Scam Report against @Refunding

[12]

Scammers Profile Link: https://cracked.st/Refunding
Sales Thread: N/A
Amount or Item(s) Scammed: $175
Screenshots of Communication:
https://imgur.com/a/Lp0K0Xs
https://imgur.com/a/U8csMPx
https://imgur.com/a/jl8KOcn
https://imgur.com/a/RoUSu3A
https://imgur.com/a/uAMVePr
https://imgur.com/a/UXZKzlG
 
Additional Information:

1. I paid refunding $175 for Ad perms on his Telegram Group and was assured that there will be no “Salestrashing” nor bashing an Ad Perms member

2. Chicken leaked one of his ad perms member monthly in his group chat and he received a ban for his action.

3. I noticed “AR” a ad perms member in his group chat publicly bashing and saying he leaked my monthly to his members, I also found proof and fivio acknowledged the screenshots of him leaking. I went to talk to fivio about this and after awhile we came to a conclusion.

4. We had came to a conclusion that
- He would receive a 2 week ad suspension and wouldnt be able to post any ads for that timeframe

- neither of us would talk shit or salestrash each other service

- We would be permanent banned if either one of us talked shit to each other

5. After a couple of days I noticed his ads started appearing again and I asked fivio about it and his response is:


“There's no talking about this”
“Enough”
“He is, he paid for the two week suspension”
“Your ad will still be sent, your not welcomed here no more”


LMFAO so basically The person that leaked my paid group can stay and talk freely as well as post his ads but as soon as I ask why fivio went against his own word and our conditions I’m banned? 

Side note:
He owns a group chat called “Mcgurik” where he spreads misinformation about people he has a problem with, 90% of what’s on there is all fake, Asriel used to be a ad perms member on his chat and as soon as he didn’t want to renew he started bashing him and leaking his paid monthly, If you go against him not only does he -rep you in cracked but make sure other members also Neg rep you which is also against the terms and services of cracked.

Request: I want a full refund for the monthly that I paid for because my monthly was being leaked since day 1 of me paying Fivio for his group by his other Ad perm member, Why would I pay for such a thing when my monthly is already free for all the other members to be seen in this group & when mentioned the action gets taken against me and not them? There is no point of me being in his group further or coming to another conclusion other then a refund.
 
Crypto address for a refund: ltc1qgpgh97hn40qptt08yl6z5v83tz29qa89y4jhup

[1]

System bot message: @Refunding (Refunding) has been notified about this dispute via private messages and has 24hours to reply in this thread

 

Taking care of cracked.st's leechers. Every day.
If you have a question regarding your leeching level, click here.

[12]

@Liars @Alex @Winter Could you add a "DWC" tag on his profile, it didn't auto add it.

[1.995]

This will be my one and only response to this report. I will not be going back and forth with OP. Staff are welcome to contact me if they need anything further.

TL;DR for staff: OP paid $175 on August 10 for 30 days of advertising in my Telegram group, consisting of 5 automated ad posts per day through our advertising bot.
 
His service has not been cancelled or stopped. His ads will continue being posted automatically for the remainder of the 30 days he paid for, through September 9. As of today, he still has 15 days remaining.
 
This is a dispute between two advertisers over conduct outside my group. It is not a situation where I accepted payment and failed to provide the purchased service.
 
OP and the other advertiser have been arguing for a long time and discussing/leaking each other's groups/content outside of my group. I cannot moderate private conversations or activity taking place in other groups. When their personal dispute was brought into my group, it was removed and they were told to handle it privately.
 
The advertising terms are no refunds, and OP continues to receive exactly what he purchased. I had additionally offered him one free week as a courtesy, which was never part of the paid $175 agreement and is no longer being offered. His full paid 30-day term remains unaffected.
 
I have also blocked OP on Telegram after he began spamming me with explicit pornographicimages:
https://imgur.com/a/L7DW8cQ
 
For transparency, the account opening this report is an alt. OP's main Cracked account is:
https://cracked.st/Porschaaa
 
A few unrelated claims in the report are also false:

• I do not own “Mcgurik.”
  
• Asriel has never purchased advertising permissions in my group.
  
• Asriel and I have no current issue whatsoever. Any staff member is welcome to contact @RefundHubAdm directly and confirm that with him.
  

Those unrelated claims do not change the transaction being disputed here.
 
The relevant fact is simple: OP paid for 30 days of automated advertising, the service remains active, and all 30 days of the advertising he purchased are being provided.

[12]

First and foremost @Refunding Ego really needs to be checked, I do not want this handle privately. I’ve already tried this and he’s so over his head he thinks he’s in the right “All the time”. This thread can continue here as normal and I request a “DWC” tag on his profile so the members can publicly see what shit hole of a person he is.


For clarification which is irrelevant:

• You can see my older account hasn’t been active in awhile hence why I had to create this alt to open a scam report as I lost the password to the other one.
  

 
He used this reason to leave me Neg rep and rest will follow as exactly as I predicted. I’d like the neg rep to be removed from both of my accounts @Liars
 
Now let’s get to his points:
 

1. OP and the other advertiser have been arguing for a long time and discussing/leaking each other's groups/content outside of my group
   
   - AR has been leaking the contents of my monthly day 1 of me starting it & has been publicly talking about it in @Refunding group, I for once never leaked anything of his the only thing that I mentioned was I was going to take action and leak everything of his after finding out what he did to me Context: I still haven’t nor am I a member of ARS group.
   
   Now @Refunding this is where ur little argument falls apart lmfao
   
   “AK”  plays a huge part in @Refunding group chat and has been an Admin for years. His admin requested my group to be leaked in ARS monthly.
   
   Proof: https://imgur.com/a/Lp0K0Xs
   

 
So help me understand this better, The group I’m paying to advertise in is the same group the Admins requested for it to be leaked?  LOL
 
 

1. Our original agreement was Ar to be suspended for 2 weeks and 1 week extension of my ad as a result of ARS damaged
   

• Not only did OP go back on his word after we both came to a conclusion but his reasoning for me to be banned from his group chat was because I asked Question on why he decided to go back on his words a few days later. Then he also said “My 1 week extension has been revoked” which is why the pronogrpahic image was sent
  

Screenshot: https://prnt.sc/uWGm3rcg4sXo

 
The claim is simple:  My paid group was being leaked by his Ad Perm member which was requested by an Admin of HIS group, so clearly there was some knowledge going into this.

Lets make things clear: Why would I pay for a group if I know the admins of are asking for it to be leaked for free? What?

[1.995]

One final clarification because OP is mixing two completely separate things: the $175 transaction and a later resolution concerning AR.

The actual transaction is undisputed:

$175 = 30 days of advertising, 5 posts per day.

Roughly half has already been delivered and the remaining half is still being delivered through September 9. OP's paid advertising was never cancelled.

The later AR resolution was separate. The final terms were simple: AR loses two weeks, OP gets one additional week, and nothing concerning the dispute is allowed to be posted or said in my chat.

OP explicitly agreed to those terms.

OP now admits he brought the issue back into my chat and was banned afterward. Calling it a "question" does not change the agreed condition: nothing concerning this dispute was to be posted or said in my chat.

Regarding the extra week: it was never part of the original $175 purchase. It was added afterward as part of an attempt to resolve the dispute. Even if staff disagreed with my decision to revoke that additional week, it still would not create a right to a $175 refund, because OP's original 30 paid days remain completely intact.

The same applies to the "AK" allegation. Even accepting OP's screenshot at face value, it concerns conduct involving AR's separate private group. OP has shown no evidence that I instructed, authorized, or approved that request. Someone being an admin in my group does not make every private action they take elsewhere an action on my behalf.

More importantly, even if staff accepted OP's claims concerning AR and AK entirely, that would still not establish that I took $175 and failed to provide the service purchased.

That is the actual issue here:

Did OP pay for 30 days of advertising and fail to receive it? No.

Approximately half has already been delivered and the remaining half is actively being provided.

OP is asking for 100% of his money back while still receiving 100% of the service he purchased.

That is not a failure to deliver the transaction.

@Alex, the paid service remains active and is being fulfilled in full. This can be closed.

[5.284]

The seller did provide the service paid for, the ads continued running and the 30-day advertising period was not cancelled. So a full refund is not justified.
 
However, the buyers complaint is not completely irrelevant to the service. His paid content was being leaked by another advertiser, the seller was made aware of it, and there was an agreed resolution involving a 2 week suspension and a 1 wek extension.

The seller later changed that and refused to discuss it further, making it the situation different from a simple dispute between two users that had nothing to do with the purchased service.

@Refunding should refund 50% of the value paid to @RealPorschaa. The remaining 50% is justified by the advertising service that was actually provided.
Do so within 24h.

Ad by @Hulk | Ends in 13/10

 

[1.995]

The seller did provide the service paid for, the ads continued running and the 30-day advertising period was not cancelled. So a full refund is not justified.
 
However, the buyers complaint is not completely irrelevant to the service. His paid content was being leaked by another advertiser, the seller was made aware of it, and there was an agreed resolution involving a 2 week suspension and a 1 wek extension.

The seller later changed that and refused to discuss it further, making it the situation different from a simple dispute between two users that had nothing to do with the purchased service.

@Refunding should refund 50% of the value paid to @RealPorschaa. The remaining 50% is justified by the advertising service that was actually provided.
Do so within 24h.

@Alex you need to actually read the full dispute and the agreement before making a ruling like this.

Your own post says:

“The seller did provide the service paid for, the ads continued running and the 30-day advertising period was not cancelled.”

That alone makes a 50% refund make no sense.

The final agreement was not just “AR gets 2 weeks suspended and OP gets 1 week.”

The actual final agreement was:

AR loses two weeks, OP gets one additional week, and nothing concerning this dispute is allowed to be posted or said in my chat.

I asked “Agreed?”

OP replied “Agreed.”

He then brought the dispute back into my chat anyway.

So no, I did not randomly “change the agreement.” OP broke the condition he agreed to, and that is why he was removed from participating.

The $175 transaction itself never changed:

30 days of advertising, 5 posts per day.

About 50% has already been delivered and the remaining 50% is still actively being delivered.

So what exactly is the basis for a 50% refund?

If I refund 50% while still providing the remaining 50% of the advertising, OP gets 100% of the service for 50% of the price.

That is obviously not a valid resolution.

The 1 extra week was not part of the original $175 purchase. It was added later as part of a conditional resolution.

@Alex please read the actual agreement and timeline again because the current ruling contradicts the facts you already acknowledged in your own post.