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

 

[rasman]

Some advice on purchasing domains through the forum

Hi All,

I am the CEO at Pool and can shed some light on this situation. First, as joecanadian pointed out, we do a thorough check on credit card purchases including verifying the CVV (which means the purchaser must have the card since the CVV is usually on the back). At certain billing threshold we also require what we call a billing authorization which includes providing photoID. It's very difficult to get sometimes but we usually won't process a sale if we don't feel comfortable with the purchaser. We also verify things like IP address and a number of other things that I won't discuss in public for obvious reasons.

You should note as well that when a domain is registered at a new registrar, as it is when it arives at Pool, it is locked for transfer for 60 days (ICANN rules). Which provides us a bit of protection.

What happens in these cases is we do all the verification we can and then within 2 weeks, the REAL credit card holder calls and says someone has used their card fraudulently and they are charging back the transaction. The credit card companies have no sympathy in these situations, they almost always side with the card holder.

So, how can you protect yourself from these scammers? Here are a few ideas.

First, if they only just got the name themselves (check the whois data) then you might question why they are flipping it so quickly? Yes, domain names are in great demand and appreciate but you wouldn't think to get a good return on investment in just a few days.

Second, consider asking for all the information that we would ask for to confirm their identity and use that information to contact them directly. If they are a legitimate seller you would think they would be willing to establish direct contact. And that would include a phone number. At least with a phone number you have some recourse although these guys can always buy temporary mobile phones.

Third, use a reputable third party to broker the deal and insist that identities are verified.

Fourth, ask for the domain history. Who did they buy it from and when. And then perhaps you can follow up with the previous owner just to make sure they were in fact the owner and conducted a legitimate sale. On our case, for example, Pool can verify how long the account has been a customer and if we notice a "quick flip" we can investigate as well. Believe me it is to all our advantage that we stop some of these guys.

The unfortunate part of the message is that the legal authorities are not much help. We launched an investigation on one similar occasion that was a much bigger use of fraudulent data and we got nowhere in catching the guy.

So, the best offence is indeed a good defence! Buyer beware, and do some homework before you write the cheque.

Cheers

Richard

 

[italiandragon]

Hi All,

I am the CEO at Pool and can shed some light on this situation. First, as joecanadian pointed out, we do a thorough check on credit card purchases including verifying the CVV (which means the purchaser must have the card since the CVV is usually on the back). At certain billing threshold we also require what we call a billing authorization which includes providing photoID. It's very difficult to get sometimes but we usually won't process a sale if we don't feel comfortable with the purchaser. We also verify things like IP address and a number of other things that I won't discuss in public for obvious reasons.

You should note as well that when a domain is registered at a new registrar, as it is when it arives at Pool, it is locked for transfer for 60 days (ICANN rules). Which provides us a bit of protection.

What happens in these cases is we do all the verification we can and then within 2 weeks, the REAL credit card holder calls and says someone has used their card fraudulently and they are charging back the transaction. The credit card companies have no sympathy in these situations, they almost always side with the card holder.

So, how can you protect yourself from these scammers? Here are a few ideas.

First, if they only just got the name themselves (check the whois data) then you might question why they are flipping it so quickly? Yes, domain names are in great demand and appreciate but you wouldn't think to get a good return on investment in just a few days.

Second, consider asking for all the information that we would ask for to confirm their identity and use that information to contact them directly. If they are a legitimate seller you would think they would be willing to establish direct contact. And that would include a phone number. At least with a phone number you have some recourse although these guys can always buy temporary mobile phones.

Third, use a reputable third party to broker the deal and insist that identities are verified.

Fourth, ask for the domain history. Who did they buy it from and when. And then perhaps you can follow up with the previous owner just to make sure they were in fact the owner and conducted a legitimate sale. On our case, for example, Pool can verify how long the account has been a customer and if we notice a "quick flip" we can investigate as well. Believe me it is to all our advantage that we stop some of these guys.

The unfortunate part of the message is that the legal authorities are not much help. We launched an investigation on one similar occasion that was a much bigger use of fraudulent data and we got nowhere in catching the guy.

So, the best offence is indeed a good defence! Buyer beware, and do some homework before you write the cheque.

Cheers

Richard

hello Richard, I`m glad you took the time for this.

You gave excellent advices and I agree totally, especially on the "quick flips".

 

[DNBro]

Richard, Thanks for putting your views.

Assume your company selling physical products instead of digital. How will you recover the cost, once company delivers the products?

A person flips a domain for so many reasons. But do you think it justifiable to recover the loss from second party and it’s clearly due to lapses in your systems.

And it’s not practically possible for an individual to make background check before buying all domains, but same time it possible for a company check all security parameters before accepting or processing payment. Also company can lock domain for 60 days (billing circle) to avoid internal account transfer, if possible.

Here your company simply putting hold on domain, and asking to making payments.

First here company not making any profit, but just trying recovering the cost.

Second company will lose reputation eventually.

Third, on how many forums or to domainers, a ceo can share their company views?.

And most importantly, domainer here losing his money and time.

It’s better and easy for a company to adapt security measures than individual.

Thanks

 

[Michael]

It sounds to me like Pool goes above and beyond when it comes to verifying a buyer. No system is 100% secure and things will happen. Sorry it happened to you, but this is not Pool's fault at all. They are just trying to recover their own property. If someone bought a domain from you and then did a chargeback, wouldn't you want to get your domain back? Be mad at the scammer, not the marketplace.

 

[squid]

Surely then they would not allow a domain to be pushed in the first place? Seems just slightly suspicious to me...

It sounds to me like Pool goes above and beyond when it comes to verifying a buyer. No system is 100% secure and things will happen. Sorry it happened to you, but this is not Pool's fault at all. They are just trying to recover their own property. If someone bought a domain from you and then did a chargeback, wouldn't you want to get your domain back? Be mad at the scammer, not the marketplace.

I'm just jumping in with a suggestion here, but why not have a limit on what a new user can sell? It could be hard to moderate, but aren't all users first posts moderated anyway? So why not say "When a new user signs up, they cannot sell any domains worth over $20 until they have at least a 5 Trader rating for 2 weeks." I know this would be a pain, but with the amount of scammers around at the moment it's the only feasible course of action. It's a pain, but what else can be done?

 

[PowerUp]

Hi All,

I am the CEO at Pool and can shed some light on this situation. First, as joecanadian pointed out, we do a thorough check on credit card purchases including verifying the CVV (which means the purchaser must have the card since the CVV is usually on the back). At certain billing threshold we also require what we call a billing authorization which includes providing photoID. It's very difficult to get sometimes but we usually won't process a sale if we don't feel comfortable with the purchaser. We also verify things like IP address and a number of other things that I won't discuss in public for obvious reasons.

You should note as well that when a domain is registered at a new registrar, as it is when it arives at Pool, it is locked for transfer for 60 days (ICANN rules). Which provides us a bit of protection.

What happens in these cases is we do all the verification we can and then within 2 weeks, the REAL credit card holder calls and says someone has used their card fraudulently and they are charging back the transaction. The credit card companies have no sympathy in these situations, they almost always side with the card holder.

So, how can you protect yourself from these scammers? Here are a few ideas.

First, if they only just got the name themselves (check the whois data) then you might question why they are flipping it so quickly? Yes, domain names are in great demand and appreciate but you wouldn't think to get a good return on investment in just a few days.

Second, consider asking for all the information that we would ask for to confirm their identity and use that information to contact them directly. If they are a legitimate seller you would think they would be willing to establish direct contact. And that would include a phone number. At least with a phone number you have some recourse although these guys can always buy temporary mobile phones.

Third, use a reputable third party to broker the deal and insist that identities are verified.

Fourth, ask for the domain history. Who did they buy it from and when. And then perhaps you can follow up with the previous owner just to make sure they were in fact the owner and conducted a legitimate sale. On our case, for example, Pool can verify how long the account has been a customer and if we notice a "quick flip" we can investigate as well. Believe me it is to all our advantage that we stop some of these guys.

The unfortunate part of the message is that the legal authorities are not much help. We launched an investigation on one similar occasion that was a much bigger use of fraudulent data and we got nowhere in catching the guy.

So, the best offence is indeed a good defence! Buyer beware, and do some homework before you write the cheque.

Cheers

Richard

Hello everyone, I'd like to hear your comments.

When a merchant sells real goods and delivers real physical products, and later gets charged back because of scam, then the merchant has to bear the losses. It is part of his cost for doing business and he can certainly minimize this cost by filtering and setting high fraud checks. But of course, he still cannot 100% prevent fraud, and he accepts whatever he cannot prevent as a cost of doing business.

With Pool, they just pass on this cost to the consumers. They grabbed the product (domains) back from the consumers (victims) and keeps them. IMHO, I'd say Pool should bear the losses as part of the cost for doing business and releases these domains to the domainers.

 

[rasman]

A different perspective

Powerup, you're suggesting that "other" vendors would not follow the same recourse if it were to happen to them, that it would simply be a cost of doing business? I would suggest to you that in material transactions, the seller would not simply chalk it up to the cost of doing business. Allow me to provide an example which may be extreme I admit but illustrates the point.

Suppose a Person A buys a car and somehow manages to convince a bank who do all kinds of due diligence to lend them the money. Then, Person A goes out and sells the car to Person B. Then Person A decides not to pay the bank anymore... you can bet the bank will repossess the car from the current owner who should have been smart enough to have the right procedure in place to make sure what they were buying was clean.

Another perhaps more extreme example would be stolen property that gets sold to a third party. You can bet if the original owner finds out who the current owner is they let the authorities know and with sufficient proof of original ownership my guess is they would be able to reclaim the "stolen" property that changed hands improperly.

Fraud doesn't happen very often but I would suggest as domain values continue to go up, it will become more and more attractive to commit fraudulent acts. These are illegal, and when they occur the victims have the right to be compensated.

In any case, I still suggest that being wary is your best defence.

 

[Michael]

The physical product merchant example isn't relevant in this discussion because the cost of retrieving the goods is usually more than they are worth, so they write it off as theft which is deductible. If getting back your physical merch was as easy as clicking a button, you better believe they would get it back.

I agree that the victims need to be compensated, but in this case Pool is also the victim. Why should they just give away the domain when they have every right to recover it?

A lot of people doing business on this forum don't do their due dilligence in regards to identifying the person they are doing business with and making sure they are trustworthy. If you do business like that long enough eventually you are going to get burned.

 

[DNBro]

I remained part of an online company selling products more than three years; company was getting 3-8% charge back. You are talking about car, but there thousands of other products selling online.
In case I had used stolen credit card information to shop something with different shipping address, what company can do nothing in this matter? They simply loss the product cost. Here also companies use so many security features to avoid or minimize this situation.

Here you are advising to domainers how to avoid scammers, but its better adapt at top levels instead implementing on lower level?

How currently Pool is victim, they processed invoice on the basis of stolen credit card information with out proper verification, once they got charge back from real customer, and they put hold on domain name. Here looser is only domainer, but eventually Pool.com will pay for all these approaches.

Thanks

 

[rasman]

Proper verification was acquired

DNBro, you suggested that propper verification was not obtained? That is incorrect, all of the required verification that was possible short of requiring the buyer to appear in our offices was in fact followed. And the one option we have to combat the scammers is, per ICANN rules, keep a hold on transfers for 60 days which gives us the ability to get the "goods" back. So, the one solid piece of advice to all buyers that I don't want to get lost in this discussion is think twice about buying a domain from anyone that is trying to flip it in less than 60 days from when they first bought it. That on it's own should be a big red flag and it's likely that they are not the rightful owner of the domain. It is, in essence, stolen property.

 

[PowerUp]

Powerup, you're suggesting that "other" vendors would not follow the same recourse if it were to happen to them, that it would simply be a cost of doing business? I would suggest to you that in material transactions, the seller would not simply chalk it up to the cost of doing business. Allow me to provide an example which may be extreme I admit but illustrates the point.

Suppose a Person A buys a car and somehow manages to convince a bank who do all kinds of due diligence to lend them the money. Then, Person A goes out and sells the car to Person B. Then Person A decides not to pay the bank anymore... you can bet the bank will repossess the car from the current owner who should have been smart enough to have the right procedure in place to make sure what they were buying was clean.

Another perhaps more extreme example would be stolen property that gets sold to a third party. You can bet if the original owner finds out who the current owner is they let the authorities know and with sufficient proof of original ownership my guess is they would be able to reclaim the "stolen" property that changed hands improperly.

Fraud doesn't happen very often but I would suggest as domain values continue to go up, it will become more and more attractive to commit fraudulent acts. These are illegal, and when they occur the victims have the right to be compensated.

In any case, I still suggest that being wary is your best defence.

The point I'm trying to make is, you have security features, but obviously they were not enough. Do you use Verified by Visa or Master Secure Code? (Sorry, I've backordered many domains from Pool but never got the chance to win any domains and pay Pool before.) And it is not right to pass on the cost of fraud onto the consumers because of flaws in the security. Yes, I know no systems is perfect. But I still believe that the business should bear the risks that come along with the rewards of doing the business.

How would a buyer know that the seller is the scammer? The buyer could have doen a whois search. And as far as the buyer is concerned, the seller is the legal owner (at that point in time) of the domain. Yes, the updated whois dating back to 2 or 3 days ago might raise a red flag, but what is wrong or illegal with this? Nothing. So, based on all the available information, as far as the buyer is concerned, the seller is the legal owner of the domain.

If Pool, or other merchants had been able to detect the fraud and prevented it from happening in the first place, then there would not be more victims with the fraudster selling stolen properties.

 

[Dave_Z]

How currently Pool is victim, they processed invoice on the basis of stolen credit card information with out proper verification, once they got charge back from real customer, and they put hold on domain name. Here looser is only domainer, but eventually Pool.com will pay for all these approaches.

I already explained how in cases of chargebacks:

http://www.namepros.com/domain-name...namescout-com-trying-scam-me.html#post2690988

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.

Now let's see:

1. Person A registers and pays the registrar directly for the domain name/s.

2. Registrar registers and pays the Registry directly for the registrations.

3. After 120 hours or so, person A makes offers to sell the domain names.

4. Person B posts their offer to person A, work out the details, then agree on
a price.

5. Person B pays person A in full.

6. Person A transfers the domain names to person B.

7. Few days later, person A does a chargeback on the domain name or so with
the registrar and succeeds.

8. The registrar lost money from those registrations and can't get their money
from the Registry.

And the registrar should continue providing service for something they lost out
their money on and won't possibly recoup? No, the merchant doesn't have to
eat the chargeback costs on their own given they're a business, not a charity.

Whether they'll eat the costs of that chargeback or not is for them to decide.
They'll probably do so if that third party is willing to compensate the merchant
for those chargebacks made by the one who sold the product or service, but
what third party is stupid enough to do that given they've also lost money to
that original seller?

And it is not right to pass on the cost of fraud onto the consumers because of flaws in the security.

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?

 

[DNBro]

I already explained how in cases of chargebacks:

http://www.namepros.com/domain-name...namescout-com-trying-scam-me.html#post2690988


Now let's see:

1. Person A registers and pays the registrar directly for the domain name/s.

2. Registrar registers and pays the Registry directly for the registrations.

3. After 120 hours or so, person A makes offers to sell the domain names.

4. Person B posts their offer to person A, work out the details, then agree on
a price.

5. Person B pays person A in full.

6. Person A transfers the domain names to person B.

7. Few days later, person A does a chargeback on the domain name or so with
the registrar and succeeds.

8. The registrar lost money from those registrations and can't get their money
from the Registry.

And the registrar should continue providing service for something they lost out
their money on and won't possibly recoup? No, the merchant doesn't have to
eat the chargeback costs on their own given they're a business, not a charity.

Whether they'll eat the costs of that chargeback or not is for them to decide.
They'll probably do so if that third party is willing to compensate the merchant
for those chargebacks made by the one who sold the product or service, but
what third party is stupid enough to do that given they've also lost money to
that original seller?

None here suggesting that company have to lose money due to chargebacks, but it usual part of online business. Company not getting chargeback means either company not doing business or they already implemented any prevention system.

In my case I had loosed $64.00 same ways so many other persons loosed their money, mainly due to their poor quality system. Every individual treated that lose as a part of their business why same rule will not applicable to company???

I’m buying domains directly from TDNAM auction, even from auction sites, here how many scam case of TDNAM or other auction sites reported?, search here in NP itself, why scammers have any special taste for Pool or they kept their doors open for scammers.

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?

When you are running business, you are ready to take some risk or even ready to loss sometimes, only suggestion is bring some better business standards to stop/avoid scams and minimize chargebacks.

 

[accent]

A big game of pin-the-loss-on-someone-else.

POOL YOU DISGUST ME!!!

Your company, despite whatever protections you had in place, got scammed. So now you try to push that entire loss on someone, anyone, except yourself.

And what is your loss?
Not $60, mind you, that bid was fraudulent.
The loss was your marginal cost - Wholesale Registration Fee.

And to come here and tell us we should spend hours of research on a $65 domain, and not expect you to vet your buyers before you push a domain???

Go after the scammer, but leave honest people alone, if not for decency, then to protect your company's reputation.

 

[diddie]

None here suggesting that company have to lose money due to chargebacks, but it usual part of online business. Company not getting chargeback means either company not doing business or they already implemented any prevention system.

In my case I had loosed $64.00 same ways so many other persons loosed their money, mainly due to their poor quality system. Every individual treated that lose as a part of their business why same rule will not applicable to company???

I’m buying domains directly from TDNAM auction, even from auction sites, here how many scam case of TDNAM or other auction sites reported?, search here in NP itself, why scammers have any special taste for Pool or they kept their doors open for scammers.

You know why ? :

Because they're not going after them, they pass the loss on their customers and the biggest and disgusting thing into that is that the domain costed them only the registration fee (around $6 i imagine) and using their Catching system (but its already a working machine, a couple of domains less or more doesn't make a difference)

so YOU guys at POOL make money of people being scammed because of your POOR SYSTEM

i repeat what i said in my own thread: i'm gonna talk a lot about it, not letting this go, it is just injustice: YOU STILL WANT TO MAKE MONEY OF US BEING SCAMMED !!

I would accept to share the loss, but asking $65 for domain (where i had 7 in that situation) is just stealing, and avoid to sue the Individual responsible for this, SO JUST SHARE THE LOSS! and DO NOT PASS IT ON VICTIMS OF THIS SCAM

 

[gpmgroup]

Let’s reverse the situation

You sell a name to the scammer and he does a fraud/chargeback.
You’ve already released the name and he’s sold it on to someone else.

What happens now?
Should Pool move the name back to your account?

Who stands the loss?
You for selling the name to the scammer?
The transacting company (bank/creditcard etc.)?
The new owner for buying the name?

Irrespective of the answers to those questions I think Rasman’s advice is excellent –
buyer beware - make sure you do due diligence

 

[diddie]

I see a lot of Pool's defensors here, my only question are :

How much costed really to POOL those names ?
How much they want from Scammed people ?

Why you still want to make money off scammed people ? Not Recup loss, but earn money, each domain lost by this way costed you less than ten buck.... SHAME ON YOU POOL!


Just simple questions, give me answers, i don't wanna talk about the system that isn't perfect, just why you want make money of scammed people ????

 

[Michael]

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.

If you logged into your Godaddy account and found your domain had been transferred out while you were on vacation and sold, would you just "eat" the loss or would you go after it and try to recover it?

There is not a single good reason why Pool should have to eat the loss, it is just the mob mentality around here where everyone thinks the "man" is out to get them and all corporations are evil and trying to screw the little guy. Get over it, it is really getting old. Do your due diligence and make sure you know who you are buying from, and if you get screwed, take responsibility for your bad decisions and don't try to pin it on someone else.

 

[diddie]

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.

 

[DNBro]

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.

If you logged into your Godaddy account and found your domain had been transferred out while you were on vacation and sold, would you just "eat" the loss or would you go after it and try to recover it?

There is not a single good reason why Pool should have to eat the loss, it is just the mob mentality around here where everyone thinks the "man" is out to get them and all corporations are evil and trying to screw the little guy. Get over it, it is really getting old. Do your due diligence and make sure you know who you are buying from, and if you get screwed, take responsibility for your bad decisions and don't try to pin it on someone else.

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.