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.
Inception Hosting Review
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
the op must now also be happy about the unfriendly behavior of the provider?
should he possibly even apologize? this is a case of misjudging and turning upside down who is the perpetrator and who is the victim.
why don't you write under your other user name Clouvider anymore? are you uncomfortable with your behavior being documented here?
@InceptionHosting
You do realise that above also reflects that refund process is already started among the userbase (meaning some users already received the refund) and rest will complete on or before15th January 2025? [Ambiguity arises here]
Then request them not to post here on your behalf as they do not (should not) have the authority in this regard.
Because your parent company is representing as if they were doing it. In this case, issue of acquisition will kick in as chargeback will be against them and not you.
You may believe many things that may harm your business but that doesn't mean this particular customer doesn't have the right to fight his case (if he wishes) after you and your parent company ignored him for weeks.
it seems the parent company is the problem.
Both are problem as they are not drawing boundaries between different entities. Both are representing different facts and there seems to be internal chaos and confusion among themselves as to why parent is bad mouthing with regards to @InceptionHosting .
As I see it, you are again gaslighting the customer.
PayPal disputes are just that, disputes, not claims. They are a means of communication and therefore an opportunity. You can communicate with the customer and work to resolve the issue. Instead of taking the opportunity, you went for the nuclear option and reported the customer to the Fraud Record and Maxmind. Not nice.
You failed twice, not answering a properly communicating and patient customer, and a second time, not working with the customer to resolve the dispute. Double not nice.
You can keep insisting that your prior communication was clear, but it looks like it wasn't clear enough for the customer, hence why he contacted you.
There was twice a chance to resolve this, which wouldn't have been much trouble. Simply explaining the refund process in some other words would probably have sufficed. Your excuse of being busy, or whatever, is invalid, since you had time to respond to the dispute.
My advice: admit and fix your errors and make an exception and refund the customer.
OK, I'll look at it with blue eyes (stupidly just trusting), but still ...
The way I see it, IH (understandably) is happy that Cv took them over so there's some kind of future for what is IH, albeit probably under a different name (Cv). But it seems that, other than maybe personal reasons (like friendship) there's not much in it for Cv. Yes, some customers might stay/become Cv customers now but with all due respect there would have been cheaper ways to achieve that (if it was a decisive factor). All in all it seems to boil down to Cv needing to invest quite a bit and/or needing to making the investments IH wasn't able to make (new server generations, etc.). TL;DR Having to gain little of course Cv is interested to keep the costs low and to, how to word that nicely? ... uhm, have the changes done cheaply and with as little effort es possible.
One "tool" for that seems to be to make things look clear, proper, and clean cut as possible - while actually keeping them murky by for example having Cv make (quite bold) statements but at the same time repeatedly insisting that IH and IH alone will handle everything (related to IH), in particular the refunds. And also by mostly using "our" and "we" instead of "Cv" and "IH".
Finally, I'm under the (possibly wrong) impression that Cv, the "boss" (internally) said "I handle this thread, period" and IH gave in, but now when Cv basically ran it against the wall, IH is allowed to make statements here ...
And what's the core of IH's statements? Well, it's (basically boiling down to) "You are right. We fucked up in this case. The only thing we actually can hold against OP is that he reacted too harshly after being let hang in the air".
In other words, IH finally said, what Cv stubbornly refused to say or even to recognize. Well done IH, I think you saved what little there was left to save after Cv's amok run here.
Oh, and there's one "little" other thing: Clouvider, are you still really sure that a promise from you is good enough? Because that's what the whole "we'll process refunds beginning Jan. 15 2025" assertion boils down to. *It's but a promise ...
You are forgetting a crucial aspect.
As per inceptionHosting, refunds will be "completed by" Jan 15.
Not "beginning" Jan 15.
I guess you're right and I'm wrong.
But ...
I didn't mean to say you're wrong.
inception and it's parent is saying two different versions.
No wonder OP is confused. Even after 10 pages, it's still confusing and vague.
Your first reply on this thread was exactly how this should have been handled from the start. The second one though... Almost as if they were written by different people.
Either Clouvider owns the business, and is therefore responsible for the running of it, or they aren't. If they aren't, why did they put so much effort into embarrassing themselves on this thread?
NOWACKI, Dominik Jan (who is also the managing director of Clouvider)
It seems same people (not OP) that "hate" here is one's that hate Hetzner for random (20TB to 1TB etc.) stuff and probably also why is there no McDonalds in Moscow (or similar every day randomness).
Everyone should have in mind that all haters (other than OP, who has right to do so) have no reason to move this thread to page 11. Probably less than 5% are actual customers of Inception/Clouvider
For an issue which could have been avoided with an timely response or just one direct friendly communication with customer in good faith, this company chooses to repeat the same content like a scummy parrot ( they obviously got hurt being called scumbags..)
After 11 pages and longer replies, the company still talks generic parrot talk, but not got into the actual issue and RESOLVE for this specific person.
The original scummy parrot under @Clouvider is exceptional talent we hardly see such people and it's a good thing. Somehow first post from @InceptionHosting was posted by someone else who showed some intent to resolve and now again the the original scummy shows up again..
You can run this thread into how many pages you really want, with such exceptional parrots around.. and the OP deserves credit for coming up with an apt title.
hatred is a massive insinuation. and in whose name are you judging here?
This is a public forum.
I do not care about any of you, including provider(s) mentioned here. I was Clouvider's active customer in past and will probably be again when needed at some point in future.
I just hope moderators will watch this thread closely and let it sink or at some point close it completely.. Because, other than what was already clear around page 3, there was not much else to this be at page 11 (other than previously mentioned "I hate everything" haters which are not and never were customers of Clouvider)
Actually, you are flat-out wrong. Western legal systems have doctrines called "anticipatory breach", "anticipatory repudiation", "adequate assurance of future performance", "reasonable grounds for insecurity" etc.
A party to a contract does not have to wait for the breach to happen in these circumstances. This is how business people and customers get into trouble, playing lawyer.
On that note, others have said a customer acts fraudulently (and deserves being reported to a fraud blacklist) when they lose a dispute with a provider.
This is ridiculous. Again, in the Western legal system, the test for whether a claim is unwarranted and subject to sanctions against the attorney bringing it (or their client) is whether it is a "colorable claim" -- sometimes called the "straight-faced" test. That is, can the argument be made with a straight face. One is also permitted to argue for a good faith change in the present applicable law.
As a result, probably well less than 1% of all court claims that lose are considered to have been made in bad faith.
Under the arguments proposed, half of all commercial litigants would be put on fraud blacklists when they lose cases, including providers of products and services.
The way to accept PayPal and not suffer the indignity of responding to dispute resolutions or chargebacks is to behave accordingly. Many other business and industries do.
Or price your services properly to pay for the costs inevitably incurred.
Credit card companies do -- that's why they charge interest of 25% when they pay 4% to borrow themselves. They assume a significant proportion of their cardholders will not pay.
When you take money up-front for future services there are special requirements. These requirements are almost never observed by internet businesses, which is why fraud or losses are so prevalent.
Publicly-traded companies have to account for their future obligations and cannot freely use today's yearly advance fee to pay yesterday's bills. Do we think hosts are putting 11/12ths of these yearlies into a separate account? Of course not, they are paying personal rents, present costs, last year's overdue bills and the like.
It's even worse with "lifetimes".
When someone who admits they owe you something chooses not to pay you today, start asking hard questions, unless you like to lose.
Apologies if others answered this earlier, I have not read ahead.
From https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07504587/officers he has been
I didn't know that @AnthonySmith had given away his company such a long time ago... This explains why many deals were hosted with Clouvider during the last years.
What's "puzzling" is that you do as if this acquisition is something recent. While it seems like you are simply trying to get rid of the "discount branch" of @Clouvider. (That explains why you didn't offer a really good deal to @InceptionHosting's customers.)
If the same individual is behind these two accounts (@Clouvider & @InceptionHosting) - which appears very likely - it's clear than the "ceasing operation due to multiple factors" should have been handled more professionally (and that it would have been very easy to be more comprehensive with @op).
Do you think you showed the client this understanding when you threatened to report to FraudRecord and MaxMind after ignoring his ticket?
Give me a break from this arrogance...
Corrected that for you. It seems there was no patience at all when threatening to report to FR and MM.
The only ones getting a refund are people with renewals outside the Nov 12 to January 15th window. Given the Black Friday time frame, a non insignificant number of those customers are not getting refunds and not going to ticket.
If that many tickets are made, it confirms that the announcement was ambiguous and/or confusing and requires another email to clarify.
They didn't say when they'd pay the refunds. Most people would assume starting from the announcement. Now you're the one not reading, OP is not getting FREE SERVICE. Stop the gaslighting.
Feel free to quote inceptionhosting.com notice posted so we know who isn't reading properly. There's no announcement date and so no reference to having refunds prorated from date of notice.
Dom said the agent escalated the ticket in question. Dom did NOTHING about it. This debacle is on him.
The calculations is an export to a spreadsheet, add some rules and get the list. This is a one man job for an hour or so. It should have also been done before sending the announcement. Making 2+ months free also makes calculations much simpler.
Why aren't you quoting the announcement that you keep saying that OP misread? Because you're making shit up.
I too hope that moderators are watching this thread. Because out of all the replies in this thread, yours is the one which is off topic and have nothing to with the thread except saying that you were Clouvider client in past, the host which shouldn't have handled the thread in the first place and throwing inception hosting under the bus.
This was in response to the FraudRecord retaliation.
Sed /scumbags/other petty person characteristic/
Your announcement doesn't say Inception Hosting is ceasing operations, it says services are ceasing and being consolidated under Clouvider.
Where does it explicitly say that in the announcement on your website? Also, Clouvider has already stated refunds would be ON January 15th, not between November 12 and completed by January 15th.
Unfair, how? You even put notices that there's going to be increased delay. You also missed where Dom said 30 day responses were acceptable to him.
Harmful to the business no longer taking new orders and ceasing operations? Say again? What damages?
You're gaslighting again, the OP was clear that scumbags is in response to the petty retaliation that would prevent OP from getting services elsewhere. That's being a cunt.
How hard were you working to resolve the issue when OP offered to withdraw the dispute if Dom could reach out and was rebuffed?
Just need a time machine to respond to the ticket.
Alright everyone. No need for personal attacks! Keep it civilized please.
@jbiloh, give this man, "Resident LowEndLawyer" handle!
lets keep the attacks objective!
chargeback yesterday
That was not explicitly stated in the email.
Again, it's not 2 months of free service until I have a pro-rated invoice in hand.
I appreciate you accepting responsibility for not responding to my email. It was responded to yesterday but I'm sure that's more of a response to this thread than anything else. I imagine I would still be waiting.
Given the apology you have offered and the promise of refunds being issued by 15th July, then I will, in good faith, cancel the charge back as I also promised to do. I have had no problem with Inception Hosting in the past and am sure all this is down to Clouvider.