Corey: Requesting this be handled as a Scam Report

Well the 'new contract' is irrelevant in this case because it was not agreed to at the time of the actions. The old contract may apply; at least for the provisions in which it is valid. The very last line of the contract that says it is subject to change is invalid. A contract must have fixed terms to be valid.

Now my question: Was the commission paid to Corey for the three transactions in question? If so, on what date and who paid it?

 

[Corey]

Yes, the commission was paid to me (and was refunded to Grave). How it was paid, who paid it, and when it was paid is a mystery.

 

[Grave]

The old contract may apply; at least for the provisions in which it is valid. The very last line of the contract that says it is subject to change is invalid. A contract must have fixed terms to be valid.

The old agreement was more of a basis of trying to compile everything together until the contract was completed, and it was meant more for Sythe purposes. I began drafting this after workers became confused about certain parts of our basic agreements in our conversations.

Now my question: Was the commission paid to Corey for the three transactions in question? If so, on what date and who paid it?

Yes, the commission was paid to me (and was refunded to Grave). How it was paid, who paid it, and when it was paid is a mystery.

The date would most likely be sometime in late March or early April. I do recall you being paid to a PayPal account near the end of your career, from the RSUltimate business PayPal.

 

[Corey]

The date would most likely be sometime in late March or early April. I do recall you being paid to a PayPal account near the end of your career, from the RSUltimate business PayPal.

This is true, but I don't think it was for Mayberry. I know Dorian sent those Paypal funds you are referring to, if it matters. I could try to get the date and amount if you really want Richard, but I don't see how it will help. Not to mention the amount wouldn't help because I would have been paid for more than just the mayberry orders, if thats how I was paid for that week.

 

The orders may have been cause for suspicion, although this is not clear based on the evidence I have received so far.

Nowhere in the agreement does it specify there is a 999M order limit. So far I have not seen evidence that Corey broke the agreement that was in effect at that time.

@Grave:

1. Can you please point out the specific provision of the agreement that Corey broke, and the evidence you are presenting that he did break it.

2. When was the commission paid? And on what basis and at what time was the commission reversed?

 

[Sypherz]

Note: I've edited out screenshots which contain personal information.

 

[Grave]

@Grave:

1. Can you please point out the specific provision of the agreement that Corey broke, and the evidence you are presenting that he did break it.

http://puu.sh/142md/77f2ff9fae1af94e81f82457c00b5685
http://puu.sh/142mk/8f9b7f069e0e9427eb0fa75231ec8136

Corey, more specifically:

• Part c of the delivery procedure
• Part d (although if you take it literally, not so much)
• Part e (this is where delivering orders back-to-back and delivering orders when the customer changed houses in between his older orders comes in)
• Not keeping evidence of the phone confirmation, even to the point of providing it for the chargeback a month later
• The 999M limit was a site mechanic, that permitted customers 999M per order. This was meant to stop them from ordering larger amounts in short periods of time. I can dig up our old form to show this. In addition, Corey was told on Skype, as was everyone else, to not surpass our site mechanics. The evidence for this is lost; there are still archives of the Skype logs, but they will take too long to reproduce.

By not strictly following our set procedures, and not compiling the evidence Corey was required to compile, we were left both with orders that should have never been accepted, and zero protection since we did not have the required evidence to dispute the chargeback properly.

Evidence:

• In the chargebacks we disputed, only screenshots were provided, thus signifying that Corey never submitted the full evidence. It could be argued that Corey did submit them and I did not include them in the report, but I'd like to think that we can at least assume I'm not an idiot and tried to fight the chargeback to the best of our ability. Chargeback disputes cropped from email: (http://puu.sh/13Wnt/f9836dc8f23dcc168d100db4fb0468c7) (http://puu.sh/13WnL/53ee9c10a5e9bfcb4c20a28799e164c1) (http://puu.sh/13WnW/f833d01a194ee2a2a2f06cc3dc4d27a9)
• Further proof that Corey only provided screenshots. These are taken directly from what he sent me: (http://puu.sh/Yd9I/0cce681677c3e177a57693b07977918c) (http://puu.sh/Yd9T/72392707334142f7dc40b802cd285046)
• An order by Mayberry placed a few days before Corey's had a different IP address, and Corey should have noticed this as a red flag. I can provide evidence of this in private if needed as I don't want to leak IPs

2. When was the commission paid? And on what basis and at what time was the commission reversed?

The commission was paid in the routine weekly/bi-weekly payment schedule, so it would have been about a week after the orders, or near April 1. The commission, specifically for these three orders, was paid back by Corey in the previous scam report against him, when the staff said I did not have enough evidence to have him pay the full damages.

 

[Corey]

@Richard

There was a 999M order limit when these orders were delivered. However, here is what happened.

I was covering one of Dorianking's shifts as he was late because he had to study or something at school. While I was covering his shift, Mayberry (the customer involved in the chargeback) came on livechat asking to receive his gold that he ordered on a different shift. At RSUltimate we had a policy that you may only deliver GP that you sold, and since Dorian had been the person who dealt with this customer, only he could deliver the gold. I believe at this point it was only one order and he made 2 more after, but we'll get to that later.

I had went ahead and asked Grave on Skype if I could deliver the gold and get the commission, because the customer was there and obviously I didn't want to tell him he can't have his gold. Anyhow, I got permission to go ahead and deliver it, which I did.

Later that night, while I was still covering for Dorian, Mayberry came in looking to place a new order. I happily took it and delivered it, all was fine. Even later that night, just as Dorian returned, Mayberry returned yet again looking to buy some more gold. This time he wanted 1B, which was over his limit, so I asked Grave about it and he said it was fine. I remember this part so well because me and Dorian had fought over who should get the commission for the order because it was during his shift and he just returned.

I'm sure Dorian will remember the above, and in the event that he does, it proves that Grave knew about the final order which exceeds the 999M limit, and still paid us our commission (something we were not entitled to if we broke procedure).

@Grave

1. Other than HHNs testimony, please show me where it says we were supposed to keep audio logs. Thats what you keep coming back to, and we simply were not required to keep them at this point.

2. If we were not supposed to take one point of the contract literally, whats that to say about the rest? "You shouldn't have taken it literally" is a stupid way to get anything you want out of anybody with a contract. If you didn't want us to follow it you shouldn't have written it that way.

EDIT2: I'd like to request that in the case I am not able to respond to this scam report on a timely manner due to the impending hurricane, that it not be closed and that the final verdict be held until I can get back to my computer and respond to anything I see as untrue or unclear.

 

[*]Part c of the delivery procedure
[*]Part d (although if you take it literally, not so much)
[*]Part e (this is where delivering orders back-to-back and delivering orders when the customer changed houses in between his older orders comes in)
[*]Not keeping evidence of the phone confirmation, even to the point of providing it for the chargeback a month later
[*]The 999M limit was a site mechanic, that permitted customers 999M per order. This was meant to stop them from ordering larger amounts in short periods of time. I can dig up our old form to show this. In addition, Corey was told on Skype, as was everyone else, to not surpass our site mechanics. The evidence for this is lost; there are still archives of the Skype logs, but they will take too long to reproduce.

So you allege that Corey broke part 3c,d,e of the agreement. The penalty for breaking this part is covered in part 2c.

Corey alleges that he messaged you and you gave him an 'ok' override on the transactions to deliver the gold.

The agreement says "not following procedures which includes confirming IP and phone number and keeping evidence of the trade."

I believe Corey kept evidence of the trade (screenshots.) Is there anywhere in this agreement that it says he is required to keep evidence of phone calls?

 

[Grave]

So you alleged that Corey broke part 3c,d,e of the agreement. The penalty for breaking this part is covered in part 2c.

Grave alleges that he messaged you and you gave him an 'ok' override on the transactions to deliver the gold.

The agreement says "not following procedures which includes confirming IP and phone number and keeping evidence of the trade."

I believe Corey kept evidence of the trade (screenshots.) Is there anywhere in this agreement that it says he is required to keep evidence of phone calls?

By evidence of the trade, it means all evidence pertaining to the trade. I suppose that's possible misuse of words on my ends as I see how it can be taken another way. Hahanerd also vouched for me in an earlier thread, as he worked at the same time as Corey, that they had to keep evidence of everything pertaining to the trade, such as pictures of the SMS messages they sent out and recording of the phone call. In addition, on the "confirming IP" part, Corey should have rejected the order on the basis that Mayberry moved from his previous order(s).

In the meantime I'm going to see if I can locate the Skype data files from 2011 and extract any evidence out of them. Skype was our main method of communication, and the agreement was discussed in full detail there.

 

By evidence of the trade, it means all evidence pertaining to the trade. I suppose that's possible misuse of words on my ends as I see how it can be taken another way. Hahanerd also vouched for me in an earlier thread, as he worked at the same time as Corey, that they had to keep evidence of everything pertaining to the trade, such as pictures of the SMS messages they sent out and recording of the phone call. In addition, on the "confirming IP" part, Corey should have rejected the order on the basis that Mayberry moved from his previous order(s).

In the meantime I'm going to see if I can locate the Skype data files from 2011 and extract any evidence out of them. Skype was our main method of communication, and the agreement was discussed in full detail there.

I need evidence that there was some additional part to this agreement wherein Corey was required to keep evidence of phone calls and SMS messages -- I.e. evidence of procedures. The literal interpretation of the contract as you have provided only references 'evidence of trade' which I take to mean evidence of delivery.

It is hard for me to read this in another way. Your contract is quite specific about the types of logs and records to be kept, and at no point does it say phone calls and SMSes must be kept.

As to the question of the IP differences, Corey alleges the IPs were quite similar. Do you dispute this?

 

[Grave]

As to the question of the IP differences, Corey alleges the IPs were quite similar. Do you dispute this?

The IPs were similar, but in an alternating sense, meaning it went from 10.10.10.10 to 10.12.10.10, and back to 10.10.10.10, and so on. It was very clear that Mayberry was ordering from two different locations, as you can't just reset your IP and then go back to the older one to my knowledge.

I need evidence that there was some additional part to this agreement wherein Corey was required to keep evidence of phone calls and SMS messages -- I.e. evidence of procedures. The literal interpretation of the contract as you have provided only references 'evidence of trade' which I take to mean evidence of delivery.

Unfortunately, other than my bad wording of it in the older contract, this was not made more specific until the final, professional version. However, I can state that Corey definitely did not make the phone call. When I asked for evidence, I was desperate for anything, and even asked him and others to just take a screenshot of their Skype history where they called Mayberry, so we could show it to Google and say, "Hey, look, we called the number," but I wasn't even given that. Also, nowhere in the chat logs of the delivery that we have on our site does Corey ask to confirm Mayberry's number. However, Corey also took the conversation to his private MSN, so any records of that lay with him, which is most likely lost.

If you believe direct evidence of this is absolutely crucial to handling the case, please feel free to close the dispute in Corey's favor. However, I ask that you reconsider it in the future as I hunt for more evidence to suit what you asked for today. Thank you so much for taking personal time out to address this matter.

(edit) I will be resting so I cannot respond until morning.
(edit) I also want to clarify that the IPs do not look similar at all, but they are repeating. For the three orders specifically, however, they are the same.

 

The IPs were similar, but in an alternating sense, meaning it went from 10.10.10.10 to 10.12.10.10, and back to 10.10.10.10, and so on. It was very clear that Mayberry was ordering from two different locations, as you can't just reset your IP and then go back to the older one to my knowledge.

I would like to see the actual IPs. You can * out the parts that were the same or the first few digits if you need to.

Unfortunately, other than my bad wording of it in the older contract, this was not made more specific until the final, professional version.

Your new contract contains quite a few new problems. I advise you to take it to a solicitor and fix it. For example your repeated reference to penalties and fines are, for the most part, invalid. I have not read the whole thing but it suffices to say you need to research equity law and make your contract fair before any court would uphold it in its entirety. I would even go so far as to suggest you reconsider your business model in such a way that you do not need penalties in your contracts.

However, I can state that Corey definitely did not make the phone call. When I asked for evidence, I was desperate for anything, and even asked him and others to just take a screenshot of their Skype history where they called Mayberry, so we could show it to Google and say, "Hey, look, we called the number," but I wasn't even given that. Also, nowhere in the chat logs of the delivery that we have on our site does Corey ask to confirm Mayberry's number. However, Corey also took the conversation to his private MSN, so any records of that lay with him, which is most likely lost.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

That he did not provide you evidence that he made a phone call or SMS does constitute evidence that no phone call or SMS occurred.

That your website's chat log does not contain evidence of Corey asking for the customer's phone number does not constitute evidence that he did not ask for one; You accept that the conversation continued outside these logs. I have been given no reason to assume a phone number was not asked for.

To go any further:

I need evidence that he did not follow the procedures of your agreement.

That is, for example, evidence that according to your agreement:
1. He was not allowed to use his private MSN for closing deals, or
2. He was required to keep logs of phonecalls and/or other conversations with the customer.

You are alleging he broke your agreement. Of this, so far, I have seen no evidence.

Corey's counter claim is that you amended the agreement when he asked you over skype if he should process these orders. I have seen no evidence for this either.

So far neither claim has sufficient evidence to proceed. If it cannot be reasonably shown that Corey failed to follow the terms of your agreement then you may be liable to return his commission to him.

 

[SuF]

Richard unediting photos of everything are most likely here: http://sythe.org/showpost.php?p=11374872&postcount=5

Also: The IP from the first order (May 24) is the same as the one from the second order (May 25). The third time it changes (for the May 27th order).

I went by confirmation times but the order times also line up in this order.

 

Richard unediting photos of everything are most likely here: http://sythe.org/showpost.php?p=11374872&postcount=5

Also: The IP from the first order (May 24) is the same as the one from the second order (May 25). The third time it changes (for the May 27th order).

I went by confirmation times but the order times also line up in this order.

Thank you.

I've taken a look at the GCO screenshots. A phone number is listed there for the customer.

Corey did you call this number to verify the customer's identity and intention to purchase in each case before charging the order?

 

[Corey]

Yes Richard, I called the customer before delivering each order. I tried to provide proof of this in the previous dispute, but Skype call history only goes back 6 months.

To expand on something Grave said, I did NOT take Mayberry to my private msn, rather my BUSINESS msn with RSUltimate. If I remember correctly, there was some reason that I didn't deliver the order on time, and he or I was leaving, so to abide by our agreement that the person who sold the gold must deliver the order, I gave him my RSUltimate BUSINESS msn to reach me at for a timely manner.

 

Yes Richard, I called the customer before delivering each order. I tried to provide proof of this in the previous dispute, but Skype call history only goes back 6 months.

To expand on something Grave said, I did NOT take Mayberry to my private msn, rather my BUSINESS msn with RSUltimate. If I remember correctly, there was some reason that I didn't deliver the order on time, and he or I was leaving, so to abide by our agreement that the person who sold the gold must deliver the order, I gave him my RSUltimate BUSINESS msn to reach me at for a timely manner.

Ok but did you call the customer on the number cited in the GCO log? The one starting with 510...

If not, on what number did you call the customer?

 

[Corey]

Ok but did you call the customer on the number cited in the GCO log? The one starting with 510...

If not, on what number did you call the customer?

Of course, that's the one they provided for us to call in the form.

EDIT: I obviously don't remember the exact number, but yes it was the one included in the GC payment details.

 

I've done a lookup on the customer's IPs.

Both IPs are located in Oakland on the same ISP.
The phone number on the order is located in Oakland.
The orders in question passed AVS and CVV checks.
I've called the number and it is a valid number.

Any reasonable person would have concluded that these orders check out.

Again, to proceed further I first need evidence of a broken agreement.

Grave has claimed that Corey broke part3 c, d, and e of the stated agreement:
However no evidence has been presented that Corey did indeed brake these parts of the agreement. Indeed it seems parts 3 c, d and e are materially satisfied by the facts of the case. The IPs are from the same ISP and area. The phone number is valid and from the correct area. The AVS and CVV information are correct. Corey claims he called the number. There has been no evidence presented that he did not. Presumption of innocence leaves us to assume that Corey did indeed make the call, and thus these terms of the contract were satisfied.

It is additionally claimed by Grave that Corey was required to maintain evidence of phone calls and text messages. However no evidence that this additional agreement existed has been put forward. As such I cannot proceed until more evidence is presented.

 

[Grave]

I've done a lookup on the customer's IPs.
Both IPs are located in Oakland on the same ISP.

While they are the same ISP, the second IP Mayberry ordered from was under a different data plan. You can tell: the Static plan, which is used for business and higher speed data, and the Dynamic plan, which is generally reserved for the company's lowest performing data plans. There's no doubt that Corey could have easily noticed this had he used a little more common sense. The older IP was used just four days earlier by the customer, so Corey should have noticed the change.

The phone number on the order is located in Oakland.
I've called the number and it is a valid number.

I would like to also state that in an earlier March 20 order, Mayberry used a different phone number as well. Again, this signifies that Mayberry was using different locations, or that no one even noticed the phone number or called it, and didn't notice the change. Corey had the ability to notice this in about 30 seconds by looking at Mayberry's orders.

The orders in question passed AVS and CVV checks.

While I admit we weren't strict about these checks, the payments aren't "Guaranteed" (a little line of text appears saying it's guaranteed above AVS) since Google did notice the change in IPs from one household to another, and the excessive orders back-to-back.

Any reasonable person would have concluded that these orders check out.

If you ignore the previous recent orders of the person, then yes.

Corey claims he called the number. There has been no evidence presented that he did not. Presumption of innocence leaves us to assume that Corey did indeed make the call, and thus these terms of the contract were satisfied.

I have 12 folders of Skype from all of my re-installs. Once I find the correct timeframe I can go through all my chats with Corey, and see if I find something proving he didn't call. Obviously, the only way I can prove that he did not call is Corey stating that he did not, and I'm sure he stated something similar when I brought up the Mayberry case originally and asked for evidence. However, it will still be challenging, as trying to prove someone did not do something is analogous to trying to prove god doesn't exist, when there's no proof that he does.