I cancelled my two host accounts with Deru/Weinbar in early April after the worst hosting experience I've ever had (one of my sites was down over 50% of March after the other was down about 20% of February). I switched over to hostinggroup.com - which has been amazing - and heaved a sigh of relief.

Today I received an e-mail that my credit card had been charged $62.48 for 17.5 gig of bandwidth overages in FEBRUARY. Darin claimed another customer had been charged accidentally and they were rectifying the mistake. Bull. I guess with Weinbar customers leaving en masse Deru has to resort to other ways to turn a profit. That 17.5 gig overage is bull****, my accounts have been cancelled (they shouldn't even HAVE my CC#), and they're not even the same damn company I made a contract with. I wasn't even informed that Weinbar had been sold until I wrote in to ask why my site was so jacked up.

I've given Deru a chance to credit my card, which I hope (but doubt) they'll do. If they don't, I'm regarding this as theft. Anyone else got any unexpected charges from Deru?

Hey,

How about giving the deru guys time to rectify the issue before posting such harsh things on a public forum? It could be a honest mistake or might not be one... i totally understand your current state, but I would yet give them sufficient time to rectify the issue...

kunal

They did the same to me, charged me for like over 120 GB of bandwidth when I should of been charged for alot less, I was charged a few hundred unlike you got me so pissed off, although they fixed it pretty quick

As Blake mentioned, when we billed for the bandwidth overages, the overage charges for multiple customers were charged to twnpmp news, which was quickly brought to our attention, and we immediately rectified the situation by crediting back their credit card. The charges were assigned to individual accounts in the billing system, yet only twnpnews credit card was charged.

The old Weinbar billing system has multiple issues (including this one) so we are migrating away from it to one we believe has less issues (and we have more experience with).

To date, overage charges for February, March, and April had not been billed and charged for, so we are going through and charging for them now. Blake may not like the fact that he is being charged two months later for bandwidth he used in February, but the fact is his web site used the bandwidth and we will not be held hostage in this forum because he dislikes that.

We officially acquried the assets of the company on 3/1/2002 - included in the assets were customer contracts and accounts receivable, so we are well within our rights to collect on outstanding balances and charge peoples credit cards for service they agreed to.

We (I) have thick skin, so I'll let the "theft" and "fraud" comments slide - we only expect people to pay for the bandwidth they use. I asked Blake why he felt being charged for usage he used was fraud, and his response was to come here and take his case public.

Regarding the outages (50% and 20% is a bit exagerated, but any percent is unacceptable) - we have pending criminal and civil litigation regarding the root causes of that, so we can not comment. Suffice it to say that if I were Blake/TWNPNews, I wouldn't have been happy either - being happy and paying for bandwidth you used are two seperate issues.

Thank you Kunal for the kind words - it seems like this board is like a Jerry Springer show, everything is a huge controversy...

Darin

The two emails we sent to Blake on the Subject:

===========================================

Subject: Re: ProPay Transaction
To: v4vendetta@hotmail.com (Blake Washer)
Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 11:36:58 -0700 (MST)
Cc: billing@deru.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-96.6 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,FROM_MALFORMED,DEAR_S
OMEBODY,FREQ_SPAM_PHRASE,A_FROM_IN_AUTO_WLIST version=2.01


Hi Blake,

Right before this was sent to you another email was sent explaining
that this charge is for the excess bandwidth you used in February that
you had not paid for yet.

Here's the top part of that email:

Hi Blake,

I understand you have moved on from Weinbar, which is unfortunate, but
understandable.

While auditing the accounting records we found that you used 37.85
GB's of transfer in Feb 2002 - which is 17.85 GB's over the amount
included with the WHT Special account.

We attempted to bill for this amount in March, but unfortunately the
charge was passed on to another customer instead of you. We are
correcting that mistake and running the charge fo $62.48 on your
credit card now for the 17.85 * $3.50 per gig overage.

Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this charge.


We've deleted your cc info going forward...


Darin


> What the hell is this?! Credit that amount back IMMEDIATELY. I have
> cancelled all accounts with Weinbar and you have NO authorization to bill my
> credit card.
>
> -Blake Washer

=============================================

Subject: Re: Weinbar bandwidth usage in Feb/2002
To: v4vendetta@hotmail.com (Blake Washer)
Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 11:37:51 -0700 (MST)
Cc: darin@deru.net
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-98.2 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,FROM_MALFORMED,DEAR_S
OMEBODY,A_FROM_IN_AUTO_WLIST version=2.01


Please explain how charging for usage that your account used in
February is Fraud.

Darin

> I responded to your billing e-mail about this charge - it is not authorized
> and I expect it to be credited back immediately. If you do not credit the
> full amount back to my card I will regard it as fraud and proceed
> accordingly.
>
> -Blake Washer
>
>

kunal, the harsh part is that my site was down 20% of one month and 50% of another, which is something Deru was given the chance to rectify. This is just another part of the sordid saga and as you can see, as I anticipated, Deru (Darin) doesn't want to do anything about it. If the "mischarge" was quickly brought to Deru's attention, why are they charging me now (conveniently after I've left their craptastic hosting)?

Here's my e-mail response:

I did not use that amount of bandwidth, and as I am not a customer I no longer even have access to those stats. It was Weinbar's responsibility to attempt to bill me while I was their customer - and I would've disputed it then too. You shouldn't even have retained my CC#, let alone charge it without authorization.

I did not and could not have used that much bandwidth, considering how much my site was down in February. You say a mistake was made in billing, yet are sure the bandwidth figures are correct? I had hoped I was done getting screwed by Deru.

If it makes your Accounting dept. feel better, take the jacked-up bandwidth figures from Feb. and balance them out against the REAL ones in March, when I couldn't even use half and the contractually obligated "24/7 e-mail support" never materialized. So I'm responsible to you for the terms of my contract with Weinbar, but you're not responsible to me for the same?

If you do not intend to credit me $62.48, let me know.

Blake,

Everything is logged, archived, and backed up to tape. Apache logs, webalizer/analog reports, downtime reports for the servers you were using, trouble ticket reports, etc. So, to answer your question, yes, we are certain you used the bandwidth and are going to let the charges stand and if necessary will defend any charge backs you may attempt.

If you wish to continue to berate us in public that is your choice, we will not respond further on this issue.

Take care,

Darin

As a former banker, I can assure you that a company has the right to charge you well after the services are rendered (it has been a while and i don't remember the exact time frames). However, you can continue to request chargebacks 'til the matter reaches arbitration - assuming they are denied. I must add that my experience is with Visa and Mastercard, other cards may have different rules. Good luck to you both. :erm:

Having purchase several web hosting companies, we have never and will never automatically bill a credit card which was authorized to be billed by a predecessor company. The only way this is permissable is if you acquired the legal entity. But, if as said here you acquired assets, while you did acquire receivables, the credit card policies are governed by the card issuers. Now, you may have some leeway if you took over the former's merchant account, but otherwise you are treading on very dangerous ground.

I am not addressing the issue of whether you are owed or not, just whether you have the right to charge the card without specific new permission. And, my opinion, is you need a new authorization. In fact, if the customer signed an authorization form, I would suspect it showed clearly the legal entity authorized to charge the card.

Again, one other possible exception contracturally, but one the credit card companies generally don't accept, is if it noted Company name or successor.

The credit card companies are just very strict on who the legal parties to the agreements are.

Yes, a good candidate for arbitration. Few people are aware of the rights they have as card holders, merchants can be quite ignorant as well, for that matter.

IMO, if the company had a 30 day money back guarantee then the customer should get all their money back. However, if the customer has paid in full for that month then all related charges should still stand. I agree that Weinbar should not have your CC on file now that you are not a customer, but you are still responsible for any charges that you had built up while you were a customer. Should Weinbar bill you 3 months later, when you are no longera customer? That's not one I can answer, nor do I want to. As said by other WHT members, this would be the perfect situation for a 3rd party to handle.


My suggestion is that Weinbar provide server logs that shows that the customer actually used the 18 GB. If they can not come up with the logs then there is no basis for the charge and a chargeback will pretty much be guaranteed. However, if the logs are available then maybe you two can agree on a lesser price since Blake is no longer a customer and the original company was bought out - maybe something like $1.75/GB??? (just a suggestion)

dwayrynen i suggest you edit your post and remove the customer's e-mail address from a public forum....unless blake gave you permission to post it?? and thank you for refraining from giving customer support off forums

Well I went back through my e-mail, and found something that reminded me what happened. The beginning of February my site was shut down for supposedly exceeding its bandwidth. I wrote and said there was no way I'd used *22* gig of bandwidth in 2 or 8 days (I don't know when the billing cycle began). Weinbar said they'd look into it and they turned my site back on.

They had not contacted me two days before shutting off my site as is promised in their AUP/TOS and I had not agreed to pay any overage charges when they turned the site back on. Now, I didn't usually use 22 gig in a MONTH, let alone 2-8 days. I later found out that this was right after they changed their servers! Does this sound like a screwup to any of you?

Darin responded: "This is not an error, this is you trying to get something for free." I didn't get anything but a gigantic headache, and you can have it back. ProPay will charge you $15 for each chargeback.

.

(-:

[edit]

I am flabbergasted to see the damage being done to a company (by themselves) over $62. To tell you the truth, it's a little embarassing.
I feel like sending you $62, Deru, just because I feel so sorry for you.

I don't always win with customers. I used to try, but realized it was very much like wrestling a pig in the mud: after a while, you realize the pig likes it.

Originally posted by dwayrynen
Please read our contract again, specifically this section:

Assets: any and all properties and businesses of Company of every kind, character and description, whether real, personal or mixed, tangible or intangible, known or unknown and wherever located, as a going concern (including, without limitation, all goodwill, licenses, permits, franchises, claims, records, deposits, cash, bank accounts, merchant accounts, securities, prepaid items, accounts receivable, supplies, materials, work in progress, finished goods, equipment, machinery, furniture, fixtures, motor vehicles, contracts, notes, evidences of indebtedness, purchase and sales orders, inventory, sales data, customer lists, distribution facilities, furniture, inventions, computer programs, patents, patent rights, trade-marks, service marks, copyrights, trade names, trade secrets, domain names, and other rights and privileges, land, leasehold rights and improvements except for those assets disposed of in the ordinary course of business prior to the Closing.



As Michael pointed out, Weinbar did not bill, charge or invoice this customer for those overages. By your own contact as listed here, you have no grounds to CREATE a NEW bill on a date that was a month BEFORE you purchased their assests. There had to be a record or entry from Weinbar saying 'this customer owes this much for overage'. By assuming everything I've read in this threat is correct, there was no such entry. But you're creating one using a date before you owned the assets.

What are you going to do next, go back a year from now and see if anyone needed to be billed then too? There was no asset for this overage charge to be purchased by you because it didn't exist so thus you can't legally create that asset after the fact.

Weinbar billed for several items on or after the 1st of the month for the prior month - namely bandwidth overages and reseller accounts. This is covered in the purchase agreement.

My response here isn't regarding the $62, it's regarding Michaels comments in general that we don't have a right to collect on uncollected receivables, whether they had been billed or not.

Weinbar never created invoices for overages - he just plugged the numbers into the billing system which in turn whacked the credit cards and sent an email receipt.

By defination overages are billed when the month is over, not during the month in question so there was no way he could have billed for them.

Darin

.

My response here isn't regarding the $62, it's regarding Michaels comments in general that we dont' have a right to collect on uncollected receivables, weither they had been billed or not.
I'm not trying to pound on you. As far as I know, we're in the same business.
All I'm saying is why do you care what he thinks or says? Why not just cut your losses (or whoever the losses belong to) and NOT let people see you as a hard-ass?

(-:

(-:

.

Since Michael chose to publicly post to the list, I am forced to respond.

There is obviously at least two sides to every story, and if anyone cares to hear the other side, they are welcome to contact me off list.

.

Since Michael chose to publicly post to the list, I am forced to respond.

There is obviously at least two sides to every story, and if anyone cares to hear the other side, they are welcome to contact me off list.

Darin Wayrynen
darin@deru.net

Edit

Darin
So far there has been no mention on the Weinbar site that it has in fact changed hands. The support forum there is pretty much dead, and getting a responce is all but impossible in any way it seems.

We canceled our account at the end of April. We have yet to receive confirmation. In addition, the site is still active on Weinbar servers. We demand confirmation that you have closed our account. We will charge back any and all charges made to us after May 1st 2002. I have gone public here, after 3 private email attempts to obtain confirmation have failed.

Please read your email and confirm.

Thank you.

Confirmation received.
Thank you.

I am a Weinbar customer, the Weinbar site is now down - and as far as I can tell - as the technical contact, I was never notified of the changeover. I only read about it on this forum...

Anway - how the heck do we reach support?

Hi Stephen, Weinbar doesn't exist any longer. Your servers are
hosted by Deru now.

We had a switch crash, and when it came up it's access lists were missing - any traffic destined for it was being black holed which affected your server, and the shared servers supporting the old weinbar web site.

Brown outs are something that are difficult to route around - unlike Black outs where unreachability of a router is easy to detect. We've tried to implement solutions like Opnix's orbit 1000, but those solutions have their own set of problems.


In any case Stephen, you have been well aware of the change for months now - we've interacted in email regarding your servers multiple times. Tom's been sending us payments for months...