Velox media under new management

ralf

@VeloxMedia said:

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:
People should chargeback if they want. All I've said is they need to pop a ticket and tell us so we can delete their account, otherwise it's fraud.

Please stop lying. It is not fraud for people not to inform you. You aren't party to the transaction or the chargeback.

Yes it is because otherwise they'll continue to receive service which is fraud. The problem is we're not a party to the transaction or the chargeback so must be notified.

Seriously, speak to your legal team. That is not fraud. If they tell you otherwise, then they are seriously incompetent.

Why are you making such a big deal of this. Pop a ticket and we delete the data. Problem solved

You are trying to insinuate that people are breaking the law by not informing you. That is not true. They have no responsibilities to you at all.

You have no obligation to provide service after a chargeback (if they are your customer) or at all (if they are not your customer). I'm not disputing that. What I'm trying to correct is your lying, trying to coerce people into informing you by insinuating that they'd be breaking the law if they didn't. You are either uninformed or deliberately lying.

ralf

@VeloxMedia said:

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:
You didn't answer my simple question. I'll state it again, Please provide the legal agreement you had with Lewis's company concerning your data and that he wasn't allowed to transfer it to anyone or give anyone access to it.

The legal agreement is in payment. I paid for a service. This is the contract.

None of what you said is true. There is literally infinite ways on how a deal can be done.

Please enlighten us on what was in the deal. That way we may know what legal rights we have and with regards to whom. So far you failed to send an email message of notification with regards to this deal.

But to your point. I didn't take money from you,

I don't care.

Lewis did so your agreement is with him not us. Lewis was a sole trader and no affiliation with velox media inc.

This is where I do care. You have keys to the kingdom, therefore you're the king and you're responsible for customers and data. You can't have my data and say you're not responsible.

Velox Media inc is registered with the ICO and we take data privacy seriously. Any data we have is protected by all US and UK/EU/GDPR data privacy regulations. Any requests will be followed and complied with properly. If we possibly have your data, file a ticket and we'll delete it.

But you bought a brand. It is yours, with all the responsibilities included. You can't say you offer something for free, when you bought something we have paid for: services and contracts.

Any data provided to Lewis was under his protections and under his data privacy agreement you had with him. Refer to your agreement with him about your rights and if any issues or concerns file a complaint against him with the proper agencies. If you feel we have your data in error then file a complaint against him.

Nope. You have the keys now. You're in charge. The concerns are no longer with Lewis, but with you.

We do not have an agreement with you unless you've bought services from Velox Media inc which was established 12/21/2025. Anything prior had nothing to do with us. It's that simple. We have no obligation to anything prior to that date.

You do have agreement nd obligations towards me. You obtained me and my services when you bought a brand with its business and domain, a brand named Velox Media from UK - I don't know if you remember. You have me and many others as customers; you even migrated the data recently - hopefully you remember this too.

I keep having to rehash this same exact thing over and over.

Yes, indeed you do. You keep forgetting stuff. I know, it's a circus here.

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:
You didn't answer my simple question. I'll state it again, Please provide the legal agreement you had with Lewis's company concerning your data and that he wasn't allowed to transfer it to anyone or give anyone access to it.

The legal agreement is in payment. I paid for a service. This is the contract.

None of what you said is true. There is literally infinite ways on how a deal can be done.

Please enlighten us on what was in the deal. That way we may know what legal rights we have and with regards to whom. So far you failed to send an email message of notification with regards to this deal.

But to your point. I didn't take money from you,

I don't care.

Lewis did so your agreement is with him not us. Lewis was a sole trader and no affiliation with velox media inc.

This is where I do care. You have keys to the kingdom, therefore you're the king and you're responsible for customers and data. You can't have my data and say you're not responsible.

Velox Media inc is registered with the ICO and we take data privacy seriously. Any data we have is protected by all US and UK/EU/GDPR data privacy regulations. Any requests will be followed and complied with properly. If we possibly have your data, file a ticket and we'll delete it.

But you bought a brand. It is yours, with all the responsibilities included. You can't say you offer something for free, when you bought something we have paid for: services and contracts.

Any data provided to Lewis was under his protections and under his data privacy agreement you had with him. Refer to your agreement with him about your rights and if any issues or concerns file a complaint against him with the proper agencies. If you feel we have your data in error then file a complaint against him.

Nope. You have the keys now. You're in charge. The concerns are no longer with Lewis, but with you.

We do not have an agreement with you unless you've bought services from Velox Media inc which was established 12/21/2025. Anything prior had nothing to do with us. It's that simple. We have no obligation to anything prior to that date.

You do have agreement nd obligations towards me. You obtained me and my services when you bought a brand with its business and domain, a brand named Velox Media from UK - I don't know if you remember. You have me and many others as customers; you even migrated the data recently - hopefully you remember this too.

I keep having to rehash this same exact thing over and over.

Yes, indeed you do. You keep forgetting stuff. I know, it's a circus here.

None of this is how laws work. I've stated again and again the important details of the deal.

Your agreement is with Lewis. Period end of story. He is gone and we have all the services. If you have a concern with your data then send us a ticket and we'll delete it. If you have a concern with your money then file a chargeback or lawsuit against lewis.

Right. So, this is your final position? That none of Lewis' customers are your customers?

We have zero responsibility to store your data or run your services. We do have a responsibility to protect data privacy we have and abide with government regulations, as well as partner agreements like with payment providers and ensuring we aren't complicit in fraud.

You have zero right to store Lewis' customers data or run their services. You are violating your responsibility to protect data privacy by doing so, and failing to abide with government regulations.

It's that simple.

It's that simple.

We have every intention of retaining services for users solely because it's good business and what's right. It also costs us basically nothing to host all your data compared to everything else we do so we don't care.

Is that your final position? That you intend to continue retaining data you have no authorisation to hold?

Correct, none of Lewis's customers are ours. But we have authorization to the data.

You don't have consent from the users to have their data, and you claim that they not your customers and you're under obligation to provide them service, so there's no legitimate reason for you to have their data either.

ralf

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:

Liable for what exactly? We don't have any agreement with you or anything. We didn't take anything, Lewis was responsible for your data not me.

And yet you have my info and my data. Why? You said you are GDPR compliant... so please explain how you got to be in possession of my data without my consent, because clearly my data is on your servers.

Last I remember I paid some business, but not your business.

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:

Liable for what exactly? We don't have any agreement with you or anything. We didn't take anything, Lewis was responsible for your data not me.

And yet you have my info and my data. Why? You said you are GDPR compliant... so please explain how you got to be in possession of my data without my consent, because clearly my data is on your servers.

Last I remember I paid some business, but not your business.

Lewis was responsible for your agreement and your data.

Thank you for clarifying this. I am glad Lewis was responsible for my data. I paid him for precisely that.

I'm not responsible for your data, Lewis is.

You did not answer my question as to why my data is with you. I have not paid you, I paid Lewis, but you have my data, and my account, and my info. You said you are GDPR compliant - I hereby invoke the GDPR legislation in demanding explanation from you as to why you have my data.

Where are you seeing that any responsibility was transferred from lewis to me?

You have my data. You should answer this. You must explain yourself, not me. I paid Lewis, and now you have my invoice in how I paid Lewis. You also have my data which Lewis hosted; so you're the one to answer.

What notification or agreement or anything did you receive saying this?

You stated you acquired Veloxmedia and its data in this thread.

Who specifically did you pay for the service.

VeloxMedia - but the data is with you. It is up to you to justify yourself.

What does your credit card statement say?

[REDACTED ON THIS FORUM] (for GDPR legislation with regards to sensitive data - you should know this)

Who signed your agreement?

VeloxMedia - now with you because you have the whole client area

These are what matter and none of this is with us.

Actually it is, all of it is. The whole client area and all the services are with you.

Ahh I see the issue. We're Velox Media inc. I don't think veloxmedia was ever a real company, what's the address on the invoice? I thought it has Lewis's name on it as a sole trader and his address. You should really investigate that. Also if you want to know how we have your data you should file a complaint against the company you purchased it from. Velox Media inc is on the ICO and it's a new company so anything before 12/21 wasn't us.

See you're confusing the companies and people. Completely different. We're in different continents even.

Again we're not responsible for how we obtain data just responsible for maintaining that data is compliant from now on.

When you file a chargeback it'll be against lewis and you'll get the answers you seek.

Wrong! As a data processor you are also liable for continuing to hold and process data (and potentially making decisions outside of instruction around how data is processed if using to look up transaction records to identify chargebacks) despite knowing the data controller, Lewis, is non-compliant with his obligations under GDPR

Why are you saying Lewis has an obligation to be GDPR compliant? Why are you saying we have an obligation to be? Why is the data considered GDPR? We're a US based company> @alexanderras said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:

Liable for what exactly? We don't have any agreement with you or anything. We didn't take anything, Lewis was responsible for your data not me.

And yet you have my info and my data. Why? You said you are GDPR compliant... so please explain how you got to be in possession of my data without my consent, because clearly my data is on your servers.

Last I remember I paid some business, but not your business.

@default said:

@VeloxMedia said:

Liable for what exactly? We don't have any agreement with you or anything. We didn't take anything, Lewis was responsible for your data not me.

And yet you have my info and my data. Why? You said you are GDPR compliant... so please explain how you got to be in possession of my data without my consent, because clearly my data is on your servers.

Last I remember I paid some business, but not your business.

Lewis was responsible for your agreement and your data.

Thank you for clarifying this. I am glad Lewis was responsible for my data. I paid him for precisely that.

I'm not responsible for your data, Lewis is.

You did not answer my question as to why my data is with you. I have not paid you, I paid Lewis, but you have my data, and my account, and my info. You said you are GDPR compliant - I hereby invoke the GDPR legislation in demanding explanation from you as to why you have my data.

Where are you seeing that any responsibility was transferred from lewis to me?

You have my data. You should answer this. You must explain yourself, not me. I paid Lewis, and now you have my invoice in how I paid Lewis. You also have my data which Lewis hosted; so you're the one to answer.

What notification or agreement or anything did you receive saying this?

You stated you acquired Veloxmedia and its data in this thread.

Who specifically did you pay for the service.

VeloxMedia - but the data is with you. It is up to you to justify yourself.

What does your credit card statement say?

[REDACTED ON THIS FORUM] (for GDPR legislation with regards to sensitive data - you should know this)

Who signed your agreement?

VeloxMedia - now with you because you have the whole client area

These are what matter and none of this is with us.

Actually it is, all of it is. The whole client area and all the services are with you.

Ahh I see the issue. We're Velox Media inc. I don't think veloxmedia was ever a real company, what's the address on the invoice? I thought it has Lewis's name on it as a sole trader and his address. You should really investigate that. Also if you want to know how we have your data you should file a complaint against the company you purchased it from. Velox Media inc is on the ICO and it's a new company so anything before 12/21 wasn't us.

See you're confusing the companies and people. Completely different. We're in different continents even.

Again we're not responsible for how we obtain data just responsible for maintaining that data is compliant from now on.

When you file a chargeback it'll be against lewis and you'll get the answers you seek.

Wrong! As a data processor you are also liable for continuing to hold and process data (and potentially making decisions outside of instruction around how data is processed if using to look up transaction records to identify chargebacks) despite knowing the data controller, Lewis, is non-compliant with his obligations under GDPR

No. Lots of assumptions being made and added here that aren't true.

You have repeatedly said they are his customers. All UK companies, including sole traders, are subject to GDPR. Lewis is therefore subject to GDPR.

The data contains PII, and you have just said that you have GDPR obligations from 25/12 and have registered with the ICO.

No assumptions here - just going by what you have explicitly stated

They WERE his customers and he's gone. We're a US company and we're only required to be GDPR compliant to our customers that we're providing services to that are in the EU. Those would only be people who have bought items in past couple weeks.

We're not providing services to Lewis's old customers they're just continuing to use whatever they have access to without any agreement.

They remain his customers - unless he has voided the sales agreement and refunded them. If so, he should probably inform you so you’re not providing free hosting services to them.

For all new customers you are the data controller as the agreement with you. By holding the PII data of Lewis’ customers you are a data processor. You are subject to GDPR obligations towards both groups.

I think you might need to look for new external counsel - you’ve been given terrible advice.

No. They're not Lewis's customers anymore. He did inform us. I've stated this over and over on here. You're missing the key detail and choosing to ignore it.

Yes he should have refunded them but he didn't. So the options are to chargeback or we keep system running but not assume as a customer and not provide a service.

Regardless this is only for EU clients and not all since we're a US company.

And no we have great advice, they just know what they're doing and understand the laws and ways on how to do things so we can get what we need done.

Systems stay online, we don't assume any liability and everyone is happy. We eat the hosting fees but whatever no biggie.

Anyone who isn't happy chargesback. Anyone new is GDPR if in EU if not they aren't because no need, although we file same policy for all anyways.

They remain Lewis is customers until agreements are voided and they are refunded. He can’t just decide they’re not his customers. You keep saying they are his customers over and over in this thread - how am I the one missing the key detail here?

You know they’ve not been refunded - you just stated this - and therefore you know they’re still his customers. You therefore remain a data processor under GDPR - it doesn’t matter where you’re based.

That isn't how it works.

They have the option to get a refund via chargeback and file lawsuits. Many have been refunded apparently on here. And it does matter. GDPR isn't required for a US company providing services to customers not in the EU.

Regardless I'm not really seeing your point on any of this. Where specifically does it state that in any case there's any possibility that liability would be pushed onto a data processor? Even if all you say is true, can you please cite where this would make a difference?

That is how it works. You claim this over and over again, without clarifying your position.

Read Art 28. As a processor you’re required to have a clear and written instruction from the controller. Can you confirm you have this?

I read it and nothing has any info about liability or requirements to hold data or keep active. These were your comments.

Also where specifically does it state that a customer is a customer until they're refunded.

You didn’t answer my question. Do you have data processing agreement with Lewis?

Where does it say that a provider can unilaterally decide that a paying customer is no longer a customer?

I can't discuss specifics about the agreement.

It doesn't have to say that, it has to say that they can't. Specifically when a company goes out of business what happens? These are the policies, it has to state what's not allowed. Not the other way around.

Also you still haven't cited where it says anything about holding data or keeping it active as you stated before.

I am not asking for specifics about the agreement. I am asking if there is a data processing agreement in place. That is a basic and standard document between two parties when GDPR-relevant information is exchanged. You previously stated that there was only an NDA in place, so I guess not.

This is basic contract law - it’s binding for both parties, unless you can prove the customers en masse have violated TOS.

You need better legal advice

You're asking for something that obviously would be covered by an NDA.

But again for the 3rd time I'm asking for you to cite where in GDPR compliance it states what you've been saying because I can't find it anywhere

Confirming the existence of something is not the same as disclosing its contents. A NDA would not prohibit confirming that a legally required document exists.

Article 4.2, as per my previous comment, states that you are a processor.

Again, do you even have anyone in your alleged legal team that knows even the basics?

Yes a NDA does prohibit this.

And 4.2 doesn't say anything about being required to store data for a period of time like you suggested.

No that’s not the way it works. In any case, you’re likely in breach of that NDA anyway with your previous disclosures on this thread around the nature of your agreement.

4.2 says storage is processing - timeframe is irrelevant. By taking over the live systems you are storing PII - and hence a data processor under GDPR. Your turn - find me something that says you’re not a processor. Surely your large legal team can do that?

The entire premise that the data hasn't been classified as GDPR since it's US data and "the processing activities are related to offering goods or services to such data subjects" does not apply as we're not offering goods or services to them. (Recital 23)

You hold personal data about EU and UK citizens without their consent. That is a GDPR violation.

You also are offering a service to them, or else you'd have deleted the data already.

ralf

@VeloxMedia said:

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:

There's no privacy violations on our end as we're fully compliant. Any issues would be with Lewis sending us data which depends on customers agreement with Lewis.

No that's not how the law works.

No that's not how the law works. I bought the bus not the bus company. You need to deal with the bus company to get a refund or another bus.

If you bought a bus, it doesn't come with all the personal information and data of the previous passengers.

And no we don't have privacy violations because we're properly handling data and properly registered.

You are not.

If any issues it's with Lewis depending on your privacy agreement

Lewis seems to be no longer keeping any of our data. If that's the case, he's not violating our privacy.

Interesting as our legal team seems to agree that we're handling it fine and so does outside council who's liable for any issues. So I guess we'll see what happens

Good luck with that. BTW you might also want to read https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/law-enforcement/guide-to-le-processing/penalties/

The higher maximum amount, is £17.5 million or 4% of the total annual worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.

If there is an infringement of other provisions, such as administrative requirements of the legislation, the standard maximum amount will apply, which is £8.7 million or 2% of the total annual worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.

rpqu

@ralf don't read the important part loud. It's their legal and compliance team responsibilities

JasonM

@VeloxMedia said: Again I don't care if anyone chargesback I only care that they send a ticket with us stating such so we can delete their account.

@VeloxMedia said: So you charged back... Did you file a ticket and say so? Or just leave your service active? If active are you still using the service?

@VeloxMedia said: Correct, none of Lewis's customers are ours. But we have authorization to the data.

thanks for the clarification that Lewis Velox Media's earlier customers have been duped by new owner Eric/Velox Media, Inc/LLC from the U.S. This is even worst than exit scam.

@VeloxMedia said: Correct, none of Lewis's customers are ours.

You aren't support to ask me anything about my financial, personal deal with Lewis. Why shoud I give you the details for it? I never had done contract with you Velox Media/Eric. Why are you insisting me (Lewis customer) to send email to you (VeloxMedia) after I did successful chargeback to notifiy you to shut down the server and close my account? You have no obligation to ask me neither I have any legal obligation to notify you (VeloxMedia) since you are a third-party here (Your whining about ICO, and Incorporation and some dumb mother-company Enterprise spending millions have zero value for us. No one care of your GDPR registration and other lame tactics that you are saying here or on discord). You have the resources then find it out yourselves when and for which product I did chargeback or you can keep that server running for ever. I don't care about it since I am not using Lewis service anymore neither I have any legal contract with you to notify you.

alexanderras

I suspect Andrew from legal will be returning tomorrow to tell us how we’re all wrong. Or maybe it’ll be Lucy the Lawyer.

NotFoundException

@alexanderras said:
I suspect Andrew from legal will be returning tomorrow to tell us how we’re all wrong. Or maybe it’ll be Lucy the Lawyer.

Nah, account will be handed over to FBI in a few days. They'll answer from then

alexanderras

@NotFoundException said:

@alexanderras said:
I suspect Andrew from legal will be returning tomorrow to tell us how we’re all wrong. Or maybe it’ll be Lucy the Lawyer.

Nah, account will be handed over to FBI in a few days. They'll answer from then

Que Agent Adam

rpqu

@NotFoundException said:

@alexanderras said:
I suspect Andrew from legal will be returning tomorrow to tell us how we’re all wrong. Or maybe it’ll be Lucy the Lawyer.

Nah, account will be handed over to FBI in a few days. They'll answer from then

225thinker

It can be hard, in long arguments, to realize when you are winning.

Due to arguments that have been made here, this guy has changed his position and is clearly and repeatedly now inviting people to chargeback.

He has also disclaimed having any responsibility to provide any services to people who paid money to "Lewis".

If your payment processor allows chargebacks, you should chargeback.

The argument is that Lewis -- the guy you paid -- is not providing the services.

If Lewis argues that he foisted the obligations onto someone named Eric, show your payment processor that "Eric" has publicly disclaimed any legal responsibility to bear those obligations.

Get your money back.

I know zero about the GDPR, and it is a separate issue. Just know from experience that U.S. entities without employees or assets in the EU basically believe they have nothing to lose from GDPR non-compliance.

"Eric" clearly believes he has taken the right steps to insulate himself, and "Lewis" clearly believes they have muddied the facts so much with the "acquisition" that he has saved himself as well from any likely repercussions in the EU.

(By the way, this does not rule out them being the same person).

Bottom line -- don't fall prey to the distraction/delay game, get your chargeback.

GDPR people -- I'll continue to watch with amusement, more power to you.

P.S. If you chargeback successfully, watch "Eric" twist himself into a pretzel arguing that you, who he claims to have zero legal obligation to, have an obligation to him -- to identify yourself so he can cancel your services (which he somehow came to provide solely through some incredible cosmic coincidence).

zed

i was here page 75

default

I had to go to sleep. I am so happy to see how others continued the conversation about our data.

network

How's your investigation with Homeland Security/FBI going @VeloxMedia? Are they still helping you find the DDoSers?

default

@network said:
How's your investigation with Homeland Security/FBI going @VeloxMedia? Are they still helping you find the DDoSers?

Maybe the DDoS people already did chargeback as requested by provider.

ralf

I think I've decided that there's nothing more than can usefully be said to Eric, as he's already been told enough times about his obligations under GDPR.

One final parting thought for anyone who's still going to stick with Veloxmedia...

Aside from the GDPR violations, by saying that you're not his customer and he's only providing the service for free because he feels like it, he's essentially made your service worthless for anything other than hobby projects or things that are illegal.

Logically, if you're not his customer, you have no SLA or expectation that the service will continue running. If it goes down for any reason you have no recourse for remedial action. If you're past the chargeback window with Lewis, then tough I guess.

If you have any customer data on your server yourself, you cannot guarantee its privacy, nor can you guarantee it won't disappear for good at any moment, so you can't store anything of value on it, except solely as a backup.

Eric has also shown that he doesn't consider consider privacy at all important. Even if he reluctantly complies for EU and UK customers (which he still doesn't seem to accept he needs to), he said that he doesn't need to worry about privacy for other users.

Good luck with that y'all.

emperor

@VeloxMedia said: All I've said is they need to pop a ticket and tell us so we can delete their account, otherwise it's fraud.

Guys dont be fooled by this sentence and fraud. They will terminate your service the moment you press paypal dispute. Everything other is a lie that they cant see or bullshit. You have no obligation to this provider to tell him to delete your service since your contract is with lewis not him. lewis have that obligation. This will be my last statement here as i did dispute on paypal and got my money. GL on your next project @VeloxMedia as you said in your own words THIS is not your 1st rodeo.

forest

@ralf said:
Logically, if you're not his customer, you have no SLA or expectation that the service will continue running. If it goes down for any reason you have no recourse for remedial action. If you're past the chargeback window with Lewis, then tough I guess.

If you have any customer data on your server yourself, you cannot guarantee its privacy, nor can you guarantee it won't disappear for good at any moment, so you can't store anything of value on it, except solely as a backup.

This is exactly my worry. I told Eric what I think he should do in order to regain trust but he ignored it, leaving us with this status quo. I don't like thinking that my server could be shut down at any time or for any reason. I know that he said that he intends to keep running them, but if he's also adamant that it's nothing more than a charity, it makes me uncomfortable.

default

So... that's it? The end is nigh?

tentor

Velox megathread is crazy

default

@tentor said:
Velox megathread is crazy

True. We could make it an announcement so other customers are aware. The problem is: not many customers visit LET and the new provider did not send an official announcement with regards to the acquisition.

zed

@default said:

@tentor said:
Velox megathread is crazy

True. We could make it an announcement so other customers are aware. The problem is: not many customers visit LET and the new provider did not send an official announcement with regards to the acquisition.

and it doesn't even come up in a search since LewisEric was so clever about the name he picked, lol.

ascicode

@zed said:

@default said:

@tentor said:
Velox megathread is crazy

True. We could make it an announcement so other customers are aware. The problem is: not many customers visit LET and the new provider did not send an official announcement with regards to the acquisition.

and it doesn't even come up in a search since LewisEric was so clever about the name he picked, lol.

Not first time.

VeloxMedia

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:
At the end of the day people paid Lewis for a service and he left. This isn't our responsibility to provide the service. I have no reason to give assurances that their service won't be terminated in the future. I have no reason to do anything. We're only providing services because we're a legitimate provider and trustworthy. We'll prove ourselves to our legitimate customers and build an amazing brand as we grow this thing. But we don't need the drama nor do we need to assure anyone, because if you need assurance then you should chargeback or do whatever you want.

So are they your customers or not your customers? You seem to keep flip-flopping based on whichever best suits whatever argument you're trying to make.

I'll make it simple:

• If they are your customers, you have an obligation to provide a guarantee of service, or else a refund
• If they're not your customers, you have their data without consent and are violating the GDPR.

So "pick a lane".

How exactly are we violating the GDPR? How exactly do we not have consent? Please state the exact GDPR law and policy from Lewis about these and explain how there is any violation

ralf

@VeloxMedia said:

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:
At the end of the day people paid Lewis for a service and he left. This isn't our responsibility to provide the service. I have no reason to give assurances that their service won't be terminated in the future. I have no reason to do anything. We're only providing services because we're a legitimate provider and trustworthy. We'll prove ourselves to our legitimate customers and build an amazing brand as we grow this thing. But we don't need the drama nor do we need to assure anyone, because if you need assurance then you should chargeback or do whatever you want.

So are they your customers or not your customers? You seem to keep flip-flopping based on whichever best suits whatever argument you're trying to make.

I'll make it simple:

• If they are your customers, you have an obligation to provide a guarantee of service, or else a refund
• If they're not your customers, you have their data without consent and are violating the GDPR.

So "pick a lane".

How exactly are we violating the GDPR? How exactly do we not have consent? Please state the exact GDPR law and policy from Lewis about these and explain how there is any violation

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2016/679/contents (in particular articles 5 & 7)

VeloxMedia

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:
Yes again we keep asking this same question. Why the hell are we continuing to keep this service active? Everyone keeps telling me to shut it down but the money doesn't matter. It's all this bs drama.

If the money doesn't matter, why are you threatening cancelling services that you think Lewis sold too cheaply?

If the money doesn't matter, why don't you refund customers whose services you plan to cancel?

How do you suppose we refund? They're not our customers, not our service. We don't have access to process refunds.

Why would we keep services for customers that we have no intention on providing in the future? They're not going to buy legitimate priced services from us so why would we keep the service active? It doesn't make any business sense.

VeloxMedia

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@Calypso said:

@VeloxMedia said:
It isn't required for 30 days and hasn't been 30 days.

You are changing your story again. You've said before that you don't plan on informing the customers because you don't see the need for it.

Also we aren't certain it's required because we only need to notify customers of this and we aren't planning on converting them into customers until they renew their agreement or purchase services, which then invoice satisfies this. Until then we're not delivering any services or anything.

You have their data. So you are obliged to inform. It's one of the basics of GDPR; if your "legal team" doesn't understand this, they're as usefull as a legal team as my mother is. And she's dead for quite a while now.

It's not a handover and the terms are vague.

No, it's not vague and it is a handover. A handover is when someone else, not acting as the initial person/company, owns/processes the personal data.

And either you are another company or you are Lewis. In latter case, please admit now and we can go on. If not: there was a handover of data.

Same story for over 70 pages now. 30 days is the rule and it hasn't been close to 30 days.

We're still working the details and waiting on the response from everyone on what to do. This only applies to EU users anyways.

Hopefully you realise that the 30 days is a MAXIMUM time for compliance.

The regulations are quite clear that you should delete data as soon as possible after the business requirement for it has ended.

So we're perfectly within compliance?

ralf

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:
At the end of the day people paid Lewis for a service and he left. This isn't our responsibility to provide the service. I have no reason to give assurances that their service won't be terminated in the future. I have no reason to do anything. We're only providing services because we're a legitimate provider and trustworthy. We'll prove ourselves to our legitimate customers and build an amazing brand as we grow this thing. But we don't need the drama nor do we need to assure anyone, because if you need assurance then you should chargeback or do whatever you want.

So are they your customers or not your customers? You seem to keep flip-flopping based on whichever best suits whatever argument you're trying to make.

I'll make it simple:

• If they are your customers, you have an obligation to provide a guarantee of service, or else a refund
• If they're not your customers, you have their data without consent and are violating the GDPR.

So "pick a lane".

How exactly are we violating the GDPR? How exactly do we not have consent? Please state the exact GDPR law and policy from Lewis about these and explain how there is any violation

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2016/679/contents (in particular articles 5 & 7)

And specifically article 7.1:

Where processing is based on consent, the controller shall be able to demonstrate that the data subject has consented to processing of his or her personal data.

If we are not your customers, you cannot possibly have obtained our consent.

ralf

@VeloxMedia said:

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:
Yes again we keep asking this same question. Why the hell are we continuing to keep this service active? Everyone keeps telling me to shut it down but the money doesn't matter. It's all this bs drama.

If the money doesn't matter, why are you threatening cancelling services that you think Lewis sold too cheaply?

If the money doesn't matter, why don't you refund customers whose services you plan to cancel?

How do you suppose we refund? They're not our customers, not our service. We don't have access to process refunds.

Why would we keep services for customers that we have no intention on providing in the future?

I don't know. Why are you keeping services running for Lewis' customers when they're not your customers (according to you)?

VeloxMedia

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:

@ralf said:

@VeloxMedia said:
People should chargeback if they want. All I've said is they need to pop a ticket and tell us so we can delete their account, otherwise it's fraud.

Please stop lying. It is not fraud for people not to inform you. You aren't party to the transaction or the chargeback.

Yes it is because otherwise they'll continue to receive service which is fraud. The problem is we're not a party to the transaction or the chargeback so must be notified.

Seriously, speak to your legal team. That is not fraud. If they tell you otherwise, then they are seriously incompetent.

Why are you making such a big deal of this. Pop a ticket and we delete the data. Problem solved

You are trying to insinuate that people are breaking the law by not informing you. That is not true. They have no responsibilities to you at all.

You have no obligation to provide service after a chargeback (if they are your customer) or at all (if they are not your customer). I'm not disputing that. What I'm trying to correct is your lying, trying to coerce people into informing you by insinuating that they'd be breaking the law if they didn't. You are either uninformed or deliberately lying.

It 100% is fraud if they are intending to continue to use service and receive a refund. Please explain how this isn't fraud.

They do have a responsibility to discontinue service. This is clearly stated in the agreement they have with the payment processor and every banks conditions as all credit cards require this for fraud prevention.