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
You could at least attempt to disguise yourself a little more - there's only one user that attempted the Texas > Finland migration so far. Not brilliant, isn't it?
Not smart at all to attempt to pressure a provider when you are dependent on a refund, most especially when that was never denied in the first place; when we've clearly stated that you were compliant via ticket; and that you now need to send an e-mail to the requested e-mail, as it is the regular policy since 01-01-2026. Which will continue.
I wouldn't be complaining at all considering you've only used bogus customer account details on your account to purchase a product - which, per the Terms and Conditions, do not allow a refund when this happens, and yet you are requesting it, and yet it was accepted, including with the requested deadline of four days out of the predicted maximum of seven.
You're the very reason KYC policies exist at providers in the first place.
I'll personally make sure you are blacklisted once the refunds are processed. In the meantime, thank you for proving my point on the fact that fraud is rampant at this forum. Have a good day.
Yeah this just sounds like both sides escalating-airing KYC/refund stuff publicly while it’s still being processed is messy all around.
I’m genuinely curious about what "mystery" you think you’ve solved. My username on this forum is identical to the name on my account in your system. It’s right there in your database.
Exactly which part of my information do you find "bogus"? If my details were so suspicious, why did you happily accept my payments, activate my services, and even take my money for a recent upgrade without a single word?
You only started questioning my "legitimacy" the moment I pointed out that you aren't even providing the bare minimum service you're legally obligated to. You had no issues with my "details" while you were collecting my money; you only have an issue now that I'm holding you accountable.
Instead of making baseless public accusations of fraud to save face, maybe you should focus on why your "Support Adjustments" don't even work for customers who meet your own criteria.
You’re right. I’ve already stated the facts and proved that the claims about my 'bogus details' are false. I’ll leave it at that and wait for the legal refund process to conclude through the proper channels. Thanks for the input.
You really think I will be talking to you?
How about that: account closed, disabled, blacklisted, and while all amounts were refunded to card from the payment gateway, you were also reported for fraud as well.
Set and done. And services immediately terminated, of course.
We don't want any of your money. Have a good day.
@defneselat What was the fraud you committed? I re-read those messages a few times and can't find it.
To answer the question about what "fraud" I supposedly committed:
When my US node crashed, I paid for an upgrade to a higher-spec Finland node. When I mentioned this in a previous post, Tiago used that info to "identify" and target me publicly, claiming my details were "bogus." I simply pointed out that my username here and my account name in the C-Servers panel are identical. So, if I'm a "fraud," I’m a very consistent one that he was happy to take money from for months.
Honestly, I still don't know what kind of "fraud" I committed or what he actually reported, but it seems asking for the service you paid for is considered a crime here.
That said, Tiago has now closed my account and initiated the refund. I genuinely want to thank him for finally starting the refund process. However, I have one final question for him:
I just received an automated "Account Suspended" email saying: "If you think this is a mistake, you can contact us." Hey Tiago, just asking for a friend...
To "contact" you about this, should we buy the $6.79 human support ticket, or should we just have another heart-to-heart talk with Michael Williams, your AI bot who has no authority to do anything? 
This looks really bad for @alfatarsos
Also I hate AI support too especially when AI just doesn't understand the thing and it can be easily resolved with human support.
When will these providers realize that AI support cant do anything meaningful and just frustrates the end consumer who just want to buy servers and just have things be working for the most part smh, I am sorry for this and hope that some resolution occurs for you my friend.
Thanks a lot for the support!
But the core issue here isn't just that the AI doesn't "understand" things—the real problem is that it is completely unauthorized.
For instance, when I told the bot that my package upgrade wasn't processed, it had no access to the database or my account status to verify anything. It’s just like a generic ChatGPT window. After giving me 1-2 generic tips, the AI tells me to "open a ticket."
But here’s the irony: the provider has blocked the ticket system for my plan! It's a perfect "dead-end" loop designed to prevent you from ever reaching a human. It's not support; it's a gatekeeper meant to exhaust the customer.
I mean yeah, there are some problems where they just do not help (period), this is one of them I understand.
I FEEL THIS IN MY BONES. The worst part feels when you are stuck. I hope that something positive happens to you personally though so @alfatarsos you should do something about it as soon as possible for them if/when possible.
If the users at this topic think I will be staying here giving justifications "at will", then they are wrong. I have nearly 300 messages exchanged at this forum.
The process now concludes through the respective regular channels at C-Servers, in whichever sense it comes to be necessary, and this will be the last message you will get from me at this topic or at this forum for quite a while.
Time for some well-earned vacations of the toxicity of LowEndTalk.
Have a nice week, everyone!
You're a scam artist and LET should ban you. Full stop.
Why are some hosting providers like @C-servers acting so deranged, I mean, I feel shocked by the way that they are conducting a business...
@defneselat wasn't even being angry or anything, even as a bystander I feel somewhat angry at the way @alfatarsos is responding
People use LET providers sometimes to support a small provider but these responses truly make me feel :-/
What is even happening to the world at this point, lol.
Honestly, beyond being frustrated, I was actually one of the most reasonable customers here. If they had just listened, completed my upgrade (even at the cost of my data), and dropped the KYC nonsense, I would have happily continued using the service without even asking for a refund or compensation for the lost uptime.
But unfortunately, this isn't an isolated incident. This provider has a history of being incredibly rude to customers. Instead of a professional "this is out of our support scope," they’ve previously told users things like: "Go question what you are doing with your life, the money you give is worth less than my minutes."
You can see the history of this "customer service" style right here on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/VPS/comments/1phrhn9/cservers_good_deals_and_rude_customer_service/
Thank you all again for the support.
Regardless of the amount, the uncertainty regarding the tools we use daily is truly frustrating. I hope we all navigate these situations with minimal loss of data, time, and money
lmao i had enough of this company i even left some money that they didn't refund it or credit it to my account, they even don't know what they run, still people get fooled like me i feel funny
Ironic the guy asking for everyone to KYC is the same guy who info dumped a bunch of stuff (allegedly) about me in the other thread and didn't delete it when asked...
I am genuinely curious about what you went through. Could you please give a brief summary of what happened if you don't mind?
Sure, I will try to quickly summarize while keeping it primarily about alfa so as to not derail this thread.
There was another provider drama in the other thread which involved another provider leaking what he believes is my real name and contacting who he believes is my real employer. (Private info). That had nothing to do with alfa, but alfa in the thread made some conjectures on how the provider could have determined this. In the process of this conjecture, alfa posted (what they both think is) my real name / job title / birth year / city / business address onto LET, which involved looking up public records, linked in posts, apparently schooling history, etc.
I asked this to be taken down in the following post, but it was ignored. (In fairness, it seems alfa has had a very busy day, so I can kind of understand, but still it is too invasive for privacy IMO.)
That is so disgusting and shocking that I literally had to read it 2-3 times just to make sure I understood it correctly. I hope you are doing okay, and thank you for explaining this.
Now everyone reading this thread can clearly see the true colors of this guy—the exact same person who demands IDs from people, calls me out for being anonymous, and constantly targets anonymous users. It is a complete disgrace
NanoVPS-US back online as of this morning!
The VPS is back online, but the network is still not performing normally. Better wait for a while to see how it holds up.
NAT seems functional again, at least at the moment!
Hello,
Today when I logged into your website, I found that my account had been disabled. I also noticed that some of my servers were partially refunded, all without any prior notice.
I would like to ask: if I need to back up the data on my servers, what should I do now? I have not been given any opportunity to access or secure my data.
I am fully willing to cooperate with any investigation regarding my servers. I can guarantee that there has been no illegal activity, and I am also willing to complete KYC verification, or any other required verification process. I am a completely legitimate user.
In addition, I have actively promoted your services to others and even published recommendation articles on my blog. Through this, I have earned over $80 in affiliate commissions. Does the suspension of my account mean that these commissions will not be paid out?
Please provide clear answers to these questions.
Thank you.
Apologies in advance for the long post.
Three out of four of your VPS services were found doing an automated SYN TCP IPv4 mass port scanning on the first of two networking test series, ran between 16h15 and 16h37 WET.
Alongside you, 31 more services were caught doing the exact same, to varying levels of severity, but all severe. A relevant amount of the reports for the IPv4 were precisely SYN TCP IPv4 and port scanning.
The execution for all of them is the exact same: as we had originally warned, their services were terminated, including all non-associated e-mails, and their account was blacklisted and blocked. No differences there.
Since a chain of trust, essential for the affiliate relationship to exist, was unfortunately lost on you due to what happenned, your affiliate commissions are also explicitly lost as well, under the Intentional Abuse policies and as it would naturally be expected under these circumstances. No company can pay a customer that, not isolated of course, but together with several others, causes such a disruptive, systemic action, affects 298 services and leaves those users without service for a total of 12 days.
The only reason you got refunded on an existing service was not due to honor, but because of chargeback control. If it depended on me, you wouldn't even have had that, but it has to be done.
Thank you for your attention.
A e-mail will follow shortly regarding Zeta.10 Houston - which is, I confirm, back to normal and, hopefully, back for good. At least serious work was done in that direction today.
The last 6 hours were very, very hard, involving the global analysis of nearly 17000 TCP and 92000 UDP packets, user accounts, evaluating and acting on services/users that pose a systemic risk, among several others, and implementing systems that will allow finer grain on future potential service violations.
There will be zero tolerance for abuses at Zeta.10 Houston, as expected.
Regarding the questions about data for @WyvernCo , indeed I was very much occupied at the time, so couldn't get to the topic in due time (I see that it got redacted already at around 11AM), but all that was intended with that post was not to dox someone - that data being true or not - but to actually show not only how easy it was to get those details, but also the possibly followed reasoning by the other agent for the issues mentioned on the now-closed topic.
It is to make clear that at no point was my intention to dox or harrass @WyvernCo, to which I nevertheless apologize if it felt half-bakedly doxxed. The post was done as a normal user, not any company representative, and solely and strictly intented to show a (very possible) flow of reasoning on a third-party, not for me to state something direct - most especially because I have nothing to do with the situation, nor am I a customer of that third party. My concerns are with LET to a wider extent, not isolated situations.
Lastly, regarding the self-prophetized "all IDs will be requested" of the fraud-blocked @defneselat, it is incorrect, and as a final position I am pleased to say that no KYC will be mandated on the existing user accounts.
I stand by what I stated here - I mentioned that if KYC was avoidable I'd very much avoid it, and the networking tests were very productive, so there is no need for KYC - only regular management. The idea of KYC was never to avoid refunds, but to control something essential - balance, on servers. Systemic risk is important and must be controlled.
Obviously C-Servers will have to do something in this regard, and what we will do actually aligns with our findings here, but also on the general thought of this entire forum - any applicable checks shall be done pre-purchase. That's where any action must be. This is also why, temporarily, all payment gateways are offline at C-Servers and will be so for the next 24/48h - we'll be implementing new controls and adjustments.
That shall be my last statement on the matter.
I can provide full access to all my servers for inspection. I do not believe my servers are involved in any malicious activity. The configurations are minimal, and I only run a single program used to manage or interact with my other servers. Unless the servers have been compromised, I find it unlikely that they are performing any unauthorized actions.
Please provide concrete evidence showing that these scans or activities are indeed malicious. I would like to understand what exactly these port scans are targeting and how they were determined to originate from my servers. I will investigate whether any program on my servers could be responsible. If no such activity is found, then accusing my servers of malicious scanning would be inappropriate.
Additionally, you have not clearly addressed my other concerns. What will happen to my affiliate earnings? I have accumulated around $80 in commissions—will these still be paid out? Also, if I need to back up my server data, how should I proceed now that my account has been suspended?
From my perspective, I have not violated any terms or engaged in illegal activities. My account was terminated without prior notice, which seems excessive. Could you clarify whether this action was taken due to a specific violation of your terms of service?
I would like to emphasize that I am fully compliant and willing to cooperate, including identity verification (KYC) or any necessary checks. However, it is important to establish the facts. I am confident that I have not engaged in any illegal activity, and therefore my account should not be suspended without valid justification.
whatever he say it's nonsense, i wouldn't stop hating in this little scam, it's made me a mad that i remember i wouldn't open chargeback for 7$ it wasn't worth my time but it's keep his business running
Thank you @alfatarsos, I accept your apology regarding the other post and I do believe your intent was good in making it.
Regarding KYC, I would like to respectfully suggest you include a disclaimer on your checkout flow (maybe https://web.c-servers.co.uk/case/payment where other PII details are entered) that prominently indicates your service will require KYC. Some customers do feel very passionately about KYC, and if they know it ahead of time, this will help divert them before leading to future frustration. (I see in your post it indicates pre-payment, which is great, but I would suggest that includes before PII entry if possible)
34 vps were port scanning lol this is pretty serious!
Honestly, that’s just nonsense. I’ve only deployed XrayR on my server, and it’s solely used to connect to my own panel for pairing and data transmission. I’m just using a few small VPS instances to speed up access to some US-based services, and most of the time (around 90%) it’s actually limited or idle.
XrayR is open-source, so anyone can review the code at any time. Besides that, there’s nothing else running on these servers—and with such low specs, there’s not much else that could even be deployed.
I’d really like to see what actual evidence they have. Otherwise, the only explanations would be issues on their side, like poor isolation between hosts or even a possible breach.
And let’s be real—the fact that I have over $80 in affiliate commissions in their system is probably the real point here.
@alfatarsos
I would like to respond directly here, as there are several serious issues with the claims made.
This is a fundamental problem.
In a shared IPv4 NAT environment, traffic observed at the NAT bridge is aggregated across multiple tenants. Without per-instance correlation, it is not technically possible to reliably attribute that traffic to a specific VPS.
These are serious accusations, but no verifiable evidence has been provided:
My setup is minimal and private:
This profile does not match the behavior described.
My access may appear from both China and Canada due to residency and work requirements.
I hold permanent residency in both regions and maintain established living arrangements, including property. Therefore, my registration information is valid regardless of where I access the service.
If necessary, I am willing to verify this through a third-party or supervised process.
That said, geographic access patterns are unrelated to the technical accusations and cannot be used as evidence of abuse.
Now, I want to address one particularly serious point:
This is completely incorrect.
I have never opened, filed, or been involved in any PayPal dispute — not with this provider, and not with any provider.
This is a fully verifiable fact.
If such a basic and easily verifiable statement is wrong, it raises a fundamental question:
How reliable are the rest of the conclusions?
At this point, we are seeing:
I am fully willing to cooperate and provide access for verification if required.
However, serious accusations require proper attribution and verifiable evidence.