New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
The OP did not enter into a credit agreement with the company, it would extremely rare for a judge to award a CCJ on this even if the OP ignore the initial demand and did not turn up to dispute the judgement, and it would near impossible for the company to register a charge on their property or lien on their salary, I'm not sure what you refer to?
Give it 10 years? Even if it was valid, and it isn't and enforceableblity (sp?) is near zero, statue of limitation would apply before 10 years. You'd have to do something stupid like believe it was valid, admit it was valid, and attempt to pay before you would have a problem.
No bradford/leeds/shipley debt collectors (and their solicitors aliases) - is (used to be?) the center for it all - will attempt to enforce this (I have somewhat knowledge about this), so you can safely ignore.. the debt was likely not even purchased as they might do with MBNA etc.. your own communication would start the problems
Stop scaring the OP with nonsense. If the OP is genuinely worried about the implication of debt collectors in UK under a non-credit agreement etc.. I would suggest he puts his/her mind at rest and share their story on moneysavingexpert and get proper feedback rather this silly nonsense here
don't worry about your credit record haha. they cant do anything like that
But bailiffs are powerless to enter your home, and needs to go court first.
And the moment they go court, the debt suddenly becomes hundreds if not thousands because they add the cost to the debt.
That is when things really go south for the one who has to pay up.
Just a minute: is it just for domain or for hosting that went together with the domain? Because, if it is just the domain, if it you transferred it away, then, there was no service that 1&1 could offer you and charge for. A contract can be valid for a service. Take as an example a telephone landline number. If you transfer it from one company to another, the original company cannot continue to charge for it even after it belongs to a second company now, because you did not "cancelled" the contract.
If you hire a lawyer, I guess you'll win this case easily. The question here, is: Is it worth to hire a lawyer for 30 pounds? On the other hand, 1&1's practice is shady. They sell in bulk all their client's debts, despite if those occurred by mistake or else. And they rely that no one will go with a lawyer in court for 10 or 20 bucks.
I do not know UK laws, but here in Greece there is a government funded, independent authority called "attorney of the consumer" that anyone like you can go to with his case to ask for protection of shady commercial practices. If a case is not a classic conflict between two parts on B2B or B2C and involves abusive terms or unfair policies, then, his office can send extrajudicial or even send to court the company, free of charge.
Yea this is my issue.
If 1&1 had auto-renewed the domain so it was valid from Sep-19 to Sep-20, and then I transferred it to Namecheap, and it was now valid from Sep-20 to Sep-21 I would understand being billed and would have just paid because I'd received that year courtesy of 1&1 but they haven't provided me any kind of service so I'm not willing to pay.
That's what I told the woman on the phone anyway, and if they come back to me that's what I will tell 1&1
"I'll pay if you can provide the 1 year of domain I'm paying for" which they won't be able to do, because it's with Namecheap since the expiry date.
Another thing which is weird is that this letter doesn't say anything like "You must pay by ____ (date) or ____ will happen" or anything like that. I would have thought something like that is required.
No, they are merely informing you. They are obligated to inform you that you have a debt before doing anything else. They know it's just 30 and not worth anything, yet.
"Must pay" can only be done after they go to court.
Not true. They can't force you to let them in, and they can't break in, but leave a door unlocked and you're fucked.
When you say "fucked", you mean... intercourse, or what?
BTW, a mod? Wow! Well, anyway, congratz! Nice to see some cool dudes helping running the show...
Then, reply to them asking in a formal way to inform you what exactly services you owe them money for, ask to describe the exact service, the day started, the day ended, the due date etc. Then, send them the initial contract for the domain and the namecheap transfer on the day the contract ended.
You can also state that if they insist asking you for money, you have any right to ask for protection for false money demanding. Just be polite in your response and be formal, typical. And do not be afraid that they can damage your credit score or anything like this. First of all, they will need a permanent court decision and for an amount of money that exceeds a certain threshold (in Greece is €500 for the initial owe minus the expenses).
FYI, those collecting companies are working with a percentage of success. They buy a dept for 5-10% of the initial cost willing to collect 20% either for clients with big debt that will stand on a court room, or from people that won't like them to be bothered with calls and letters for a 20 or 30 euros/pounds debt.
You should mention the date of annual contract with 1&1 ionos, also the date you transfer the domain to your namecheap account.. also did you turn off autorenewal function?
123-reg pulled this kind of crap when they registered the
.ukdomain for everyone who had a corresponding.co.ukdomain and went ahead and charged the credit cards and Paypals of lots of their customers when the renewal period was due.Two years ago, 123-Reg and NamesCo decided to register millions of .uk domains for customers without asking them
I threatened to raise a dispute with Paypal and they reversed it promptly.
123-reg pulled this kind of crap when they registered the .uk domain for everyone who had a corresponding .co.uk domain and went ahead and charged the credit cards and Paypals of lots of their customers when the renewal period was due.
Two years ago, 123-Reg and NamesCo decided to register millions of .uk domains for customers without asking them
I threatened to raise a dispute with Paypal and they reversed it promptly.
I always tell the collection service they were sold a fraudulent debt and then provide the details why, like a zero balance statement, or showing cancelled services screenshot, etc.
The main thing is telling them they were scammed into buying debt that wasn't really debt and make them question their whole debt list.
There are some information missing here:
1) What was the contract with 1&1?
When I used their domain registrar, I remember that by using the service I had to agree to something like: "if you don't cancel the service 15 (or 30) days prior to its renewal is due, you will pay the renewal price, even if you cancel".
2) When was the service cancelled - was it before the deadline set in 1)?
I am not sure, if this is actually written for domains, that is legal in case of a transfer out. If the domain has been transferred to namecheap, then, there is no valid "contract" with 1&1, because, the product (the domain) does not belong anymore to 1&1 but it belongs to namecheap (and been paid to them).
So, legally, a contract cannot be valid for a product that the seller does not have anymore.
It's like renting a house and the ownership changes. The previous owner cannot claim any contract to the renter for the period that the property belongs to another party. This is fraud.
Canceling before due date can only be valid if the domain is still a property registered on 1&1 - and this is a grey zone IMO: A domain is valid only for the period that has been prepaid. If someone does not pay for renewal, the domain stops working and will be sinking. There is a grace period, but this grace period is from ARIN, AFRINIC, RIPE, not from the register itself. In a court, I am sure that this term for "15 days cancelling before ending of contract" for a domain, would be stated as "abusive term", but for this to be done, someone has to sue them for that.
The only valid usage for this early announce for cancelling a service is for providing services like hosting, because the company can claim that keeping a physical server on and not wiping any data (for safety reasons in case of a mistake) causes expenses and minimizes the available products that can be renter to a new client.
I agree. A collecting company will not sent to court something like that, because they will probably lose and this will cost money. Normally, they send to court a bunch of debt from a lot of clients. If one ore more of them deny the debt, then, the court itself has to examine the case and will not just give a decision on bulk, so, it will not be anymore a typical procedure where thousands of cases get a decision in 5 minutes, but will need to examine the client's arguments. This costs money, has risk for the collection agency and, if they lose some cases, their costs will be much higher than the whole expected profit from the bought debt.
Last but not least: a domain transfer needs many days to be completed, before ending. If you try to transfer out a domain 3-4 days before ending, it will not be completed. All sides, the old register, the new one and the domain issuer (e.g. RIPE) will need usually at least 14 days before expiring, or else, will deny it. So, the old register cannot claim legally that did not know about the transfer.
So if you book a holliday, or a hotel room, you are allowed to cancel a minute, hour before, and don't own anything - even if you agree to a contract that says you must cancel a certain number of days in advance, or you will be charged as if you used the service?
In my country it doesn't work that way. That is, unless a contract breaches some business (or general) laws (you can't sell your child for example), you are expected / forced to honor it.
I don't like the policy of having to cancel well in advance and having to pay if you don't explicitly cancel the service. Prefer not having to worry about it: I don't pay, the service gets cancelled, all done. That is one of the reasons I'm not using 1&1 services.
However, if I hadn't moved domains in time, I wouldn't have argued - because that was the deal / contract.
It seems fairly straight forward and simple - but most participants in the thread, including the OP, seem to fail acknowledging it.
The only problem/argument that (IMO) can be argued is whether those terms were clearly communicated to the client (OP). Again, while I was 1&1 customer, it was clear to me, without expecting some catch like that, nor actively looking for whether it existed (I do from then on, with all the other services and service providers, just to be on the safe side).
Apples and oranges. The domain does not belong anymore to 1&1. It has been transferred to Nemecheap BEFORE the end of the contract. So, they do not have anymore this property to sell or rent it.
If I book a hotel room and the hotel was transferred to a new owner, the old owner cannot come to ask me money for renting the room for a property that does not belong to him, when actually I paid for the room to the new owner.
What cannot you understand? Please, ask a lawyer first (I have a degree in Law) and then come to argue...
In ALL countries, selling a product that does not belong legally to you, is called fraud. And asking for paying a contract for a product that is another's property, is also fraud.
A contract is not the 10 commandments. It is very common to contain abusive, illegal or fraudulent terms. This can be settled in a court. Many banks has terms that has been cancelled with a court order as abusive.
Again, it is another thing not to cancel for a product that, in theory, still belongs to 1&1, and other to have 1&1 asking for cancelling a contract for a product that does not belong to them. Try to see the difference...
For all those who keep telling that a contract is a contract. Let's say that the OP, when received the invoice, would pay for it in time. Then, the company is obligated to deliver a service. What service could they deliver, when the domain is not on their hands anymore, but in namecheap?
The moment that 1&1 agreed for the transfer out of the domain, is the moment that they agreed that the contract will end just when the domain will be transferred. They cannot claim that their client have to cancel the contract for a product that they agreed to transfer to another owner and, much more, AFTER the transfer.
Don't mess this in your mind with just sinking a domain.
Well.. you could not say that @OP transferred domain BEFORE the end of the contract, as he did not give details of date when the contract end and the date when he transfer domain to namecheap.. kinda gray information, here..
No gray information at all. He could not transfer the domain after the end of the contract. A domain need to be transferred 10-15 days prior the expiration date, or else, it won't. The system won't let you begin the procedure of a transfer. The contract for a product ends with the expiration of the product. So, it is absolutely sure that OP transferred the domain before the end of the contract.
A contract may be a contract, but you can win in court if they did not provide the service or the product, 1&1 would need to prove that you have used the service and did not pay.
Just a note for other situations: Even if you sign a contract, if you do not use the services if it comes to a trial, all they can get is some fees for the lawyer/trouble, nobody will force you to pay for something you did not use.
In this case, its better to settle it outside of courts because the amount is very little, I was just saying in general, that a contract is fine as long as you are using the service, if not, even if there are clauses that force you to use the service for 2 years for example, they usually offer you a fake discount that you need to pay back if you cancel, nobody is allowed to force you to use a service if you do not want anymore, they can sue you for the trouble but not to ask for money for a service that you did not use.
We've argued this same argument the last time 1&1 pulled this shit. @bikegremlin makes a point you enter into a contract, so be a man and honour that contract (if I ever handshaked a deal, I'd feel the same). The counter point is that contracts are often illegal and unenforceable and this case appears that way because they are charging for a service they didn't nor could provide, and there's jurisdictions where that is outright fraud.
So no sympathy for 1&1 for being dicks.
I lease an apartment. With monthly rent payments (pay on the 1st for the current month).
I explain in words an put it in writing: "cancellation is 30 days in advance."
This gives me time to find a new tenant.
In practice, 15 days in advance, over the phone, or whichever way is fine. I can put the apartment on the list and find a tenant.
However, if one cancels on the say 31st, I have practically no time to rent the apartment for the following month.
In that case, I keep the next month's rent from the deposit, even though the tenant has canceled and I haven't provided the service.
Similar policies are in Italy and Germany as far as I know. You definitely can't just stop paying, move to another apartment and expect to not have to pay after that period - it gets taken out of your deposit. Even though they "didn't provide the service to you".
I think that's both fair and reasonable. Especially if you are notified and agree to those terms prior to taking the service.
@hostnoob I would leave it to the debt collectors to sort out. The account is on hold so nothing else should be added to the amount. If they come back to you and say there is nothing you can do, just pay it and mark it up as experience.
But in all fairness, I doubt they will even come back to you. As they can't provide you a service, it's probably 1&1 just trying it on and hoping you'll pay it. But you've done what you can for now. Leave it to them to sort.
Yeah hopefully I don't hear anything back now.
Thanks for the replies everyone, interesting reading.
I explain in words an put it in writing: "cancellation is 30 days in advance."
You are still denying to see the difference. The apartment is NOT OWNED anymore by the original part that did the contract. The apartment HAS BEEN SOLD to another owner and the client is still living there, paying the lease to the NEW OWNER. But the OLD OWNER is still claiming that he must be paid FOR SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT OWN ANYMORE.
Gush, he did not move to a another apartment. He is still living in the SAME apartment. The apartment changed ownership and the renter is paying THE NEW OWNER. The OLD OWNER has no rights to ask money for something he DOES NOT OWN ANYMORE!
Put your mind to work, here: