Topic: all finished - page 9. (Read 44926 times)

Reports from the other thread:





Draw your own conclusions, but since the batch #2 machines being delivered two weeks ago I think we are definitely being scratched from the shipping queue.

So this means we missed delivery chance already by being in a refund queue?

At this point, are we the only group considering legal action against HF? 
 
Have they actually made us a refund offer, and if so, how much is it?  40% fees from the lawyers with 400BTC refunds might be less than the refund we are being offered?

Personally I agree that if 600BTC was paid for the HF shares, then 600BTC should be returned, with a 1.5 - 3 % refund fee.

This is because we all paid for the shares under the promise that non-delivery resulted in refund, and also we were under the illusion that HF were honourable to their word of their BTC refund policy.

It would be good to know wth is happening with HashFast, as their order list isnt really moving, and I guess that means they are picking which orders to complete, as many people chasing refunds.

If they are blocking service updates or announcements to their paid customers, and selecting which orders to fill, this is another example of how they are an underhand company and are not offering any of the promised after sales support for their unhappy customers.

WH, please get some kind of news about where we are with this, as its frustrating to think that our hardware is being delivered to other customers who kept quiet while we are having a TimeOut to get our legal boots on.

By my estimates we would need 3-4x our original hash rate to have any chance of the MPP working out, is there any feedback from others on how the MPP is panning out?

OK, I will chill out, but as long as this affair is nontransparent group-buyers are making the wrong decisions based on misinformation. We are thinking that we are aiming towards full BTC refund, yet yesterday we found that Waldo claims the aim is for a full refund of the HashFast part of the money (400 BTC), not his part (200 BTC). Lawyer's fee is 40%, but that obviously means 40% of the 400 BTC, so even if we win the lawsuit we would get 60% * 400 = 240 BTC. Since we payed 600 BTC for the equipment, maximum we can get if we win the lawsuit is 240/600 = 40% of the amount payed, minus additional lawyer fees we also found out exist yesterday. I'm not going even to calculate how much it can be if we lose when it's 40% of the refund for us if we win. Would you go for a lawyer if you knew that?

Let me remind you that Waldo asked for a refund before the Decembar 1st without consulting us, now claiming that he only "asked about the refund". He had no right to do that, and since the shipping of our batch #1 is finished it's obvious that HashFast accepted his refund request - we haven't brought the lawsuit against them yet and they haven't shipped us the equipment, nor we can hope they ever will.

I'm not claiming we should already organize for a lawyer against Waldo, but that certainly is an option if he continues to claim his 1/3 of the money (200 BTC) is out of the refund pool. The least we can do right now is to update his trust rating so the red letters Trust: -x: Warning: Trade with extreme caution! is under his name, we owe that to other forum members who may think about going into similar group buy with him in the future.

With all due respect paulej, you're incorrect. This was not a group buy, it was a buy done by waldohoover in which he offered shares for sale at the price of 2.5 btc = 20GH/s hashing power + 3% hosting fee per share. As was stated above, all the paperwork is in his name, he's selected the attorney, hashfast knows waldohoover to be the purchaser, not the group.

Like it or not, the so-called shareholders have purchased a share in waldohoover's purchase, and he is the responsible party to the shareholders for all intents and purposes, period. He defined terms of the share sale, the contract, including the following specific terms:

Offering: "1 Share @ 2.5 btc = 20GH/s hashing power + 3% hosting fee; Each share entitles the owner to 1/40 of the BTC proceeds from a HashFast Baby Jet mining 24/7 for 30 months or until no longer profitable (whichever comes first); Payment will be made to the address of the shareholders bi-weekly. (*Miner breaking after 12 month warranty, random acts of nature like data center burns down etc.,internet downtime, not covered in 24/7 for 30 months)."

Then he defined how to purchase a share in his purchase, text regarding who he is and why he should be trusted, then defined what would happen in case of non-delivery:

"I (waldohoover) take no responsibility for the possibility that HashFast does not deliver. I (waldohoover) have done what I consider a thorough due diligence but as we all know, you can never 100% guarantee anything when it comes to pre-orders.

Refunds will be given in case of non-delivery less 3% for management of the Group Buy.

This group buy will be refunded if the miners are not delivered- share holders can elect to wait further."

Note that he's provided no proof that he ordered the equipment in the name of the group. Despite calling it a "group buy" in his "In case of non-delivery" section, he goes on further to define that he's the one in charge and thus responsible in his "Misc." section:

"I reserve the right to make any changes to the above in favor of each investor’s best interest. The mining hardware world is ever changing, perhaps there may be a better deal tomorrow or next week that would suit each investor’s pocketbook better. The group will be notified if I'm contemplating changing/adding a product ordered to gather feedback."

Notice how many times in his terms of the agreement is the personal pronoun "I". In his "Misc." section he clearly states that the decisions are his and his alone: "I reserve the right to make any changes..." and "The group will be notified if I'm contemplating changing/adding...". Note that he does not say he'll be bound by the feedback from the group, only that he'll notify the group and gather feedback. Said feedback may be taken into account in making his decision or discarded entirely, at his sole discretion.

What you have is a person that thinks he's running a business, wants the protections of personal separation from a business yet he's entirely responsible for everything that business does as he's the sole operator and decision maker, yet he disclaims any responsibility or owing anyone any money when things turn out not as expected or hoped. You cannot run a business on hope.

Waldohoover has direct responsibility to refund the shareholders as non-delivery has occurred, regardless of hashfast providing a refund or not. His disclaimer about non-delivery did not specify that refunds would take place on non-delivery after receipt of a refund from hashfast, but upon the condition of non-delivery. This makes him personally responsible for refunds, not hashfast.

The shareholders should be hiring a lawyer to sue waldohoover for recovery.

Hi WH, and all,

Please cover the $1000 legal cost as part of management fee.

I have only 1 share, so I would prefer we aim for a refund full BTC as per the case against HashFast.

If this is not possible, it would be really good to get an estimate on if we will get any hardware and if so what kind considering MPP etc.

Also if we are being offered BTC or USD from HF as refund, then please tell us the numbers they are offering so we can get an idea of if it is a good offer.

I am sure you are trying to get the best deal for a refund, and hope that the lawyer has a reasonable fee (25% at most.)

Cheers
Sinewayv

itod,

This is a group buy, not a sale by waldohoover. I think this is where you're making a mistake. He offered to pool funds from folks and buy a miner. Yes, he did take in more per miner than the actual cost, but he's also doing all of the work to purchase, install, and operate. I think that's irrelevant, anyway. There was a price and you accepted it.

The only issue is who is responsible. He stated from the outset that he is not responsible for nondelivery. I think his only responsibility is in trying to get a refund, which he is actively doing. You can't fault him there, either.

The problem is that HashFast failed to deliver. To make it worse, they are now trying to get out of paying a full refund in BTC as they promised. Again, not waldohoover's fault.

Chill and let the lawyer do his job. My only curiosity is why the lawyer working on contingency wants an upfront amount, especially such a small amount. If there's truly 400 bitcoins as a part of the suit and he gets 30% (or whatever), that's quite a bit of income for the case.

I don't understand how this quoted above can be more clear, and on what grounds is Waldohoover refusing to refund us his part of the funds collected? He collected around 7 x 70 BTC for seven miners, while paying them around 7 x 45 BTC each. Similar case is for upgrades where he collected around 50% more of the cost of the miner, he collected 16 BTC for each upgrade and payed 11-12 BTC each. For this whole group buy he collected around 600 BTC and payed less then 400 to HashFast. I understand that we have to wait for the lawyer to try to sew HashFast to get back as much as he can for those 400 BTC, but why do we have to wait for those 200 BTC Waldohoover is holding? Isn't it clear from the quote above that he has to pay that back to us -3% management of the group buy?

Any responses to the comments made. Been more than a few hours now.

Let me preface this rant with this: I appreciate your transparency lately. I appreciate the updates recently. I appreciate that you truly are trying your best to resolve this situation, for our investment with you, and seemingly your own mental health as of late. However, by being in a position of running a business that does group buys for the bitcoin community, you have to take some responsibility. You cant pretend like you dont exist, that you are merely some middleman entity playing telephone between the group buy and HF.


Then you need to pay him $1000. Simple as that. You are in charge here waldo. You are on the invoices, you are on the orders, you are the responsible party. You can recoup that $1000 after any settlement that we get as a group and just take it right off the top. Honestly I cannot send you anymore money in good faith. I'm sorry that your group buy did not go as planned, however at some point you need to take responsibility for the decisions that you  made, such as putting up a group buy for hash fast. I understand no one could have known that this would happen, but that is irrelevant now. Asking your shareholders, who are out WAY more money than you are, to front the legal bills for decisions that in the end are entirely yours, is absurd.


You know this isnt true. You have gone silent several times, you dont respond to messages. When you do, you get angry when people ARE ASKING ABOUT THEIR INVESTMENTS?! I'm sorry but you put yourself in the position to be handling all of these peoples money, but then when it comes the most important time to be transparent and communicative, we get nothing. 1 update a month. Cmon.. Hey who cares if theres no news. If theres no news, BE LIKE "YO THERES NO NEWS"


What a way to treat people. Such service, Much understanding, Wow. It's sad, but i'm not suprised by your attitude, you've given me this same attitude on /r/teamredditmining when I'm merely asked you what is going on, and asked for an update. If you are feeling overwhelmed, well, thats what happens when you run a business and things don't go smoothly.


Actually, I've got you marked as owing me just over 4 BTC -or- hashes from a working babyjet, whichever comes first. So what are YOU talking about? Why would you owe us anything you say? Oh I suppose we should just go to HashFast for our refund then? Too bad they dont know who we are because we never ordered from them. Sorry but you are the only responsible party here for us, unless you plan on releasing all documentation (invoices, communication, etc) required for each indivual to file suit separately.


He actually did add to the question. He answered it. You pay the fee, and if you need to recoup it later on, you do it. You see, you are the owner/operator of coiningsolutions.com. You picked a bad egg, sold it before it was delivered, and now are trying to absolve yourself of any responsibility. I'll quote your original post.


Well non-delivery has occurred. The refund for non-delivery clause was provided WITHOUT A FEE in the beginning when you agreed to take my coin. Get us our refund now. We will not be goaded into giving you MORE MONEY for GETTING A REFUND. I'm sorry but this falls under your responsibility.


I dont see how this is any of our fault. Oh god sorry, I care about my money? Please forgive me. Maybe people wouldn't be stressing you out with questions if you, you know, updated us regularly. Giving 1 update, then silence for over a month, is not updating us. (Again, I appreciate the updates today)


You already know how to pay for it. We already all agreed how to pay for the lawyer, that it would be coming out of any settlement we get from HF. Believe it or not, you are running a business. Businesses have up front costs. When I go to the store, I dont pay the store directly for the truck and gas and driver salary that delivered my goods to the store to begin with. I only pay the store for the goods that I bought. Its the store's responsibility to get the goods from the warehouse to the store front. It is your responsibility to get the lawyer on the case. It's the cost of doing business, just as the store is able to recoup its delivery costs by carefully analyzing and setting retail prices to be competitive yet profitable.

I'm sorry for this wall of text. If you would like to discuss any point in detail, I would be more than happy to.

I can say I'm not putting in a single penny more. I just want a refund as I'm just fed up with the whole thing. If it is in $$$ or BTC fine, but talk to Hashfast, get the refund cheque from them and cash it and pay us.



Phil

Waldo to be honest you are bumming me out a bit here.
I understand that you can't pay for everything but I didn't know you were so negative toward hiring a lawyer.

As I understand it you own a bit of these miners yourself right? Would you rather that we go with a USD refund?
Actually with the BTC price falling it might be something to reconsider.


I own 1 tiny share of this group buy so I won't act like some crybaby. So whatever you guys decide I'm fine with it.
But I tell you this: It kinda feels like throwing money down a hole.
First buying 1x share, then 1x MPP, now this. When will it end?

I'm fine with paying a small percentage of the 1k, but as you say the lawyer might ask us for more cash later. All these "fees" are pissing me off.
Maybe you can understand that people are quite pissed?

The fact that so few people has commentated on this worries me. Seems like a lot of people has given up on ever getting there money back.

Just to get a correct tally on this: Atty wants $1k down plus 40% of the take or am I missing something? If that's the situation, then it's up to everyone w/ shares that wants a refund to pony up their share of $1k. Or, those that do pony up get a % of the prospective reclaimed funds in the event that we win of those that haven't paid over and above our own. Or, those that pony up more get their % of the % of those that don't pony up. Make sense? Getting a little complicated I know but fair is fair.

So you need $1000 from us?
If itod is right and you charged us 3% in management fee you could use some of that for this deposit.
If it doesn't cover the $1000 I guess our only option would be to split it amongst all shareholders. If anyone refuses to pay just deduct it when they receive their BTC back. (if that happens)

You are being rude to me, and I don't like it. I never said anything to offend you, and you are calling me names like "dumbass". Since I can't stop you talking like that, this is my last comment on this issue, I don't want to talk on that level with anyone.


What we have to do with that data-center of yours? We are not gonna use it, how on earth may you think it's fair for us to finance something somebody else will use? Instead to compensate us as much as you can for something we have no control of (HashFast failure), you are now looking to profit on that (us financing the data-center). Unbelievable.

As I said talk to others what do they think about this, I'm done discussing things with you.

Signature on what? Why are you not transparent on this? Is it so hard to scan an agreement and let us know what you are up to?

Regarding the $1000 deposit, I don't want to be rude but don't you (not only HashFast) own us a lot of money? I don't have figures because you never published the official accounting regarding this, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you've collected 60-70 BTC for each machine (or maybe more?), and payed each somewhere around 45-55 BTC. You are entitled to keep 3% of that amount when all this is over, so to be honest I'm really surprised you:
a) haven't already refunded us the difference between the collected and payed amount;
b) are asking us this question how deposit should be payed.

I apologize if I made a mistake about the exact amounts, please correct me and give us exact figures for each of the 7 machines and their upgrades.

Any update about this?

Thanks for the effort on this waldo.  Sorry this didn't work out how any of us expected, but do appreciate you carrying the load for the rest of us "investors."  Much appreciated.

This certainly won't be as quick as things go in Suits! :p

Wow. The attorney just got the paperwork. Might as well sit back for a long wait.

Some updates from ray ?