COLTS7841 - A technical Core - PROLIFIC SCAMMER - BAN IMMEDIATELY

Also I have a feeling JohnP seems to be someone else's account which is meant to look like it's me. It's not me.

 

You can clearly see I have contacted him after the sale.What difference is it between prior or post? (Don't answer this, it's meant to be a rhetorical question)
The matter of the fact is I had 100% confirmed he was the OO through exchanged vouches and his selling thread that he was the OO as the stats CLEARLY matched

Also the facts are the ones posted on my report.

 

Bump this comment please

I can only ask mods/admins to judge this situation with the facts provided. To use their heads and hearts instead of the fucked up real world technicalities. This is gaming forum with a set of market rules. This is not real world assests but instead is virtual goods so your 'laws'; which are being BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION should be dusted away.

1) I purchased the account, of Racks on Racks, fullwell knowing that Colts was the original owner. The vouch left on his thread, the vouch on the original selling page of Colts was more than enough confirmation for me. I had NO reason to contact colts. Why should I?
Colts should NOT be vouching for a transaction that is not completed. That is very misleading. This also should warrant a ban under fake vouching.

2) After purchase I have contacted Colts. Colts has opened a scam report on Racks. By doing this he has acknowledged he has been scammed.
How on earth do I become the victim here? He was the one scammed and that burden should not be placed on me in any way shape or form.

3) I have contacted colts after his report asking him what to do, he told me nothing as it was him who was scammed. Why say that and then recover the account the next day?
How can you steal my account back without telling me or making a report on what to do. This warrants a ban as it is straight out scamming.
I had GP on my account. Don't you even dare ask me why I said to Racks I had 525M only. You must be stupid to not know that is a form of negotiation.

4) You saying he was not allowed to resell the account is pure bollocks, your unawareness of this is bollocks too. His account selling thread was active for a prolonged week. His signature space had a link to the account thread. His Skype status says 'selling a Main'.

5) I honestly don't know what to say anymore. This facts are simple. Colts was scammed. I wasn't. But now I have that burden. You have an 80M payment which you are keeping which I find upmost ridiculous in this scenario. That 80M should go to me depending on the verdict, if not to one of his scam victims.

6) I have done absolutely nothing wrong. Racks was not banned at the time of transaction, he did not scam me. I followed all the right procedures by confirming you were indeed the OO.

Please please please for the love of god see the light on what I am saying. I am innocent in all of this. I have done NOTHING wrong but yet, on my shoulders, lays the weight of all this mishap.

 

@EskyBoy you didnt confirm he was the OO you "Bollock"

 

I can see both sides of the argument but ultimately it comes down to this:

Colts left a vouch which gives the impression that the trade was COMPLETED... Which means Eskyboy saw this and took it as a sign of purchase, which he rightfully did so.

Racks had an open thread for over a week selling the account which to my knowledge was never challenged or confronted by Colts.

Therefore the burden of the scam falls on Colts, not Esky as it was Colts fault for vouching for a deal that wasn't completed nor confronting Racks for selling an account that wasn't "his".

 

I agree with this point, but you have to understand that by Colts leaving Racks a vouch for the account sale, Esky wasn't in the wrong to assume the account was in any kind of compromised state... Vouches are for successfully completed trades if I'm not mistaken.

 

Why are you interpreting your own rules so twistdly

It clearly says 'IF YOU HAVE GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE'

Which I did.

 

Again, I see you're trying to take a black/white point of view but this really isn't the case in this situation.

Colts should have never vouched for Racks if the trade was not completed. But because he DID (when he shouldn't have) it mis-lead someone into buying the account from Racks.

Aswell as this, Colts had a week to confront Racks on his selling of an account that wasn't his, and by not doing so it also mis-leads Esky into thinking his purchase would be safe.

But that's just my 2 cents I agree that the account should be returned to Esky, Colts got scammed by Racks and that should not be taken out of Eskys pocket just because he failed to contact the OO before purchase, he clearly wouldn't have purchased the account if there was any visible issue.

I think it's safe to say Esky would have never bought the account if Colts didn't leave a vouch, nor would he have bought it if Colts confronted Racks like he should have.

 

Lmao I am legit done with you

Can you not read my posts?

I have 2 SOLID reasons

1) Exchanged vouches between the two
2) Look at Colts account thread and look at Racks - both same account stats

If this isn't enough then idk what is.

 

Hey @EskyBoy. Would you mind posting from a home IP (not mobile or Uni)?

Also, can you provide screenshots for the entire conversation between you and Racks? If it's a lot, you can make a video and scroll instead.

 

I will do shin when I get home
Currently on night shift at work
Won't be back till 8am then I will sleep so will be a while from now

Also I will do the pictures from next time I am home

 

Alright, thanks. Appreciate it.