Hello,
@veiken,
Thank you for your patience. I have taken the time to review this report in great detail, consider the various outcomes, and discuss it with multiple staff members on multiple occasions.
Unfortunately, we are unable to determine with certainty whether the gold in question was originally on the account. If it was, there are several potential explanations for its absence, including that it was removed by the seller (Adam xd), or the trader (Veiken) before the buyer (wsbintern?) was given the login credentials, or that the buyer is lying and the gold was on the account. There are, of course, other possible scenarios.
Here is what we know:
- The seller has a history of successfully selling RSPS GP.
- Veiken has a history of successfully buying and selling RSPS GP.
- The buyer has a history of successfully buying RSGP.
- It would seem that the seller, Adam, was not keen on the idea of an account trading method, as this was not something he suggested, on the contrary he wanted to transfer the GP via other trading methods.
- Adam claims to have won most of the 350b gambling. While unlikely, it's possible.
ToS:
@veiken is liable if his buyer disputed receiving GP within 30 minutes.
@veiken must refund the buyer.
However, to say "this rule applies to SELLERS AND BUYERS" is vague at best regarding the seller's liability.
From the ToS posted above, one cannot reasonably conclude that if the buyer disputes getting the GP, then the seller does not get paid.
@veiken I encourage you to estimate how the statement "If anyone in the chain of buyers disputes the presence of GP on the account, you will not receive payment" would affect the amount of GP people sell to you.
As is often the case with RSPS GP trades, there are multiple people involved in the chain.
You cannot just buy something, resell it, and then claim it never existed if something goes wrong.
Your trading/flipping/outsourcing security measures and lack of proper ToS led to this report and a potential loss on the seller/supplier side.
I'm issuing you a TWC for this, which can be appealed in 1 month.
I have concluded that the seller/supplier, Adam xd, was sufficiently informed that the trade was being done for
@veiken's buyer, thereby exposing himself to the risk of a dispute from
@veiken's buyer.
I will not force
@veiken to pay Adam xd because Adam xd voluntarily made the trade via the account method, was sufficiently informed that the trade was being "outsourced", cannot prove delivery of the GP, and did not protect himself with any ToS.
I will note that if
@veiken did not inform Adam xd that the trade was outsourced, I would force
@veiken to take the loss here and pay Adam xd, while also refunding the buyer, because in my opinion, by reselling the gold,
@veiken inherently confirmed that he received the gold.
There is currently an open suggestion regarding the "account method" and this ruling may not serve as a valid precedent in the future. You can share your ideas with us -
Rsps section drop trading rule..
However, for now we treat it as a drop trade - we do not get involved - and forcing a refund or payment outside of the prearranged agreement between the people involved in the trade would be Sythe getting involved.
@veiken, someone suggested that the trader/reseller provide his buyer with the login details, ask him to screen share and only then provide him with the bank pin. This screen sharing can only take a few seconds and can easily be done on Discord without any additional program. You and any other RSPS trader should consider it. I have been told that some people are already doing this or something similar.
@veiken please let me know when you've refunded the buyer.
-BlackBlasses
