- Joined
- Jul 3, 2021
- Topics
- 317
- Posts
- 1,460
- Likes
- 1,290
- From
- Toronto, ON
VPN.com files $26 million lawsuit against domain investor - OnlineDomain.com
Scratching my head about: commission rate and the escrow company they used.
VPN.com files $26 million lawsuit against domain investor (1 Viewing)
- Topic Starter silentg
- Start date
- Replies: Replies 2
- Views: Views 382
Scratching my head about: commission rate and the escrow company they used.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Topics
- 62
- Posts
- 4,056
- Likes
- 2,265
Sounds like they were taken to the cleaners by a fraudster and are now trying to blame the actual people the fraudster was impersonating. Their "evidence" on the email address is absolutely idiotic, as the investor claims to not have been involved and his email was compromised, while VPN counters that "there was no evidence of email spoofing". Huh? No one said there was any spoofing.
And check out those broker fees to VPN, with the "agreement" stating VPN would receive 50% of the $12M purchase price - no warning signs there LOL. People often send others $6M just for doing nothing - flashing a pile of fake money is how scammers hook suckers.
This is going to be interesting, as I think this will come down to whether VPN can prove the money was actually received by those people they are suing, and not to a fraudster.
And check out those broker fees to VPN, with the "agreement" stating VPN would receive 50% of the $12M purchase price - no warning signs there LOL. People often send others $6M just for doing nothing - flashing a pile of fake money is how scammers hook suckers.
This is going to be interesting, as I think this will come down to whether VPN can prove the money was actually received by those people they are suing, and not to a fraudster.
Last edited:
GeorgeK
Leap.com
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Topics
- 18
- Posts
- 228
- Likes
- 364
- From
- Toronto, ON
I don’t know what VPN[.]com is thinking, but this complaint doesn’t put themselves in a good light.
Beyond the obvious lack of due diligence (e.g. they don’t mention ever authenticating the parties by phone – everything appears to be via emails; use of a sketchy escrow; unclear if there were separate written legal contracts, etc.), there’s the hilarious “commission” that they negotiated for themselves (see paragraphs 23-25 on page 6 of the PDF).
https://onlinedomain.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/1-2022-06-29-VPN-Complaint.pdf
VPN[.]com’s own own website, on the Intellectual Property → Domain Names page, claims:
Another reason to deal with “Principals Only.”
Beyond the obvious lack of due diligence (e.g. they don’t mention ever authenticating the parties by phone – everything appears to be via emails; use of a sketchy escrow; unclear if there were separate written legal contracts, etc.), there’s the hilarious “commission” that they negotiated for themselves (see paragraphs 23-25 on page 6 of the PDF).
https://onlinedomain.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/1-2022-06-29-VPN-Complaint.pdf
VPN[.]com’s own own website, on the Intellectual Property → Domain Names page, claims:
Another reason to deal with “Principals Only.”
Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |