Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FightThisPatent
What court? What "rights" do you think you have to make any demands as to who the escrow agent is? You truly are in a powerless position right now, and one that I don't envy and i understand the frustration.
|
All webmasters who are creditors of iBill have full rights in court to be paid on a due date. This has not happened. No webmaster is obliged to even listen to any iBill-appointed escrow agent. There are also other options in this instance.
Quote:
|
The point is that the EU bank that handled the CC transactions for EU iBilll STOPPED sending payments to iBILL because they saw that EU webmasters weren't getting paid. In order for EU webmasters to get paid, SOME solution was needed. Inteca stepped in as being the third party, and for whatever credintials, etc, the EU Bank agreed to the deal.
|
Totally agree! If, and there is absolutely no evidence this is the case, Mr Williams and Inteca have stepped in to offer "independent escrow agent services" - that is commendable and I'd credit him for even considering help clean this mess up.
Quote:
|
It doesn't matter whether you trust Inteca or not. It doesn't even matter if you find Chris Williams to have any integrity at all. What matters is that the EU bank will be releasing the funds to Inteca for disbursements to be made.
|
It sure does matter to creditors whether they trust Inteca. This is the "organization" - so far, worth nothing, that is being entrusted with webmaster funds.
Quote:
|
If Inteca doesn't do what they are supposed to do, don't you think that the EU bank will know how to track Inteca down? Don't you think that the bank will have some kind of assurances in place that Inteca isn't a scam?
|
Ask yourself... what is Inteca? As far as is known at this time it is a $10 domain name - not any legal entity. The supposed participants in this $10 domain name are also either unwilling or unable to state basic credentials, such as an address, jurisdiction, phone or fax numbers. Basically, it is a "nothing". What makes you think a bank is dealing with a domain name called inteca.org?? It is reasonable to assume a bank will want full credentials presented - these sure are not "inteca.org" as we know it.
Quote:
|
I realize that lack of info and some creative detective work have added alot of fuel to this blazing fire... wild speculations and lack of facts to a disservice to everyone. I hope that by me cutting right to the points, that those that are uncertain about what is going on can focus on the facts, rather than the speculations.
|
There is very little "wild speculation" so far - simply facts. These facts are not in any doubt. I won't go thru em all again - it's too boring :-) Even "creative detectives" would not accept the number of total coincidences so far - even forgetting the facts.
But... in conjuction with the already known conduct of iBill for lying, deception, broken promises and several other issues which, so far, have not been mentioned - there is 100% reason not to trust *anything* at face value and little doubts, this saga will continue even after any future demise of iBill.
The flip side of the coin is that if Christopher Williams is, as he is painted to be by iBill (DUH?), - namely a person genuinely acting as an independent escrow agent - the man has my 100% support and I'd even pay him! :-) But.. that is not the case at this time for all the reasons stated previously on this thread.
This smells like the usual iBill screwup in presenting anything - time will tell.