All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
[Dispute] Host-C Pioneer 5TB EOL: Shifting Dates, Messy Math, and Ninja Billing Changes
Hi LET,
I’m sharing a series of bizarre and frustrating experiences with Host-C regarding the EOL of their Pioneer 5TB storage plan. The goalpost hasn’t just been moved; it feels like the whole stadium is being remodeled while I’m still in it.
The Shifting EOL Date
Initially, the EOL was announced for April 1, 2027. However, they recently pushed it forward by an entire year to April 30, 2026. Cutting the service life short by 12 months is already a huge blow to long-term users.The "Ninja" Billing Change
I noticed something even more suspicious in my client portal. My service, which I paid for as a $45/Yearly plan, has been stealthily changed by Host-C to show as $4.16/Monthly.
Why was this change made without my consent? I honestly can't figure out why an annual plan would suddenly be re-classified as a monthly rate in the backend right before the EOL process.The Broken Refund Logic
I have two identical instances, both expiring on June 3, 2026.
Service I185: Annual fee $45.
Service I125: Also an annual service, but I paid a $32.42 top-up previously to sync its expiry date with the other one (documented in Ticket GNK-260844).
Even though both are paid until the same day, Host-C quoted different refunds:
I185: $4.07
I125: $3.35The Math Doesn't Add Up
Based on a $45/year rate, 34 days of remaining service (May 1 to June 3) should be $4.19. Host-C's numbers are not only inconsistent but both are undervalued.
I’ve attached all the evidence:
Notice Screenshot: Showing the EOL date being moved forward by a year.
Support Ticket: Their refusal to explain the math and the inconsistent quotes.
Service Status: Proof that both instances expire on June 3, 2026.
Historical Invoices: Showing the $45 and $32.42 payments.
Ticket GNK-260844: Proving the top-up was to sync an annual cycle, not a lower-tier plan.
Questions for the community:
Is it standard for Host-C to "re-classify" annual plans into monthly ones in the backend right before EOL?
Shouldn't the refund be based on the remaining service period rather than just the last invoice dollar amount?
I'm posting this to warn others to check their accounts and refund quotes. If they are doing this to me for a few dollars, they are likely doing it to everyone.
(Drafted with assistance from Gemini)
Comments
Oh no 🍿
Enjoy the popcorn! I’ve been using low-end boxes for years, but seeing a provider move an EOL date forward by an entire year and then mess up the math on a pro-rated refund is a new low even for me.
Hello nodeseek https://www.nodeseek.com/post-710214-1 👋
also, tagging @host_c
Accept it and move on. This EOL storage plan was discussed months ago.
Point 1 have been discussed extensively. It's just not feasible.
Point 2-4 is basically the same thing. 2*(34/365)*45=8.3835. But, you are offered $7.42. So, there's at least $0.96 difference. That's around 3 small meat bun.
You should have post this on @host_c dedicated thread with this 203 characters count "I'm disappointed by EOL changes, but why there's difference of $0.96 between prorated refund (34 days) for 2 instances ($45/year) @host_c pioneer 5TB (I185,I125)? "
Oh I thought you meant C-Servers I mentally swap them all the time
wow that's just mean man.
I know and apologize
Sorry C-Servers I don't mean to be mean.
I mean, oh fuck I guess I am mean.
@host_c good to see you online
hello @host_c can i get both of this users vpses transfered to my account, considering he's unwilling to migrate them? i'm willing to pay new pricing, thanks.
i m serious about this request
LOL
Oh HOST-C, what have you done again.......
Recently = 3 moths ago, you should check your emails, our chat here and on OGF, and the billing website https://my.host-c.com/, oh, yes and your account:
it is also in network status for a very long time:
The only place we did not post this on the MOON, ARTEMIS asked for too much to put a banner there, sry.
The “ninja move” was specifically designed to handle annual and quarterly EOL services that were due for renewal in End February and March. Instead of having users renew for another full year or quarter—only to then deal with refund requests—it provided an additional month for data migration.
In other words, it avoided unnecessary renewals, refund processing, and extra hassle on both sides. Overall, it was simply the more practical and convenient approach for everyone involved.
The prorated refund was calculated for the period 01/05/2026 → 03/06/2026. ( and it should had been 30/04/2026 → 03/06/2026 as 30 April was the announced end date, yet I said let's give 1 more day to all as it is more fair that way as we did stop services on 1 MAY not 30 April).
For Service I185, the last invoice value was $45.00, so the refund was calculated based on that full annual price.
For Service I125, the last invoice value was $32.42, which you previously paid to align its expiry date with the other service. As such, the prorated refund for this service is calculated based on $32.42, not $45.00. ( it never renew at $45.00 to have that base for prorated refund )
Although both services now share the same end date, they do not share the same billing base. Each service is always prorated according to its most recent invoice value, which is why the refund amounts differ.
I hope this clarifies the situation.
HOST-C
Yeah, a bit on the country side today, today is Labor Day in RO, so we decided to throw in a BBQ
i m serious request! no laughage! host-c storage is very good i m lov, i want more.
DM me if you need custom stuff, I doubt you need 2 more services of the same type.
But I will be able to reply only tomorrow, need to drive home, and it is a damn long drive....
Drive safely @host_c
I am not driving, hence the "long drive "
THX!
Wah wah
Holy shit host_c stealing money with wrong refund logic. Sad times :<
I'm going to bill everyone that posted in this thread 37 cents each for the time I spent reading. Except me, not billing myself.
I will bill you, no problem
It’s unlikely for the Top Host to steal pennies of refunds.
Sure please send invoice.
I continue to be amazed at the number of people that didn't take the original ~$10/yr upgrade and are now upset.
Thank you for the detailed explanation, Host-C. However, the numbers and the logic still don't align with the facts.
My Service Does Not Fit Your "Target Group". You stated the "ninja move" was designed for users due for renewal in late February and March to avoid "unnecessary renewals". My services were not due for renewal until June 3, 2026. I was not at risk of a "full year renewal" right before the EOL date. So why was my account modified without consent? You explained the purpose of the move for others, but you haven't explained why it was applied to a user whose renewal was still months away.
The "1-Day Extension" Logic
You mentioned you decided to give everyone one extra day (stopping May 1st instead of April 30th). My question is: based on what official notice? I saw no email or announcement regarding this change. If you can unilaterally decide to move the date by one day, what’s stopping a provider from moving it by a week to further reduce the refund amount? A refund should be calculated based on the announced EOL date, not spontaneous decisions.
Also, even if we use your "Ninja" Monthly rate ($4.16), the math doesn't seem to favor your current calculations, as a monthly-based pro-rata would result in a higher amount than what was offered in the ticket.
The Misconception of Service I125’s "Billing Base"
I do not accept your explanation for I125. As documented in Ticket GNK-260844, I explicitly requested to convert I125 to Annual billing and sync its expiry date with my other service. After paying the $32.42 synchronization invoice, my client area correctly showed the service as a $45.00/year plan.
A synchronization invoice is a partial payment to align dates; it is NOT the "base value" of the service itself. Both I185 and I125 are the exact same 5TB plan and should be pro-rated based on their actual annual value ($45.00). Using a "sync invoice" as a base unfairly penalizes customers who choose to organize their billing.
Could you please provide the exact mathematical formula used for these two services? Transparency requires showing the math, not just the conclusion.
Lol. Better start a gofundme to get this guy his $0.96.
It’s not about the $0.96; it’s about the fact that if a provider can’t get basic math right—or worse, silently changes account terms—what else are they getting wrong? If they do this to 1,000 users, that's a free $1,000 for "messy math".
Don't worry, I can take this problematic service from you completely free of charge and you won't have to lie sleepless about it ever again!
$5
There's a diff of $.96 so $4.04 then