Corey: Requesting this be handled as a Scam Report

This should have been posted in the SL as an amendment to provide the additional evidence you guys said I was missing. Please treat this as a scam report: if the evidence proves that Corey went against our agreement, you can't just ignore it because it's convenient. After all, I lost about $2,000 because of Corey's actions. Yes, obviously it's a more high profile case with a more complicated agreement than just, "you give me 2 rune bars for $0.01," but a scam report is a scam report. And if I'm missing something, instead of making Corey, the scammer, innocent, please let me know what I'm missing just as you do on any other scam report (i.e, you have to provide screenshots proving this happened).

tl;dr version: I show evidence of what Corey knew, at the time of the delivery: that he was supposed to call/text, check IPs, and save all the evidence, or else he would be responsible for the full chargeback amount plus $100.

What I will be proving, as requested: Corey did not do what he was required, the mentioned policies were in place.

First, let's assume that Corey delivered these orders, based on the previous evidence provided:



Below are the detailed delivery information that RSUltimate agents go by when delivering orders. Please check the order numbers. They match those in the screenshot above, that Corey delivered.

http://puu.sh/13Wm5/a4cab2bd3cab2f397a8a459a4f11f738
http://puu.sh/13Wmr/1bf5abdffd85c11e6e8de72f148dcb4c
http://puu.sh/13Wn0/c9d0bd39389611c5ca037831f1f739b3

These orders will now be referred to as "500M Order," "999M Order," and "175M Order," based on the order size.

Please notice the chargeback date on each:
999M ORDER - May 12
500M ORDER - May 12
175M ORDER - May 12

Now, the contract Corey, signed BEFORE these chargebacks occured, included a clause, which made Corey responsible for all gold delivered. Yes, the gold was delivered afterward so it did not have to necessarily follow procedures outlined in the contract, but it does not change the fact that this clause would still apply:



There are many other clauses, and most of this contract was already known before the date of signature, but let's give Corey an advantage, and invalidate this contract, as the orders were delivered at a previous date. Once again, the contract was already valid by the time the chargebacks came in, but before this contract, we had several written and verbal agreements. Here's one that was explicitly agreed upon by Corey via PM. Now, this was agreed upon by Corey on the day it was delivered, and was sent to him earlier. The date will appear as 03/25 while the orders are 03/24, but Robert Mayberry's orders were HELD by Google temporarily until the 25th, when Corey delivered them via MSN. Once again, these procedures were already in place, but this was the first day I begin asking my workers to put it in explicit written form.

http://puu.sh/13Wkw/f19ce179a6cdd6de368bcf68e661b848

Now, from this agreement, which was, again, agreed upon before the Robert Mayberry deliveries that Corey carried out, there's a very important part we will be focusing on:

The only thing that this changes is make Corey owe me $300 additional money, so if Corey says that the second, more specific contract is invalid, the agreement that these three transactions fall under is this one. To re-iterate, Corey was at least supposed to confirm the user's IP, phone number, and keep this evidence.

Corey made two claims:

1. He called, but he was not supposed to keep the proof
2. He was not supposed to call

Both of these claims are instantly invalidated, based on the agreement. Again, Hahanerd, a worker at the time, as well as the contract, confirm that Corey was supposed to call Robert Mayberry.

Even so, a more detailed version of how orders were supposed to be delivered was included:

Point a states that Corey should cancel and refund the customer if there's any problems with it. These were the following problems with the order: the IP of the customer did not match a previous order, the customer placed 3 consecutive orders to bypass our 999M limit, the customer's phone was never confirmed.

Corey followed point b properly.

Point c states that Corey should have called and/or texted the customer, and verified their phone number. Corey skipped this step.

Point d states that the IP should be close to the address, which it is, however, Mayberry's previous order(s) had a different IP, as proven by this earlier delivery: http://puu.sh/YcYi/5ea4445e03f54a32c156f4691165f1fd. Mayberry was switching between two houses, which is not permitted. From common sense alone, Corey should have halted the order and contacted me.

Point e, once again, re-iterates that Corey should use common sense. The beginning of this agreement states that merely not knowing isn't enough: always contact me for assistance.

Point f was done correctly, as seen by the delivery screenshots on the scam report.


-----------------------------------------


So what does this prove?

• Corey was aware of our calling policy
• Corey did not submit the required evidence, when asked for it

Below is a screenshot of each chargeback we disputed. It includes no evidence of a phone call, once again confirming that Corey did not submit it when asked for it.

http://puu.sh/13Wnt/f9836dc8f23dcc168d100db4fb0468c7
http://puu.sh/13WnL/53ee9c10a5e9bfcb4c20a28799e164c1
http://puu.sh/13WnW/f833d01a194ee2a2a2f06cc3dc4d27a9

As further evidence, here is what Corey sent me when I requested evidence for the Mayberry orders, around the time when these chargebacks were filed. Notice how he has absolutely no evidence of calls.

http://puu.sh/Yd9I/0cce681677c3e177a57693b07977918c
http://puu.sh/Yd9T/72392707334142f7dc40b802cd285046

The other screenshot for the smaller order was never submitted, and I had to beg him to send it and dig through a pile of files he sent me at a later time. Also notice how the customer was given 10% more gold than he purchased, which was our policy for late delivered orders, once again re-iterating how the written agreement was before these deliveries.




Please read over this and get back to me with anything more you would like.


​

 

I never have said we were not required to call, I keep telling you this and you have yet to prove it to me. All I've said is that we were not required to keep proof of the calls, which would be recordings (the only form of proof).

I called the customer, probably even SMSed him as well (can't remember it was far too long ago/delivered too many orders), and followed all other RSU procedures.

I personally don't see any solid proof showing that I was negligent and caused you any damage, nor that you having the proof you claim to have required would have shown a more favorable outcome. Regardless, in your screenshots it says that the CARD ISSUER reversed the payments initally, not Google Checkout, so please also prove that you filed a dispute with their card issuer, as Google Checkout cannot act in favor of a card issuer. Essentially, you can prove what you want to GC, but if the card issuer took the money from them, they will not cover your loss.

Anyhow, I'll just let the staff handle this report, hopefully its the last of it, because I'm honestly sick of the worrying.

I'll check back to this in a few days when the hurricane is over/power is restored (http://vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&ID=26489 so Grave/Hahanerd can't make a SF thread saying I'm lying, although Grave definitely will now just to mock me).

 

This thread also proves that you were required to keep the proof.

This thread also proves that you ignored the following procedures:

• You should have cancelled the order in the first place since IP didn't match previous orders
• You shouldn't have permitted a customer to place 3 consecutive orders going past our 999M limit
• You didn't use any common sense when delivering the orders: you took the order to your personal MSN, never kept logs of it, never kept proof of all the things necessary, and most importantly:
• You never contacted me for assistance, and went ahead with all your mistakes

Obviously I cannot rewrite history, but it is proven (and you can check PlayerAuctions, and other gold sites) that a phone call greatly reduces fraud. So does using your brain and seeing that a customer was ordering way too much for it to be safe.

Now you're just being an idiot. Google Checkout is a payment gateway, similar to PayPal, and they do all communications to card issues on your behalf. So what I sent Google gets forwarded to the card issuer.


Corey, the fact of the matter is, we had an agreement where if you don't follow the procedures exactly, you assumed all responsibility. It doesn't matter whether or not having what I asked of you would have a more favorable outcome, even though it obviously would (plus, if you followed procedures, we would have never delivered the orders, and hence, saved ourselves from losing the gold in the first place), it matters on whether you followed the procedures or not, and you did not follow all of them, and therefore, based on our agreement, you were at fault.

Please don't turn this into another wall-of-text argument just because you can post on scam reports as an ex-mod. If you have any further evidence to add, go ahead, but I frankly don't care about your opinions on the matter anymore.

 

As I've stated in the previous thread, I did contact you for assistance, particulary directly after the orders because they were undelivered on Dorian's shift. It was my shift when Mayberry returned (I think, that or I was covering for dorian on another one of his shifts), and we had a policy that if someone made an order on your shift, you had to deliver it. I contacted you for permission to deliver the orders, and was told to deliver the orders and split commission with Dorian. I'm sure Dorian will remember the whole incident, because we got in quite the quarrel over who gets the commission.

For the record, Dorian ended up getting no commission because he did something you didn't like, I can't remember for sure, but thats what went down.

If this was a year and a half ago I'd most likely be able to prove the above (the conversation may have been voice chat), but now I'm left here with no defense. You expect that your little evidence and WORD OF MOUTH from both yourself and Hahanerd should be concrete, but mine isn't worth a grain of salt. You also refused to take a statement from Dorian, because "he did a worse job than me", but the fact of the matter is, you're afraid he remembers something that you won't like.

I'm fed up with this, and I just want it brought to and end once and for all, for both my time/reputation, and for the amount of staff time that it is wasting.

 

I wouldn't call full evidence of you breaking our agreement "little" evidence.

Go ahead and ask Dorian if you think it will help your case. I actually told you on the previous thread that Dorian could also confirm the procedures you were supposed to follow, so I assume you left him out to safe yourself the additional trouble. I can, however, let you know that you never contacted me about those orders. What else is there to defend yourself with? Every single fallacy you state, even if true, won't change the case: you broke the agreement, and the consequences is being responsible for the full chargeback amount.

 

So again, your word is better than mine, and nothing else matters.

And I don't see whats irrelevant about your boss telling you to deliver orders, ones that he now claims weren't supposed to be delivered.

I'm done posting here, you're impossible and I'd rather leave this to the staff.

 

It has nothing to do with my word. It has to do with the agreement you AGREED to, and then broke, and the repercussions of it which you are trying to avoid. Eveything you have claimed have been just your word, while I backed all of what I said with evidence.

I have evidence where:

• I stated what agreement(s) you agreed to at what dates
• When the chargebacks took place
• What you failed to provide to me when I requested it
• Proof that you indeed had to keep evidence of the calls, at least to the time where I asked for them and you failed to provide them
• You agreed to pay the damages caused if you did not explicitly follow the procedure

Thank god. Can I at least trust you to not weasel your way out of this one?

 

I am going to seek input from Dorian before this goes any farther.

 

Thank you.

 

1.5 to 2 years ago?

I'd like to note that I was told I was NOT responsible for the full order, just the commission. Therefore, I did not take/keep any evidence, and this late in the game its literally impossible to prove anything at all.

I can't prove I called via skype because skype only goes back 6 months, I can't prove I requested his assistance in these orders because I no longer have the skype logs, it goes on.

I admit I was untimely in paying the commission back to him, however thats directly due to my financial situation over the past few months, which Grave was okay with every time he contacted me.

 

It occurred in March 2011, with the chargebacks in May.

The agreement made it very clear that you would at least have to keep the evidence for 180 days, and when you were requested for the evidence in May, only screenshots were given. So no, me giving you a year to pay me back doesn't necessarily excuse you for not being able to give the evidence when requested at the proper time.

The agreement states otherwise. I do believe I gave you a grace period where you could pay back just the commission if you handled it in a timely manner, but you obviously did not do that.

 

Again, I gave you the evidence I was required to keep, which was screenshots of trade screen and our notepad outlining our incoming/outgoing GP.

You did not give me a grace period, you flat out told me I won't be held responsible for the full order because I followed procedure, and now are telling me the exact opposite.

You often outline IP changes, but let me outline something to you. You told us that the IP had to come back REASONABLY CLOSE, not the exact same. In any event, your business cannot operate by making them use the same exact IP all the time because of dynamic IP issues. The IPs were very close to any other IPs used in another order, don't forget the person using the card was a direct relative of the card owner (we later found out), and they lived very close to one another.

 

The full contract was not implemented until after the orders were delivered by Corey, but before the chargebacks occurred, making it effective. However, Corey and others said it should be invalid, and therefore, the premise of this dispute is based on an earlier written agreement that was done before the delivery of the orders.

Corey was an independent contractor for my website, RSUltimate, so the value he received was the commission from proper sales.

Here's the agreement: http://puu.sh/13Wkw/f19ce179a6cdd6de368bcf68e661b848
Here's the contract, with Corey's info cropped out:

Page 1 - http://puu.sh/141BY/b61fd76f7f9cae77ea32d9125858780e
Page 2 - http://puu.sh/141Co/f3f9f76465a1519d91ff7bb1c61eed88
Page 3 - http://puu.sh/141Ct/ab1d8c4d3dd65cdbc285a783c67289dc
Page 4 -
Page 5 - http://puu.sh/141CK/514646c2af9e1e23dbe0dcce4938fa0e
Page 6 - http://puu.sh/141CT/a03159b35a62b19ba5d8d6e977587759
Page 7 - http://puu.sh/141Dk/70f11843ad64b745578ca8820cdd4e8c

I believe the unedited/cropped PDF is in SL.

 

The contract IS invalid, you're trying to bind my actions to a contract AFTER they happened, the filing of the chargeback was not MY ACTION, it was that of the customer.

Just so you know, --- has all of our full names in it, uncropped.

EDIT:

@Richard

Its not so much the contract that bugs me about this, because I know I followed procedures. Its the fact that he told me I was not responsible for the full order, and now expects me to either come up with evidence that he implied I didnt need or pay him $450 ($150 I already paid him for commission, and now another $300 for negligence).

 

The previous agreement that was in effect during the problematic actions was this one: http://puu.sh/13Wkw/f19ce179a6cdd6de368bcf68e661b848

It's not $300 Corey, it's the full amount of the chargebacks. The $300 would be something that was in our previous agreement, and in my mind, I still think the newer contract should be considered, which would only make you responsible for the full amount of the chargebacks rather than the full amount of the chargebacks plus $300. And once again, I never told you that you were not responsible for the full order. I specifically told you that you were indeed responsible for it, but if you managed to pay me back in a timely manner and before it had to escalate to a scam report, since you were my friend, you could just pay back the commissions. Corey, you can't just go back to that now after over a year, when you didn't even meet the qualifications of the plea bargain.

 

I agree.