Help Pool.com (Fraudulent)

[DNBro]

Recently I brought a domain BFZU.COM from a NP member (widedesigns) for $65.00. He pushed the domains in my Namescount.com account.

Two days back I’m trying to access Namescount.com account, I got a warning message that, your account is own hold and contact customer service.

When I wrote a mail regarding this matter, I got below replay:

Thank you for contacting Customer Service. The domain bfzu.com was acquired through our sister company, Pool.com. Pool.com has contacted us stating that this domain purchase was fraudulent. This is why your account is on hold. You will need to resolve this issue with Pool.com. Once resolved, Pool.com will contact us on your behalf to have the account taken off hold.

Then contacted Pool.com to resolve this issue, I got below mail:

It is our regret to inform you that BFZU.COM was purchased by a fraudulent user of Pool.com. We have not actually received payment for the domain and until we receive payment the domain will remain under our control. If you still want the domain BFZU.COM then we will consider selling it to you for $60 US, which is the amount that was owing for this specific domain. If you still want the domain and are willing to provide us with payment in the amount of $60 US then please let me know and I will help make the appropriate arrangements.

I had contacted widedesigns regarding this matter, but he brought this domain from a NP member (jrush), he created NP ID just to sell those domains only. He is clearly a smart fraud without doubt. As per his transaction, he sold nearly 20 domains here, I think those are holding will face same situation. Please check your accounts.

http://www.namepros.com/domains-for-sale-fixed-price/435299-cheapest-llll-com-possible-you-must.html

First thing, I don’t know why Pool.com can’t protect their properties, now claiming it more than 14 days after transaction. Whatever mishap happened is only due their lack of efficiency, someone getting access to their system and doing things or getting domain with out making payment. What is the guarantee even if one brought domain from Pool.com for auction then later they will claim or not

There is any how I can get this domain back or recover amount I had paid? Where I need to contact, how proceed

Thanks

 

[Michael]

How many people are you gonna send to say the same thing?

You blocked access to my domains, and keep telling this is not your fault ... but the scammer. Take responsability for the business you're doing by taking ALL your due responasability.
In any other not digital form the goods that were purchased and charged back would not be taken back by the company that sold them originally. Here the situation is different since you have some control other the domains.

At least you could try to discuss with the scammed person to offer something but no, you want keep 100% profit of a scam.

I will keep posting about this everywhere, since you do not do what you have to.

However many people it takes for you to understand I guess. Let me ask you this way, if the scammer hadn't sold the domain to DNBro before he did the chargeback should Pool be allowed to get the domain back? The answer is obviously yes, right? So then why should they not be entitled to their own property just because the scammer sold it to someone else? DNBro losing his money is between him and the scammer, because the scammer never had the right to sell the domain in the first place.

What you saying here is utter nonsense, how one can access your system. I think this very planned scam run by company itself.

First, how one can sell a domain to scammer

Second, why they are releasing the domain immediately

Third, none can access system such easily then your domains will remain in someone else account first.

Pool.com, receiving chargebacks 100% due to their lack efficiency and they need to suffer the loss also.

I'm sorry, but I don't think I understood a word of what you said. When Pool sold the domain to the "scammer," at that point he wasn't a scammer. He paid with a valid credit card, the transaction went through, and he got the domain. If you're suggesting that Pool should hold every domain until after a chargeback is no longer possible, 60+ days in most cases, you're the one talking utter nonsense. Nobody would ever buy anything there if they had to wait 2+ months to get the domain.

By your logic, if someone stole your car and sold it, you should have to pay the buyer to get it back. That is just insane.

The bottom line is that while I feel bad for DNBro, if he had covered his bases by researching who the seller was and making sure that he could get his money back if things went south, this would have ended with Pool getting the domain back from the scammer directly with no harm done.

To suggest that Pool is at fault for getting back their stolen property is absurd though. People doing business in this loose manner on the forums enables scammers to do what they do and continue making profit. People wouldn't try to steal from Pool if they weren't sure there'd be a sucker on the forums to buy it up.

(I do not work for nor represent Pool.)

 

[PowerUp]

......
And is it right for the merchant to continue providing that product or service,
which they lost money due to a chargeback, to a third party who has not paid
them directly for? If, say, you sold a box of widgets to person A including free
widget support, person A sold it to me, person A did a chargeback, you've lost
out the original fee paid for plus chargeback fees or so, I call you directly for
product support, you tell me a chargeback was made on the product, I refuse
to pay for it, will you help me?

I will provide you support because a satisfied customer is a repeat customer. Also, I will not demand that you return the product but instead cross sell you other products. In the future, when you want to upgrade your product, you'll also seek me out.

They are not passing the loss onto the customer in any way shape or form. The scammer's transaction with Pool is 100% independent of a forum member's transaction with the scammer. They are NOT related.

In transaction #1 we have Pool selling a domain to the scammer, the scammer doing a chargeback, and Pool recouping their domain. They have EVERY right to do this, they are not passing on any loss, they are getting back their property. Someone did a chargeback once on a domain I sold to them, and you better believe I fought to get it back. I hope you people would too.

In transaction #2 we have the forum member buying the domain from the scammer. This is between two individuals and is not related to Pool in any way. In essence you can think of it this way, the scammer stole the domain from Pool.

However many people it takes for you to understand I guess. Let me ask you this way, if the scammer hadn't sold the domain to DNBro before he did the chargeback should Pool be allowed to get the domain back? The answer is obviously yes, right? So then why should they not be entitled to their own property just because the scammer sold it to someone else? DNBro losing his money is between him and the scammer, because the scammer never had the right to sell the domain in the first place.

(I do not work for nor represent Pool.)

I couldn't say it better myself.

So, in transaction #1 Pool losing his money is between Pool and the scammer. Then why did pool get the 3rd party involved? Pool should've made a police report about the scammer and more importantly go back and beef up more security to prevent this from ever happening again.

 

[Michael]

I will provide you support because a satisfied customer is a repeat customer. Also, I will not demand that you return the product but instead cross sell you other products. In the future, when you want to upgrade your product, you'll also seek me out.

So, in transaction #1 Pool losing his money is between Pool and the scammer. Then why did pool get the 3rd party involved?

So if someone stole your car and sold it to someone else, you would let them keep the car and try to sell them tires? The only difference between this and the widget scenario is that in the widget scenario you are a business and not an individual. If the business wants to let the person keep the name for good PR they are free to do that, but I think it is wrong to attack them for not giving away free domains.

Think about it this way, how does Pool know that the new "buyer" is not working with the scammer that did the charge back, or that they are not in fact the same person? If they gave DNBro the domain free, what would stop everyone from charging back everything they bought on Pool, "selling" it to their friend who gets to keep it for free, and then having it transferred back to them later? Pool would go out of business in a heartbeat.

Pool didn't get the third party involved, the scammer did. Again, not Pool's fault or responsibility.

Think logically people, not emotionally. We all hate scammers, but lets use that frustration to make us smarter business people, not to make us a mob.

 

[DNBro]

So if someone stole your car and sold it to someone else, you would let them keep the car and try to sell them tires? The only difference between this and the widget scenario is that in the widget scenario you are a business and not an individual. If the business wants to let the person keep the name for good PR they are free to do that, but I think it is wrong to attack them for not giving away free domains.

Think about it this way, how does Pool know that the new "buyer" is not working with the scammer that did the charge back, or that they are not in fact the same person? If they gave DNBro the domain free, what would stop everyone from charging back everything they bought on Pool, "selling" it to their friend who gets to keep it for free, and then having it transferred back to them later? Pool would go out of business in a heartbeat.

Pool didn't get the third party involved, the scammer did. Again, not Pool's fault or responsibility.

Think logically people, not emotionally. We all hate scammers, but lets use that frustration to make us smarter business people, not to make us a mob.

Its doesn’t matter you work with or not

Like a domain move from A account to B account, what normally it indicating is a transaction happened between buyer and seller. B having the proof that B has paid A. Either they stop the internal transfer for 60 days or do what they want to make their domain secure. It doesn’t make any sense charging B account again.

You are saying how does Pool know that the new "buyer" is not working with the scammer that did the charge back, or that they are not in fact the same person? But who know that scammer and Pool.com are same company?. They are so many other auction sites other than pool.com running without much chargebacks.

Even after all these things, they are simply saying we are victims of scam, then why are running such a company.

 

[PowerUp]

So if someone stole your car and sold it to someone else, you would let them keep the car and try to sell them tires? The only difference between this and the widget scenario is that in the widget scenario you are a business and not an individual. If the business wants to let the person keep the name for good PR they are free to do that, but I think it is wrong to attack them for not giving away free domains.

Think about it this way, how does Pool know that the new "buyer" is not working with the scammer that did the charge back, or that they are not in fact the same person? If they gave DNBro the domain free, what would stop everyone from charging back everything they bought on Pool, "selling" it to their friend who gets to keep it for free, and then having it transferred back to them later? Pool would go out of business in a heartbeat.

Pool didn't get the third party involved, the scammer did. Again, not Pool's fault or responsibility.

Think logically people, not emotionally. We all hate scammers, but lets use that frustration to make us smarter business people, not to make us a mob.

Have you heard of "Don't gamble with money you cannot afford to lose?" In the car case, if I couldn't afford to lose the sale money, I would have insisted the transaction be handled by an escrow, or demand a bank wire transfer prior to giving him the car. However,.. if the amount is too small, and I can afford to lose the money, then I'd accept his credit card or check. If it turns out he makes a chargeback or the check is forged, then I only have myself to blame and go make a police report.

I want to highlight to you land scams which has happened very rampantly over the last 5 years in my country. A scammer will claims he has lost his land title. The land office demands some ID verification. The ID, is of course fake. Land office verifies the name on ID matches the name of the owner on records. Land office then issues a replacement title to the scammer. Scammer proceeds to sell the land. Buyer engaged lawyer to handle the case. Lawyer made official search and verified that the scammer (with the fake ID) matches the record at the land office. Plus he has a genuine land title in his hand. Everybody thinks he is the real owner. Lawyer completes the transaction.

Months later, REAL owner realised his land had been sold to a stranger. Lodges police report. It made it to the news when the REAL owner sued the BUYER and demanded compensation or return the land. The court ruled in favor of the Buyer. The sale by the scammer was done legally. The Buyer and lawyers made the necessary checks, did the "standard operating procedures" and completed the transaction in good faith.

There was a huge outcry in the business communities. The seller was a victim. The buyer was also a victim. The real fault lies with the land office and for such lose control and flaws in the land administration. (Note: I'm curious if it's possible for the Real Owner (or get a trusted 3rd party) to put a caveat on his own property. This would prevent the sale without the consent of the caveat holder?)

Similarly, Pool is a victim, Buyer is a victim. The real fault lies in Pool's security. (Yes, you can go on and say that the REAL fault should be the scammer but that is like pointing 1 finger at the scammer without realizing 3 fingers are pointing back at you. If you had better securities, you might have prevented the scammer from frauding you)

I've read about Verified by Visa and Mastercard Secure Code. According to what I've read (and they are very limited, so please correct me if I am wrong), these programs DO Guarantee chargebacks. Meaning if a VV and MSC approves the transaction which is later chargedback, then VV and MSC will honor the payment and bear the loss. BUT, VV and MSC is not covered for all transactions and all geography. Only certain countries and only certain transaction (or card holders).

If a merchant wants to minimize chargebacks, then he could choose to accept business whereby the transactions would be honored by VV or MSC. No doubt he would lose some business due to his stringent controls, but this is the price to pay to minimize fraud.

However, if a merchant wants more business and accepts more types transactions, then he would lower his controls. By lowering his controls, he is choosing to accept some risks of fraud. And so, he is accepting the costs that comes with fraud as part of the cost of doing business. This is the price to pay to increase your target customers, hence increasing your business.

 

[Michael]

In your example, Pool is not charging B again, they are charing B for the first time because B never paid Pool any money for the domain. In fact, nobody paid Pool any money for the domain because the charge was reversed. That's like saying that the person bought your stolen car, but because they already spent money on it they should get to keep it, and you should not be allowed to offer for them to buy your car legitimately. You have no ground to stand on, and now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

You have no idea what the percentage of chargebacks occur at other auction sites such as NameJet and SnapNames, but I can guarantee you that they are experiencing chargebacks. That is just part of doing business online, people will always find ways to work the system.

They were victims of a scam. If you sold me a domain and I did a chargeback after I sold it to someone else, would you not try to get the domain back? Obviously you would, so why should we hold Pool to different standards? Because they have more money than us? That's just asinine.

 

[PowerUp]

In your example, Pool is not charging B again, they are charing B for the first time because B never paid Pool any money for the domain. In fact, nobody paid Pool any money for the domain because the charge was reversed. That's like saying that the person bought your stolen car, but because they already spent money on it they should get to keep it, and you should not be allowed to offer for them to buy your car legitimately. You have no ground to stand on, and now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

You have no idea what the percentage of chargebacks occur at other auction sites such as NameJet and SnapNames, but I can guarantee you that they are experiencing chargebacks. That is just part of doing business online, people will always find ways to work the system.

They were victims of a scam. If you sold me a domain and I did a chargeback after I sold it to someone else, would you not try to get the domain back? Obviously you would, so why should we hold Pool to different standards? Because they have more money than us? That's just asinine.

If I sold it to you and you made a chargeback, Yes I would get the domain back from you.

If I sold it to you and you sold it do ABC, then made a chargeback, then I wouldn't get the domain back from ABC. The transaction I had was between you and me and it is you I'm going to deal with. I'll report you to your local police, and get ABC's help to provide more info to the police. As with every scam, you follow the money, not follow the domain. (If scammer really pushed the domain for free, then there would not be any money trail. So ABC is the scammer.)

 

[Jon1977]

I can see this is a very divisive subject, Pool should certainly be performing their security checks as their CEO has stated they do, but they are entitled to reclaim their property, someone else used the example of a stolen car - it doesn't matter if the car is recovered 30 years later or after its had 2 dozen new owners - it still belongs to the original owner (or as in most cases, the insurance company if it has already paid out).

Namepros is a very unrestrictive site where it is very easy to conceal your ID, so of course it will be attractive to scammers - but if you were to pay for your transaction with PayPal (yes yes I know they are scum) then you would be able to do a chargeback on your paypal account, with the added bonus that the scammer would get his account frozen.

 

[DNBro]

In your example, Pool is not charging B again, they are charing B for the first time because B never paid Pool any money for the domain. In fact, nobody paid Pool any money for the domain because the charge was reversed. That's like saying that the person bought your stolen car, but because they already spent money on it they should get to keep it, and you should not be allowed to offer for them to buy your car legitimately. You have no ground to stand on, and now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

You have no idea what the percentage of chargebacks occur at other auction sites such as NameJet and SnapNames, but I can guarantee you that they are experiencing chargebacks. That is just part of doing business online, people will always find ways to work the system.

They were victims of a scam. If you sold me a domain and I did a chargeback after I sold it to someone else, would you not try to get the domain back? Obviously you would, so why should we hold Pool to different standards? Because they have more money than us? That's just asinine.

I don’t have any idea what % of charge back Namejet or Snapnames getting, but no such cases reported here in the forums or taking those loss as a part of their business.

As per your wording you have clear idea about what happening there in Namejet & Snapnames. Then please share some links here.

On what basis you are saying Pool.com is a victim????, what ever showing here us clear security laps, even after all kind of fed up from their side, they are getting their domain back.

Also there is no problem with Namepros or other forums, problem is only with Pool.com from there it needs to be stopped, it’s very clear.

 

[Michael]

I don’t have any idea what % of charge back Namejet or Snapnames getting, but no such cases reported here in the forums or taking those loss as a part of their business.

As per your wording you have clear idea about what happening there in Namejet & Snapnames. Then please share some links here.

On what basis you are saying Pool.com is a victim????, what ever showing here us clear security laps, even after all kind of fed up from their side, they are getting their domain back.

Also there is no problem with Namepros or other forums, problem is only with Pool.com from there it needs to be stopped, it’s very clear.

I don't have any data as to the extent of the problem of chargebacks at SnapNames or NameJet, but the bottom line is that all online businesses deal with this issue, period. To say someone does hundreds of thousands of transactions online and never gets a chargeback is completely out of touch with reality. It happens, and you have to deal with it accordingly.

I am saying Pool is a victim on the basis that their name was stolen. Just because they were able to get it back doesn't make them in the wrong.

If I sold it to you and you sold it do ABC, then made a chargeback, then I wouldn't get the domain back from ABC. The transaction I had was between you and me and it is you I'm going to deal with. I'll report you to your local police, and get ABC's help to provide more info to the police. As with every scam, you follow the money, not follow the domain. (If scammer really pushed the domain for free, then there would not be any money trail. So ABC is the scammer.)

So in the stolen car example, if the police found the car after it had been sold two or three times, do you really think you're not going to get the car returned to you? You absolutely will unless, like Jon mentioned, the insurance company already compensated you for it at which point they would get the car.

In regards to your comment about not gambling with money you can't afford to lose, I agree with that. However, if you don't have to lose it why would you? Pool left themselves an out because they are able to get their domain back. Like Jon mentioned, to be a prudent buyer you need to leave yourself outs too, like paying with PayPal so you can reverse the charges if need be.

 

[DNBro]

Mike, accept onething that, here domainers are losing their money or Pool need to paid/pay for chargeback fees, all these happening due to lack of efficiency of Pool.com only

 

[diddie]

The only and big difference with a car and a catched domain is that the catched domain costs only reg fee, like a car would cost only registration fee, the car comes free, as the domain.

When they get scammed, they go after a scammed person, get their PROPERTY (which is discutable as it is registred to someone not the registrar) and try to make pay the scammed person for a PROFIT! (this is what is their fault), i'm not talking about any other scheme but this one: when the scammed person pays, POOL MAKES PROFIT OUT OF a SCAMMED PERSON.
.

However many people it takes for you to understand I guess. Let me ask you this way, if the scammer hadn't sold the domain to DNBro before he did the chargeback should Pool be allowed to get the domain back? The answer is obviously yes, right? So then why should they not be entitled to their own property just because the scammer sold it to someone else? DNBro losing his money is between him and the scammer, because the scammer never had the right to sell the domain in the first place.


I'm sorry, but I don't think I understood a word of what you said. When Pool sold the domain to the "scammer," at that point he wasn't a scammer. He paid with a valid credit card, the transaction went through, and he got the domain. If you're suggesting that Pool should hold every domain until after a chargeback is no longer possible, 60+ days in most cases, you're the one talking utter nonsense. Nobody would ever buy anything there if they had to wait 2+ months to get the domain.

By your logic, if someone stole your car and sold it, you should have to pay the buyer to get it back. That is just insane.

The bottom line is that while I feel bad for DNBro, if he had covered his bases by researching who the seller was and making sure that he could get his money back if things went south, this would have ended with Pool getting the domain back from the scammer directly with no harm done.

To suggest that Pool is at fault for getting back their stolen property is absurd though. People doing business in this loose manner on the forums enables scammers to do what they do and continue making profit. People wouldn't try to steal from Pool if they weren't sure there'd be a sucker on the forums to buy it up.

(I do not work for nor represent Pool.)

Who you're calling a SUCKER ? on this thread 2 persons were scammed in that way, be clear to say who you're talking to
.

 

[Michael]

Mike, accept onething that, here domainers are losing their money or Pool need to paid/pay for chargeback fees, all these happening due to lack of efficiency of Pool.com only

Sorry, I can't accept that, that doesn't make any sense. If something is stolen from you you have every right to get it back, it doesn't matter if the scammer kept it or sold it or whatever. There is no argument to the contrary, which is what you have to accept.

When they get scammed, they go after a scammed person, get their PROPERTY (which is discutable as it is registred to someone not the registrar) and try to make pay the scammed person for a PROFIT! (this is what is their fault), i'm not talking about any other scheme but this one: when the scammed person pays, POOL MAKES PROFIT OUT OF a SCAMMED PERSON..

Who you're calling a SUCKER ? on this thread 2 persons were scammed in that way, be clear to say who you're talking to
.

Um, it is a business, they are supposed to make profit... do you want them to give everything away for free? It isn't their fault people here are getting scammed, it is our fault. Your last comment that Pool is making profit out of a scammed person is irrevelant because you don't have to buy the domain from Pool. Pool didn't scam you, someone else did, so take it up with them. If you don't know who they are or how to reach them, that is YOUR OWN fault. Period.

A sucker is "a person easily cheated, deceived, or imposed upon." If you don't do due dilligence when buying a name, you're easily cheated...

 

[DNBro]

Pool making profit from scammers, means they are part of scam also, they treat those profit as a normal part of their business return but other reputed domain companies take that as a warning and do the precautions to avoid that, period.

Here itself you search, you can find around 50 cases minimum, also so many unreported. Other auction companies also having same kind of cases, then you can share here BUT WITH A PROPER LINK.

Company run by scammers, then how they can stop scammers. Even after making profit from everything they are victim also. It matter of shame such companies are still existing in this competitive world.

 

[Michael]

Pool making profit from scammers, means they are part of scam also, they treat those profit as a normal part of their business return but other reputed domain companies take that as a warning and do the precautions to avoid that, period.

Here itself you search, you can find around 50 cases minimum, also so many unreported. Other auction companies also having same kind of cases, then you can share here BUT WITH A PROPER LINK.

Company run by scammers, then how they can stop scammers. Even after making profit from everything they are victim also. It matter of shame such companies are still existing in this competitive world.

Are you being serious? They aren't making profit from scammers. If they sell a domain, someone scams them, they get the domain back, then sell it for the exact same price, how are they profiting from scammers? They are back where they started with the exact same profit but they had to waste time and manpower recovering the domain. You're really showing your inexperience and paranoia if you think they are doing this on purpose.

I'm done with this thread, you don't have a leg to stand on and you know it, but you want to take out your frustration on someone else because YOU didn't do your due diligence to make sure the seller was legit. Trying to ruin the rep of a good company because of your business practices is pretty messed up in my opinion.

 

[DNBro]

Are you being serious? They aren't making profit from scammers. If they sell a domain, someone scams them, they get the domain back, then sell it for the exact same price, how are they profiting from scammers? They are back where they started with the exact same profit but they had to waste time and manpower recovering the domain. You're really showing your inexperience and paranoia if you think they are doing this on purpose.

I'm done with this thread, you don't have a leg to stand on and you know it, but you want to take out your frustration on someone else because YOU didn't do your due diligence to make sure the seller was legit. Trying to ruin the rep of a good company because of your business practices is pretty messed up in my opinion.

How you know that? They are making profit from scammers or not, you are saying they are running business to make profit and also they clearly supporting scammers. They are taking it as part of their business. What you mean by recovering the domains, domain is remaining under their control for 60 days after auction, either they are contacting the right owner after that, but they put domain/account on hold.

Here I’m not showing my lack of experience, but here I’m trying to prove lack of efficiency of company don’t deserve to run an online business. Other auction companies are not facing same kind of situation means these types of companies legally need to shut down; very soon, otherwise it will also harmful for those running company in legitimate manner.

Why Pool.com only having scammers and chargebacks, why this not happening with other companies?????, because this company run by scammers

 

[Michael]

Scammers are everywhere on every site, and if you think they are only on Pool you are either naive or intentionally exaggerating to try and prove a point that otherwise doesn't have any foundation. If you think Pool invites the headaches that scammers cause in an attempt to make extra profit that only exists in your imagination, you are paranoid. Either way, I'm done with this conversation because you haven't added anything of merit to it in several pages. Good luck and sorry to hear about your troubles.

 

[accent]

Appearances are important.

A huge company taking a $60 domain from a small, honest domainer is awful customer relations.

Game Over.

 

[DNBro]

Scammers are everywhere on every site, and if you think they are only on Pool you are either naive or intentionally exaggerating to try and prove a point that otherwise doesn't have any foundation. If you think Pool invites the headaches that scammers cause in an attempt to make extra profit that only exists in your imagination, you are paranoid. Either way, I'm done with this conversation because you haven't added anything of merit to it in several pages. Good luck and sorry to hear about your troubles.

Scammers everywhere, but problem is only with Pool.com, sorry to hear they are victims. Pool.com made heaven for scammers, new way to make money without taking much effort.

You are saying anther auction site also affected by same scammers and chargebacks, then prove instead blindly writing here on the behalf a company.

Problem is only with Pool.com, its very clear.

 

[Dave_Z]

I will provide you support because a satisfied customer is a repeat customer.

Your generosity is truly appreciated, considering you've lost money to person
A due to his chargeback for the product he bought from you, later sold to me,
and I haven't even paid you a dime. I won't accept your cross sells, but I will
hold you to the free after-sales support included in your product's guarantee.

If I don't get an reply to my email within 10 minutes after I click Send, or call
your phone number but no one's answering, then I somehow find your home #
and call you to answer my gazillion questions, which could take up to an hour
or so, but you're not there or you refuse to help me out, then I'll post in many
online forum or so how scammy you are for not fulfilling the free sales support
promised. I'll also say how scammy you are for trying to sell me stuff which I
don't want.

Now, this is just a pretend scenario, of course. But I'm sure you can imagine the nightmares
of that specific one with its specific circumstances, and I've dealt with those kinds of people.

When they get scammed, they go after a scammed person, get their PROPERTY (which is discutable as it is registred to someone not the registrar) and try to make pay the scammed person for a PROFIT! (this is what is their fault), i'm not talking about any other scheme but this one: when the scammed person pays, POOL MAKES PROFIT OUT OF a SCAMMED PERSON.

Diddie, I thought you said you understood my post to your thread:

http://www.namepros.com/domain-name...namescout-com-trying-scam-me.html#post2691000

That's the thing. Namescout probably thought you did the chargeback since
the domain names showed your name. (or did they?)

Especially a .com, the Registry bills the registrar $6.42 for every registration,
renewal, and/or transfer they accept. In turn, the registrar bills the end user
for it separately.

A chargeback on a domain name results in the registrar losing the fees paid by
that end user as well as any "chargeback fee" or whatever they're called. And
since they can't get their $6.42 or so back from the Registry, they've virtually
lost money on the domain name/s that got the chargeback/s.

From what I read in those emails, again, it seems like those six domain names
were originally paid for their registration periods, they were transferred to you
after you bought and paid the last user for such, then whoever last paid for
them with Namescout did the chargebacks. Again, Namescout lost money.

If the one you paid those domain names was the last one who paid for those
registrations, then perhaps you ought to "talk" to that person.

ok, i understand, in all cases i'm trying to get back to the seller, but i don't see him online now since some time...

You might want to read my post again to better understand what happens to
the registrar or so when a chargeback occurs. I don't know how else to make
it any clearer than what I explained there and here, despite one member's try
which is almost exactly what I described.

Look, folks, I certainly understand how some of you feel about this. But when
a business like Pool experiences this exact set of circumstances, it's certainly
up to them to decide if they "should" eat the costs and just accomodate you,
even though you didn't pay them anything.

If someone else gets wind of their accomodating you, it's a good bet they will
try to hold Pool to that. Imagine if a critical mass of people demand Pool to do
that as well to them, to the point of causing them to incur losses rather than
net profit.

Like most if not everything else in life, there are indeed risks. Some are doing
whatever they can to try to mitigate those risks, but they're not always in a
position to help others affected by those risks.

A huge company taking a $60 domain from a small, honest domainer is awful customer relations.

It's awful customer relations to the customer, maybe. But not to Pool, or even
to whoever third party cares enough to check further rather than take things
as they seem.

Then again, some people would probably consider this specific circumstance a
sign of awful customer relations anyway, even though it's not necessarily the
company's fault for the bad karma that befell another which they hardly have
full control over.

BTW, I don't work for Pool or Namescout. But I have worked with a registrar in
a previous life for more than 4 years, and I've handled this sort of issue a few
times to help me understand how it affects all parties concerned.