence presented (escrow docs, payment) was sufficient to transfer it back, or was incompetent invesigation as occured
or
B. you are not being honest.

I have to say, I do believe you. So your goal of retrieving the name back at minimum cost should be dispproving A. above. So, based on the assumption the Registrar made a mistake, the burden of proof is on you, I know that isn’t fair but forget it at this point who is right or wrong. You need to work with them, not attack.

If you continue on the same war path it is not going to resolve this. Being angry, and calling people out to be fired only isolates you from bringing the Registrar back into the solution. Conflict resolution is not going to progress by making insiders embarrassed or upset. You are justified in your anger and loss. It sucks, I get it. Set your ego and pride aside. If that is impossible, then it’s like a divorce and could get uglier in court than it is now.

Large corporations have all those finger pointing things going on internally, that is the political reality you have are dealing with, punting, and not returning calls, being ignored, etc. This is normal CYA behavior, I have done many large and medium size corporation collections in my own business and only when I got someone internally (usually a stakeholder) did I get a solution. Your situation unfortunately does not have a stakeholder. So you need to find someone inside the “machine” to assist you. You are a RE sales person and business owner, so you need to find someone. Believe me, it’s frustrating but getting a bunch of lawyers and corporate management people feeling threatened and angry on their end, isn’t going to get your domain back. They will just ignore you, unless of course you go the media route, and they still might force you into court. It could be that way now actually.

And your last post asking for documentation seems reasonable.

At this point, for the registrar to simply transfer it back is in itself an admission of fault so it puts everyone else in a face-saving “position” and a legal bind. That forces your hand to resolve it either by the Registrar or the Court system. The Corp is in a CYA position now with corporate employees internally whoever reviewed and decided to move it back.

This is all well known to the current registrant, hence the positioning of forcing your hand to court, which occured early on.

I truly hope you get this resolved.