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
@VeloxMedia
Who the fuck are you and why haven't your emailed clients yet? It's been a 'couple ' of days now.
Quick breakdown of the Ohio LLC Articles of Organization, which was issued with an effective date of 12/24/2025.
It was issued to a Justin Morgan, at an address that is a UPS Store public mail service. There is nothing unusual about people using a Mail Drop rather than their residence address. Justin Morgan may or may not be an owner of the newly formed company.
He could be a lawyer or paralegal or anyone who does the paperwork to create a company (i.e., the sponsor), without ownership or involvement. LLCs were created partly to provide enhanced confidentiality as to entity ownership. This is common U.S. business practice.
It is named Velox Media LLC. There is no necessity that it be related to any other entity anywhere trading as Velox Media. You can use any name you want as long as that state's Secretary of State doesn't think it conflicts with another entity name being used in that state.
Most U.S. companies have to have an entity designated to receive legal documents mailed to or served upon them. This is especially so where there is no physical office that could otherwise accept service. The Statutory Agent designated by Velox Media LLC here is Benthost LLC, for which Eric Banks accepted on behalf of Benthost LLC.
The physical address of Benthost LLC maps on Google to an office building in Worthington, OH.
On its face, being the person who signs for a Statutory Agent does not itself imply any other connection to the LLC entity. In fact, this is a service that people charge to provide and no other connection to the entity is required.
As I have posted before, in most/all U.S. states, the formation of an LLC or corporation ("Inc.") does not --of itself-- provide any protections to customers or parties doing business with it. In fact, the protections arise for the owners. This is why most lawyers advise their clients as a first act to form an LLC or corporation to conduct business under.
None of the foregoing should add to or detract from anyone's confidence in this particular operation going forward.
Those not familiar with U.S. ways should recognize that there is no "policing" of these corporate formations, no one checks anyone's claimed identity, or anything other than whether the fee was paid and that the name is not already in use by another registered entity in that state.
==
By all appearances, someone claiming to be "Eric" now has the logins to the servers that people pre-paid a "Lewis from the UK" to use. As is said, "possession is 9/10ths of the law."
"Eric" has claimed that all the monies previously harvested through the very recent "Black Friday" sales has been run off with by "Lewis" and that customers are stuck with whatever he chooses to do for them, apparently determined in part by how they interact with him. The experienced promoter on LET who "ran" the frenzied promotions for Velox/Lewis was the "TomHarper" guy. He is nowhere to be seen at this point, and his connection to "Lewis" is unexplained.
I previously observed that I sensed from his posts that "TomHarper" was an American with a certain background.
I suppose if I had pre-paid money to the Lewis/TomHarper Velox a few weeks ago, I would want to figure out whether the TomHarper guy has any connection to the above-referenced gentlemen, who seem to also be Americans.
The other pending question would be whether "Lewis" was really who he claimed to be and not someone posing, who pulled UK info off of Google to create a false sense of corporate legitimacy there.
If this is a coordinated exit scam, they likely don't care about EU law because no one involved ever had any actual connection to the EU.
The likelihood that an unrelated U.S. person with actual ties to a legitimate internet business would "purchase" a collapsing UK-based internet "business" based on a Reddit post, where that business quite publicly just took in tens of thousands of dollars in pre-paid fees is slim, in my opinion, unless "laundering" exit scams is a separate stand-alone business among strangers and is a proven, profitable one, at that.
If there are any innocents left still trying to figure this out, the above is for you.
I’m taking bets on if VeloxMedia / Eric are still Lewis.
no man, that's genuinely not how it works.
what about andy?
So what was the "Velox Media Inc" posted in Discord?
so they say is an "attack" , right. some servers are down.
ipv6works in Fresno & the machines are up -ipv4is offIt is still christmas, right? 😂
Reguards
New Years is very busy too!
Ratguards
Yes, we don't know the exact details. So, we have to play the semantics.
As far as I recall, I don't think he had said something that would've confirmed one of this route. At least on this site, but not discord. @bramabull
Then, regarding your arguments. Yes, you paid to Lewis as part of your contract. But, he's not a party to your contract, since he has yet to sign the novation or something that tells he's successor of role Lewis hold in your contract.
If you lose any money to Lewis, it's your own fault.
Currently, 100% of the liabilities rest on Eric&Co. The best win-win arrangement I could think of is making the cost-sharing as postpaid. Perhaps on annual/biannual basis.
I said from day 1, VeloxMedia.co.uk and the new Velox Media registered in Ohio, U.S. is a exit scam. just wait and watch when the owner's excuses get over they'll shut down all the old customers' servers. Why would they keep a loss making deal?
Unfortunately, he try to do one-man operation for the first few days. Perhaps due to sense of duty. But, this is fatal because lack of sleep and exhaustion which affect his judgment. The constant barrage of criticism and gaslighting only worsen the situation.
It's not like he didn't received plea from people, to not post without PR or legal
YES, this where it went wrong. First, they continued the discord channel and replying here. The new owner Eric tarnished his own brand Velox Media by threatening the customers to shut down their servers at his own will. Which sane person present or in future will want to pay to VeloxMedia and host production site on their node? Now, that the new company is registered in USA, still the brand name is gone for ever. He should have registered a new name and start with zero if he only purchased the infra and not the current customers' accounts. Eric messed up everthing. Lewis the previous owner SCAMED Eric as well as VeloxMedia.co.uk's all current customers! What a tragic situtation. Only genuine customers got badly affected plus the brand name "Velox Media" will also be considered a shaddy / unreliable operation in future
Ope
It's possible Eric want to continue the brand name to avoid the paperwork he has to do with the leasing company.
But, he could've immediately made entity that controls the transferred infra, even temporary SPE/SPV will help the existing customer regaining confidence.
That's why people think Eric is just persona Lewis made.
even i think thae same. Lewis is Eric and Eric is Lewis.
inbetween the game, VeloxMedia brand died a early death.
GDPR Deletion requests REQUIRE confirmation from the provider that they have done it, the way he's done is not only an incomplete, but not enough to quality for following the deletion request. Usually with the request you give them an email address to send confirmation to or they use the email address you provided via email.
It's true that he'd get into trouble if he kept the data, that's why legally an email is required for confirmation, as GDPR only gives them 30 days to comply. So the fact my login works, I can't see if he actually complied with my request via the ticket, but my full name is still there.
The very fact my login works still means the GDPR was either ignored, or intentionally not executed.
GDPR is stupid and you know it, because it can be used for abuses.
As an example: one can invoke GDPR to have removed all their data from provider, then contact the payment processor to invoke some chargeback because account was deleted; meanwhile the provider won't have anything in their defence because: GDPR was invoked and there should be no data.
I am not defending VeloxMedia - I just trying to say that GDPR can be used for abuses. Accounts should simply be closed on request and deleted only if there is no activity during the past year, to keep legal track for bookkeeping and possible money laundering.
Huh, what makes you think that? A company is allowed and must keep things like invoices and can keep records for legal purposes. The company just must justify it's use of holding the data they want.
I did, got my money back, server is still up “running“ more offline than online
Absolutely. There's so much misinformation spread around by GDPR.
At the end of the day, the law exists to force companies to adopt best practices not to try to make life difficult for the sake of it. If a company has a genuine need for any PII, then they just need to be able to justify that use and disclose what purposes they use the PII for.
For instance, a company might need to keep invoices to customers for a statutory minimum period, often 5 years. KYC data often might need to be kept for a similar period for law enforcement, e.g. in the UK it's 5 years. These cannot be deleted immediately based on a customer request in order to fulfill their legal obligations. On the other hand, if a customer's service ended 5 years ago, there's no legal requirement to to still keep these documents and so there's no business justification for retaining them, so they must be deleted (whether or not a customer requests it).
The real purpose about GDPR is getting companies to think about how to handle data in their customers best interest. For example, in this case there's no need to keep KYC documents on a live web server - once the data has been verified, it should ideally be moved to a secure archive only server.
The most obvious benefit of the GDPR is disclosing exactly how and why your data is going to be used, so that you can agree to that or not before providing any data. Companies can resell some of that data, but critically, only if you've already agreed to it (even if refusing that permission means they can't offer you that service). By stating up front what the business justifications for keeping and using customer data are, and informing the customer every time that changes (and giving them a chance to opt out / cancel) means that companies don't have overly broad uses for your data, or else they'll lose customers.
The GDPR also requires that companies explicitly say which people are responsible for looking after customer data, so that people whose data might be stored are able to revoke consent or check what data is held about them. Organisations such as ICO in the UK are able to issue substantial fines when the regulations of the GDPR are violated.
Some of the previous posters here clearly live in countries that don't have the benefit of GDPR protections. Stuff like "credit card details get leaked all the time, so why worry about this?" are exactly the kind of thing the GDPR is designed to stop. The fact that it's so normalised as "well, there's nothing we can do about being hacked" is completely the wrong attitude. But it's true that many companies won't consider designing secure systems with the goal of protecting of customer data as important, unless there are consequences such as fines for failing to do so.
If you're starting from a base of complete non-compliance, obviously following all the rules of GDPR is difficult. But equally, if you design a system from the outset trying to ensure that customer data is safe and removed from subsystems when no longer required, then compliance is very easy.
The real reason companies complain so much about GDPR is because it's hard to comply, it's because they want to use customer's data in customer unfriendly ways - selling it to whoever will give them money for it without any care on how it can be used. In their view, customer data is an asset to be sold, not something to protect. Really it just boils down to values, and Europe is far more focused on people's rights and countries like the US on the whole value corporations and profit far more than people's rights.
If that were the case, half of Europe would be invoking GDPR everywhere to get free stuff.
Regardless of GDPR being applicable here, that's not how that works at all.
And as for Velox, they can easily just say they deleted your data while not having done it.
Being a US company, with likely little to no assets in the EU, makes it that the EU really can't do much to verify GDPR compliance, let alone take action.
Nor would anyone in Brussels care to do so.
I even think Lewis, Eric, Josh and Alex are either same person or same 2 guys
Everything can be abused, this is not a good argument against GDPR.
I just found this thread after my service has been down for hours. I lodged a ticket and waited.
Service has now been restored so all you rumour mongers need to get a life.
Thanks Eric.
Do we really? We also could base our assumptions/expectations on a reasonable frame of laws, facts, and experience. Or we could simply wait and see - instead of wildly guessing.
And there are indications and strong hints, for example that Eric did take care of the operations and of problems (within reason), even during the Christmas days.
My California server is not able to connect to UDP, even iperf3 is not working
ipv4back in Fresno - many thx for fixing @ Xmassounds like ddos filtering, you're safe now!
It is. GDPR also.
I only base my statements on facts. I cannot harm @VeloxMedia business by just citing their statements that they posted publicly.
Sorry, but my guess is based on statement from Eric that has yet to appear, because it would divulged the details of the deal with Lewis.
Does Eric caught off guard because he's expecting Lewis to refund the existing customer or because Lewis doesn't transfer the contract and money? What if his benevolence is the aftereffect of Lewis exit, as he doesn't want to left individual customers out cold?
Well, it doesn't really matter because they could change their mind. But it's good to know their earlier intent