It raises red flag for buyer knowing that information. If I replied as "the buyer was given no non-trivial information" it means that I can recover the account as there is no one who can alter the important information(passwords set, credit card info because I commit to authorship).
The selling point of my accounts is the security. No one(in my experience) want's to depend on third party when there is money involved, especially on the internet. That's why I do it how I do it, people buy my accounts because they can be in charge of them.
It was your job to make an inquiry whether I have handed the details or not.
If ones wants to buy the account that was bought from me -- warranty comes from the person you are buying, not from the first owner if that's how first deal was made.
That's inaccurate.
Them having some account details doesn't mean you're not responsible for the acc if a recovery happens.
Once again, you are the OO, that is the point of being OO.
If Ryan bought the acc from you and the acc got locked, YOU are supposed to be able to assist him in the recovery.
Regardless of him having account information, I purchased the account because YOU claim to be the OO.
Without you able to recover the account/take responsibility in this scenario, how are we to assume that you are indeed the OO?
If you're able to just skate around selling accounts that you can't recover, you can't claim to be OO as you may as well be purchasing and re-selling those accounts.
I'm not saying that this Is the case in this scenario, BUT that's once again, how this could be exploited by other's, if they were to do the same thing & not refund.
CrazyPipe gives creation details to his customer's, and I buy account's from those people all the time, because I know, if there are any issue's Crazypipe can recover.
So no, your argument about him having acc details, isn't really valid.
