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

[DaveX]

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.

 

[anantj]

@spoiltrider has now at least one straight line of attack. she has the evidences of the hack of her hosted account and emails; she has the evidence from WHOIS changes; she has faked documents; she only needs now to put the heat under Network Solutions to disclose why they let the domain go, from the owner for 20 years, without due diligence. It will be funny to watch they defend against IPs tracks, account information changes, transfer of domain to other registrars, and some more juicy stuff.

Exactly. This should be settled in court and not on Namepros. I think we're way beyond this being settled amicably

 

[tonecas]

i don't agree. decision in courts is a side action. discussion in namepros and dissecting the deal is a must to the community.

 

[tonyk2000]

maybe time to start a go fund me page

Indeed, if Rebecca has difficulties to pay her lawyer(s) - it may be the solution. If the funds will be used to pay the lawyer(s) - I'll donate some $$$ and hope other members will... It is also due to professinal domainers interest - it would be great if the court could analyse and pronounce on Netsol and Escrow.com business practices.

 

[Grilled]

I would say most definitely, as this was orchestrated by someone with a superior knowledge of the domain industry and it's security vulnerabilities!

Well Mr. and/or Mrs. alleged Hacker / Thief -- You were sloppy. And you didn't cover your tracks as well as you think. I recommend you return the alleged money allegedly @BoothDomains (or Jack) allegedly paid you.

@BoothDomains -- Do you (or your lawyer) have any objection to posting (or emailing Rebecca) the phone number(s) you (or Jack) allegedly corresponded with? To include whether or not you called them, OR if they called you. When reporting this crime, I'm sure the authorities would like to know this information.

 

[Grilled]

Are you saying with certainty that both the Jack/Jakes are the same? Also, isn't it interesting that it is being claimed that there was a jack/jake who was in contact with Rebecca when his name itself isn't known with certainty. That, to me, is conjecture.
Please provide proof of your claim above.

HERE -- From Page 20 @BoothDomains confirms Jack shared the communication he (Jack) had with the seller.

Jack is a friend and he brought CQD.com to my attention and I purchased it. He shared all his communications with the seller with me prior to the purchase and everything seemed legitimate.

Proof that both Jack/Jake are the same? Well, Jack [email protected] (which was the name attached to the email screenshots) signed his name as Jake in the email screenshots. This indicated (to me) that the seller might have known Jack by the name Jake. Forensics (soon to be shared) solidified this belief.

More HERE -- from page 30

 

[Grilled]

Also, isn't it interesting that it is being claimed that there was a jack/jake who was in contact with Rebecca when his name itself isn't known with certainty. That, to me, is conjecture.
Please provide proof of your claim above.

To clarify, Jack/Jake was believed (per the real Rebecca) to be in contact with somebody other than the real Rebecca. e.g. what is assumed to be an alleged hacker / thief that allegedly compromised the real Rebecca's email(s), and NetSol account, to allegedly sell CQD.com to allegedly James (or maybe Jack?) allegedly without the real Rebecca's permission / authorization.

 

[anantj]

To clarify, Jack/Jake was believed (per the real Rebecca) to be in contact with somebody other than the real Rebecca. e.g. what is assumed to be an alleged hacker / thief that allegedly compromised the real Rebecca's email(s), and NetSol account, to allegedly sell CQD.com to allegedly James (or maybe Jack?) allegedly without the real Rebecca's permission / authorization.

Thanks Grilled. If I'm undertstanding you correctly, Jack/Jake did corresponded with someone who they *thought* was Rebecca, in good faith, but in reality it turned out was the thief. Right?
I don't see this as the buyers fault in this case. They WERE attempting to do their due diligence

 

[tonecas]

Thanks Grilled. If I'm undertstanding you correctly, Jack/Jake did corresponded with someone who they *thought* was Rebecca, in good faith, but in reality it turned out was the thief. Right?
I don't see this as the buyers fault in this case. They WERE attempting to do their due diligence

it depends on how did they made contact.

using email? sorry, that isn't due diligence since the email is the first thing to be compromised.

using phone? what phone number did they reached? did they reach the correct phone numbers, the ones that were shown on WHOIS history and other domains owed by Rebecca and other information about her that can be found on an Intenet search? or were they reached by a call back? last case is not due diligence because income calls can be spoofed.

did they looked at WHOIS records and if the domain was for sale on the major platforms? because if they did not then that is not due diligence. a look into WHOIS history would signal immediately that something could be wrong, specially to a professional domainer. looking to the major sales platform would lead them to see the domain for sale at $150k. Rebecca been willing to sell for just 2?k would be a big drop in expectations. this for itself doesn't mean much but combining with other information would signal red flags. so there was also not due diligence here.

 

[maya-zir]

I cant understand something..
If somebody buy so expensive domain, why not to ask a registrar support team about the domain transfer and push history?
This is so easy, just contact the support and if the domain just came to the seller account, check from where and ask other support..
If the domain was at least a few month or years on the same account this is the sign that everything is ok

 

[tonecas]

I cant understand something..
If somebody buy so expensive domain, why not to ask a registrar support team about the domain transfer and push history?
This is so easy, just contact the support and if the domain just came to the seller account, check from where and ask other support..
If the domain was at least a few month or years on the same account this is the sign that everything is ok

generally, Registrar's support is a joke, particularly in Network Solutions. also, i doubt they would give any information to a second party. last, the domain can be in the same account for long and that does not mean the domain hasn't been hijacked, because the account can be compromised by many ways.

 

[wwwweb]

What is the end game here, wait out the statue of limitations?

 

[golan]

i don't agree. decision in courts is a side action. discussion in namepros and dissecting the deal is a must to the community.

Yes. In an ideal world, full of rainbow unicorns.

Do you have all papers? No. Have you seen all logs? No. Can you subpoena Netsol, Escrow, phone companies, banks? No. HOW (AND WHAT) ARE YOU GOING TO DISSECT?

If somebody buy so expensive domain, why not to ask a registrar support team about the domain transfer and push history?
This is so easy, just contact the support

LOL. Have you ever tried to contact NetSol support?

 

[maya-zir]

LOL. Have you ever tried to contact NetSol support?

So, all you keep your expensive domains at third party crap registrars?

 

[forge]

What is the end game here, wait out the statue of limitations?

I think you mean statute.

 

[anantj]

So, all you keep your expensive domains at third party crap registrars?

Crap registrar's like? Compared to NetSol?

 

[tjl92]

So sorry for your loss @BoothDomains I admit I did not read 43 pages lol but I read the story from the first couple. CRAZY!!! I didnt even know NetSol was that bad being new around here, not that I ever considered them, but something to keep in mind for me on this journey too.

 

[PAVAN]

So sorry for your loss @BoothDomains I admit I did not read 43 pages lol but I read the story from the first couple. CRAZY!!! I didnt even know NetSol was that bad being new around here, not that I ever considered them, but something to keep in mind for me on this journey too.

James Booth got the domain. But it is now said by the owner that the domain was stolen and sold to James Booth. So the owner Rebecca is at loss here. But both are victims as of now.

 

[maya-zir]

Crap registrar's like? Compared to NetSol?

If your registrar doesnt help you and support team keep silence or responds with to much delay, then yes, this registrar is a crap.

 

[anantj]

If your registrar doesnt help you and support team keep silence or responds with to much delay, then yes, this registrar is a crap.

Care you share which registrar gie you full whois history details of a domain as well as previous owner detailed information? I'd love to use that registrar

 

[maya-zir]

Care you share which registrar gie you full whois history details of a domain as well as previous owner detailed information? I'd love to use that registrar

I didnt said if the registrar doesnt give the the whole domain history - it is a crap registrar.
I just said if you try to reach a support and never get any help or get it in 3-4 days or later - this is a crap registrar.
It is also possible to try to reach the ICANN...
Anyway, if the seller is interested in sell the domain he will help you to get the permision for the registrar.
If tomorrow somebody offer me 26k for my domain - I will ask registrar to confirm to the seller all he would ask them.