Topic: Lone Shark attempting to extort Bitcoin Cash from customers (Read 1155 times)

Pretty sure that Loan Shark wouldn't do this, his account alone is worth more than a couple of Bitcoin cash. He has been running his services for a long time and if he wanted to scam some people, pretty sure he wouldn't do it for 10 cents on the dollar.

The people who are in debt only owe Bitcoin + the interest that the loaner charges, in no circumstance should you give out your Bitcoin cash unless the loan specifically said that you had to pay back the Bitcoin cash. Some loaners might change the terms so you can pay in Bitcoin cash, but otherwise you shouldn't touch your bitcoin cash for the loan.

OP didn't even borrow money of Loan Shark, whats the big fuss anyway.

Why are you guys attacking LS only? There are some other Lenders asking for BCC as well.
Well i think that, maybe it is unreasonable to ask for it if the customer asked no extension, but on my case for an example i asked for extension so i see that the right thing to do would be to pay BCC as well to the lender.
Lone Shark is the most professional and friendly guy, so i feel like he is getting too much shit while other get away without the drama.
On future the lenders might want to add something to their terms if something like this happens on future.

Everything about your post is messed up. But I will try to explain-
[1] You are assuming they still had the BTC at time of fork and got BCH. What if they borrowed BTC to pay for urgent dental work for their grandmother with the intention of buying back BTC from her next government check to pay back the loan? With the demands from Lone Shark, they would now need to pay back more than agreed. Not fair and may not even be possible for grandmother.
[2] Lone Shark has NOT 'waived bitcoin cash repayments' which he had no ability to waive anyway. He did not state in his post that no BCH was due. He simply gave borrowers the option to repay BCH. Very different things.

Please keep borrowing from Lone Shark as you see fit. That is your rightful choice. And please comment in this thread as you wish, but please try to first get a full understanding of what is being discussed.

Some times sleep takes priority.
Lone Shark I am not a borrower. I got concerned about fellow forum members who are borrowers of yours. You do not operate in a silo here. You do not pay theymos commission on your lending business profits. What you do on this forum is open for all to comment and have a say. We are a community. Some of us take an interest when we feel others are being taken advantage of and stand up and have a say.

I do not know Joel. I am not Joel. But Joel has understood the issues I was addressing correctly. I see he took over where I left in trying to get the point across.
Thank you Joel.

Lone Shark, please re-read your post again and decide whether you gave your customers an option. Whether your change of terms were fair. Whether a debtor would have felt comfortable in speaking up against you if they disagreed with you. Your post was a poorly disguised threat to pay up with no real options. Just because you made the 1st line of the post large and in red didn't instil absolute authority in you.



Lone Shark, you went from the above position, to the following after I raised these issues-


I did not make this thread in Scam Accusations, it was moved here by moderators.
I made this thread in Lending. The issues I raised were lending issues and I believe that is where this thread should still be. I have PM'd Cyrus requesting
"I would like the thread reinstated to Lending because it deals with the issue of lenders trying to charge borrowers both BTC and BCH in repayment of their BTC loans.

The thread covers lending issues and is not a scam accusation. I will change the thread title to make it more lending specific if you prefer.

This discussion needs to be had in the lending section as it applies to numerous situations."

It is up to Cyrus and moderators where this thread sits.

Lone Shark you must have accepted the points that have been made were fair, hence your change in position. And even if no borrower of yours had a problem with what you demanded, the raising of this issue was still valid and may help the next guy down the road. We all want this to be a fair community where members feel comfortable. Surely you can agree that too much crap goes on and people take advantage of others all the time. I do not know you and I am not trying to harm you. I am trying to protect this community.

Peace. May the Bitcoin serve you well.



p.s. Please remove the negative trust. It is unwarranted.

Again, this is a contract between the lender and the borrower, you all have not say in it. As it is a matter of agreement, if they did disagree, then there would have been an argument about it. But nothing ensued. Nobody said anything the time I posted that. And now everybody is making a fuss about it.

You don't really understand how law works and let's not even go there.This isn't just about your service but also about your reputation as a forum member.Had your service been running outside of the forum,we wouldn't really bother.It also doesn't matter who opened the thread,as long as they make a valid case it's liable to be judged by the community.

That doesn't make you right ? The fact that you asked more money than you had lent shows the integrity of your service.Unlike Government laws,this forum is driven by the community to a large extent.

That doesn't explain much.Sounds irrelevant.The quoted post (in my previous comment) doesn't prove you were unsure about things.

Stop using borrowers as your defence.You know when they're in your debt and are likely to use your service again,they won't really speak against you even if you were wrong.

Not even sure why people are making a fuss about it. OP is not even a borrower of mine. Then ALL the borrowers who will be affect did not complain about it by the way. In a court case, this person, UFCkid, does not have personality to file the case as he is never privy to any contracts I had with my borrowers.

If anyone was allowed to file such a case then it was the borrowers who were affected by it. Again, to reiterate, no one complained about it even. I posted the change as well as sent them a PM about the change.

Also mind you all, that post was created before even the confirmation of the BIP 91. At the that time there was no guarantee that there would only be one bitcoin. As what I have read from Thymos' post about the possible splits, there could possibly be 3 bitcoins. Which one is the real bitcoin, there was no guarantee of that. So I asked them if they can pay up before August 1 with less than half interest per day. If someone had a problem, I did not hear anything about.

If someone wants to really open a legitimate scam accusation, please be a borrower first. Without being a borrower then this is pointless. Everything was contractual and nothing forced.

Why are you forcing him to pay that part when it wasn't agreed upon on the initial lending terms ? You changed your conditions after a thread was opened against you,might not be the case if the discussion had been in your PM.

Just took a look at the conditions you imposed on the lenders which weren't part of the initial terms,

Shows how desperate you're for the other coins.Title of the thread perfectly makes sense.You are literally asking them to pay more than what they borrowed.

In case that this wasn't agreed before the loan was issued, then the borrowers do not have to pay back any amount of BCH. The only thing that they do have to pay back is lent BTC + interest as agreed upon the initial terms. If the accused is indeed demanding that BCC be sent to them as well in the fashion of "send BCC or else X", then then a negative rating is warranted. I do have to take a better at the timeline of the changing statements.


Not really that relevant. It depends on the time when he did it, and what his original stance was. Pending exact review.

From the words of UFCkid, "perfectly worded"

After I posted that I will renounce the BCC (or BCH, whatever), he stopped replying here. Likely this guy is one my of borrowers that just don't want to pay that part. Note to that guy, next time just PM me. Every one of my borrower knows how considerate I am to them.

Um, how is this extortion?

In my opinion if i was the lender i would have done a similar thing. Because after all, logically speaking after the fork bitcoin cash + bitcoin would equal to roughly the value of 1 bitcoin before the fork. There could be a scenario where the price of bitcoin drops dramatically as a result of the fork, clearly it didn't happen this time but it is a possibility.

I'm sure that Lone Shark is financially secure enough and probably don't even care about 0.03 BTC or so.

He didn't threaten his borrowers, he simply asked them to either repay the loan or pay bitcoin cash + bitcoin, which they will get anyways.

Anyways he has waived all bitcoin cash repayments anyways, so if your agenda was really to help the borrowers then you already have seen your desired result. But i feel like you're just launching a personal vendetta on Lone Shark...

It is not trust abuse. I am just stating facts about what you have done. I don't think you can deny that you:

1. Defamed me by posting this thread and on my thread about extorting people. Which is nothing close to extortion.
2. That you insulted me in your posts. -> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.20551474

There is nothing in the rules about trust feed backs that I cannot leave a feed back about what you did against me.

I got upset when i read one of your borrowers post on your loan thread wanting to clarify that they now owed you both coins.
I feel you had no right to make the demands you did and that you made them in such a manner as to make them feel they had no choice in the matter. My interpretation entirely but that is how i interpreted your posts.
I spoke up to make these points so borrowers know they have support should they feel they want to speak up.
I feel i am attempting to make this community better by having this discussed.
I don't feel i deserve negative trust because of anything I've written here. Thank you for that little bit of trust abuse. Kind of reinforces my point about you don't you think.

For your peace of mind and so that you can move on with your shitty life and I can do other more important things aside from arguing pointlessly with you.


Have a nice day.

Cheers,
Cheeky Bastard

In no way that I prevented them from speaking up though. I clearly stated all the facts to them and if they have a disagreement with it, they were always free to pm me or post on my thread.

And why are we even really discussing this in-depth. In total, the people who owe me have about 0.2BTC remaining. To be honest, if they reacted to it that they don't want to pay the BCC, then I would have bargained and not ask for its payment. But, again, they agreed. A lot of them through pm and some even wrote a message that they agree.

I only retaliated to you since you are a hostile asshole. If you wanted a discussion then we could have talked properly in a civilized manner. But no. You chose the ugly route of things.

Again, I don't even know what your interest in this. If the people I contract with agree with it, so what is your problem?

You are not wrong.
I am pro-choice. If someone makes an agreement than that is their choice. That is what they are responsible for. There is perceived higher risk for lenders here and they can charge what they perceive compensates. What really made me go wtf is when i read in Lone Sharks thread someone wanting to clarify that they now owed him BTC plus Bitcoin Cash like they had no say in the matter. I wanted to make a few points so they felt comfortable in speaking up if they disagreed with his demands.

What is "fair" is not necessarily what was agreed upon. Some may argue that the interest rates that Loan Shark is charging (and what his borrowers are agreeing to) is unnecessarily high, however his borrowers should still pay this interest rate because it is what they agreed to.

The interest rates that most borrowers charge around here would probably be considered "predatory" in much of the Western world.

Thanks.

Again perfectly worded. Someone that sees the bigger picture from a fair perspective.

I am letting borrowers know they need not worry about your demands and extortion attempts and that they'll be supported.
This is a community and we collectively decide what is fair and right. You are neither.

Then we agree to disagree. End of talk. Again, you are not my borrower and thus not privy to any of my contracts. You do not have any say in my deals. If my borrowers have a problem then they can take it up with me.

I am not so sure that it is appropriate to ask for both BCH and BTC for outstanding loans. I don't see anything in his loan agreements that would compel his borrowers to repay both BCH and BTC. One party to a contract does not have the right to unilaterally change the terms of the contract without the other party of said contract accepting the modified terms.


I would also point out that BCH is trading at roughly 0.179 BTC and BTC is trading at >100% from where it was trading only days ago, and is roughly at the ATH.

I would say that interest paid by borrowers is what compensates Lone Shark for the loss of being able to use BTC for whatever he wants, including to use it to receive BCH, when possible. if Lone Shark was not lending out his BTC, he would have the opportunity to lend it out on bitfinex (or another exchange), or invest it in an ICO, or invest it elsewhere, and it would not be reasonable to have borrowers repay hypothetical returns on these investments plus interest for the loan.  

Perfectly worded.

Simple, borrowers, do not send these abusive lenders bitcoin cash. Why allow them to extort you? If they do, they are plainly and simply criminals.

You owe them bitcoins. You pay back bitcoins + interest. Don't let them enrich themselves by enforcing murky out of terms demands for bitcoin cash.

Adding Lone Shark response in other thread here for completeness-

Lone Shark my response is simple, you lent your BTC out under an agreement. Those BTC are the borrowers. You cant change the agreement as you see fit. You gave your borrowers an option to repay early and receive an interest discount. That was fine. It is up to your borrowers to take up that option on their choice, NOT YOURS. If they do not choose that option, you don't have a Fuking leg to stand on and demand they pay you both coins.

And you are WRONG about the fork. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Deleted you bs post. But quoted it for people to see.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.20551474

---

Again, I would like to reiterate that I sent out a message to every borrower I had about it 2 weeks before August 1. For your information again, I PM'ed those people with big loans that they can just pay up the loan with no interest before August 1 and a lot of them agreed to this change. No retaliation or whatsoever was ever sent to me.

Actually, you are the only one complaining, and you don't even have a loan with me. Unless you are borrower of mine that is hiding his ass under a noob account then this will make sense. If you are, then PM me damn it. There is no point in hiding. As if I was not kind to my borrowers. Most of them always ask for extension and they get it even without additional interest. You can ask them.

So far I have ran a fair loan business here and I believe what I asked them is always in the spirit of fairness. If it was not fair I would have received awfully a lot of negative feed back about it from my borrowers and for sure they have posted their sentiments on my thread or through PM. And again, I did not receive such.

So, again, what is your problem with all of this? Not sure what your interest in all of this is. This is really a pointless discussion, especially that you are not even a party to my transactions.

Cheers,
Cheeky Bastard

---

Oh yeah, this isn't ban evasion anymore as it was already lifted. So your thread title is already defamatory.

I just wrote a reply to you in the other thread, but I'm glad you started this.  It'n interesting
dilemma.  Should he expect BCH in addition to the BTC that he lent out?  I'm kind of on the
fence about it, so don't attack me.  I'm very curious to see what other people think about it.

There's no way those borrowers aren't going to try to use his stipulations as grounds to default
on their loans.  Not this community.

Added:  I understand,  it wasn't a discussion thread and I apologize.   You lucked out with that ban appeal. 
I was interested in the bigger philosophical question of what should happen in cases like yours.

What is it with this guy Lone Shark who has told his customers they also now owe him BCH as well as BTC even though that was never in the original agreement. What if customers refuse? Do they deserve to get collaterals sold or negative feedback. No way. This latest fork of the BTC protocol has no impact on loan agreements for BTC here.

He is was banned and banned for good reason. Do not allow him to extort anything from you other than original agreement. No matter what notice was given. That is just bullshit.

Below is what i wrote in his loan thread -
Lone Shark as you are banned you are now ban evading by creating this alt account. Do you have theymos' permission to post again?

Just because you gave people notice that you will change the terms of their agreements with you doesn't make those changes valid. Who the fuk do you think you are.

BTC did not split, there is now just an altcoin. There are hundreds of altcoins from the BTC protocol. You have no rights to any of them from your customers. Not a single extra Satoshi and defintely no rights to BCH, unless you specified that in your original agreement. Which you did not.

People, don't let these lenders getaway with such bullshit. They lent you BTC and that is all you should repay them as agreed originally.

You cheeky bastard. Take your massive high interest and good riddance to trash like you.