Hello good friends, thank you for waiting,
---
Facts
1. Edit: paragraph 9 of the ToS deals with bans. I missed that.
1.
@JohnCeena hired
@BoostedMMO to train agility from 91 to 99.
2. Account first had a temp ban.
@JohnCeena appealed it and got it removed, didn't protest again
@BoostedMMO continuing his work.
3. Account reached 97 agility and got permanently banned. Appealing it failed.
4.
@BoostedMMO refunded the value of the unfinished work (97-99 agility) to
@JohnCeena
----
The question is: can
@BoostedMMO be held liable for the ban(s) on the account? In this situation, paragraph 9 of the ToS protects BoostedMMO from being liable. But even if this term did not protect him: based on previous rulings, the benchmark to hold a provider liable is if there is conclusive evidence that proves that the provider botted the account (see for example:
here).
In this situation, merely circumstantial evidence has been presented that BoostedMMO botted the account. The accounts being banned while BoostedMMO worked on them is circumstantial evidence when taking into consideration that Jagex' detection system is known to be flawed. The appealing system is also pseudo-random. Therefore, these two points are circumstantial evidence. BoostedMMO being in plugin-servers is also (weak) circumstantial evidence.
Concluding, I cannot hold
@BoostedMMO liable for the ban, because there is nothing conclusive that proves that he botted the accounts.
@BoostedMMO paid back what he could not complete, so he is not in debt to you either.
----
I am sorry for your loss
@JohnCeena
Thank you for reading and have a good night friends