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.
INCERO - Holding hardware hostage & some extras
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I actually study law at school, so I have at least some idea. I'll try contact an attorney in the US tomorrow.
Please don't say that... please.
That's not accurate I do not lose my rights under a such contract by doing so (there's probably some fineprint in the PayPal TOS too).
It's unfortunate, a lot of providers will not share private customer communications under any circumstance.
They do say in their ToS that all communications belong to them, and that they have the right to share your personal information without asking first.
Yup, that was my mistake. I should've asked about it. In most European countries (and in Texas probably as well, through the UCC) there are standard/predefined provisions if the parties don't sign a contract.
Once again, I never agreed to their TOS, but I don't mind them publishing the ticket history.
TL;DR ?
You're wrong.
I live in EU, Romania, and there's no possible legal way to provide a service without a proper contract as you have to offer some clauses.
Every provider must have his standard contract (electronic or physical).
Yup, I didn't think this was going to be so long. In short: My mistake was not to have asked about any terms or TOS in the first place. INCERO's mistake was to not have informed me about it.
Incero colo has a minimum 6 month term that isn't stated in their product or advertisement, but is stated in their ToS.
@ascendrix says he didn't read or accept the ToS, but Incero is still demanding money and holding his equipment.
A contract doesn't necessarily mean TOS, only some essential elements (the law is very vague about that) have to be set, nothing else. Signing/accepting a quote stating a price and a term can create a contract (that's what happened with INCERO in my case). Elements such as the cancellation period etc. are then set by law, precedent judicial decisions or normal/standard practices.
OP you're either inexperienced and incompetent, or just being a dick with the whole TOS thing.
Every service that someone provides you has certain terms. Just because they didn't make you click a checkbox (called clickwrap) doesn't mean you get a free pass at doing whatever you want.
If they had changed the TOS with these clauses after you signed up, then I'd understand being blindsided by the changes.
TL;DR - be over 18 and sign a contract after you read it multiple times. Insure your equipment, make sure your vendor provides you with their insurance information. Know the cost of leaving before you ever start.
I've also asked INCERO several times to prove that I accepted their TOS, but they haven't been able to produce anything yet.
If you don't agree to anything what applies is whatever some statute like the UCC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Commercial_Code) or something else stipulates and what's on the quote you've accepted. I do agree that I should've asked about this before signing up though.
That part is also civil, as others have suggested you should contact the local police and ask them if they can help you recover your property.
Most dataenters I have been involved with don't sequester customer equipment this way because they risk taking other customers down if the police come and take the equipment by force.
I hoped that we'd fine a more peaceful way to resolve this. I'll have a chat with a lawyer about this tomorrow or I'll try to contact the local police as suggested.
The communication was private until the OP posted it publicly at which time Incero was within their rights to defend themselves publicly without violating any laws. They did not post anything personally identifiable (they redacted the clients name) and only provided information regarding the complaint. Instead of "he said, she said" back and forth Incero opted to provide the communications between both parties which shed some light onto the situation that was previously undisclosed by the OP.
That being said, it would have been better if Incero had asked the OP's permission to post the ticket but that's more an courtesy thing than an ethical/professional one.
I fully agree with them posting the ticket and I think it's a good thing they did that to avoid any misunderstandings.
It's the truth, I actually love reading what some other people call "boring stuff" and then try to interpret it.
You're being a kid. You bought the product/service, I'm 100% you accepted their TOS during the process. In the last few threads related to subjects like this, it always comes up to 2 things : Read the damn TOS + Companies can and will change their TOS to suit their businesses.
Also, Provider tag ?
KEK
He has asked Incero to provide a signature or some type of proof that he accepted the ToS over at WHT.
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1617495
That's a pretty dick move. I mean he can pull up the TOS on archive.org and if it's different then maybe that's an argument. Not reading it and then later claiming you didn't agree to it is just trying to weasel out of it. It's not something you try to do as an honest person with values, in my opinion.
I'd feel that way if it was a host I despised.
They never asked me to accept or confirm that I accept their TOS. I asked them to produce evidence in the ticket and in the post that I did so and they haven't done anything yet.
From a legal perspective I didn't agree to their TOS. I do agree that I was stupid/naive and that I should've at least asked about it. I certainly learned my lesson here.
Right. You know what you're doing. You know that signing up with a provider is effectively, morally, an acceptance of their openly available policy. I'm no lawyer, I'm not saying you can't build a case that you didn't accept it. I'm saying you're not a nice person for trying to use that angle to weasel out of it when the policy was right there and available for your consumption on signup.
I signed up via e-mail, not through their site or portal. I obtained all information (except for one live chat) via Skype and their post on WHT. If I'd have seen their TOS I would've gone with Psychz right away.
Yeah, okay. You never visited their website, never looked for a terms of service, never read it. So if I can't conclude that you're not a nice person for trying to weasel out of it from this angle, I can conclude that you're massively incompetent. Pick the one you prefer, I guess.
You should consider replacing the "interpreting unit", it seems broken as it is now.
A customer could say that a 'hidden' minimum term was the same.
Most people who try to do what Incero did here usually lose.
http://www.americanbar.org/publications/communications_lawyer/2015/january/click_here.html