Domain Name Help?

[J-Wholesale]

Off topic, but the snackacan.com website in your signature has some sort of Trojan on the home page - tries to modify the hosts file. Just to be sure, I opened it twice - same result.

 

[Julian]

Off topic, but the snackacan.com website in your signature has some sort of Trojan on the home page - tries to modify the hosts file. Just to be sure, I opened it twice - same result.

I can confirm this too. I visited the site, mostly to see if my anti-virus software would catch it, and my trusty Kaspersky did indeed throw up an error message and blocked a trojan.

- Julian

 

[Vending Siting Services]

Thanks guys about snack-a-can website.

I am going to be reporting this right away.

Regards.

Barbara

 

[Vending Siting Services]

Hi Barbara,
Long time no speak.

I can't believe whats happened to the domain!!
I've was wondering for a few weeks what was going on with the website.
It's such a shame this has happened.

I dont understand why your hosting company didn't contact nominet to renew the domain or even transfer it, and instead decided to wait for it to expire and rebuy it.
Maybe this was just the easiest way for them to change the ownership details on it?

I may be waaayy off base here, but can you be certain your hosting company isn't involved with the bad guys in this?
It just seems strange for that domain to be a target.

Daz

Hi Darren, how's tricks? Hope you and Louise are fine. Hope you are selling lots of Venderbase - excellent bit of software!

Bit of a bugger this, as previously mentioned, we did inform our hosting company the moment we found out it went down and they said the site/name was on "lock" and that there was nothing they could do and we had to wait for the "unlock" date, whatever that means. Now I am being told by people here that we could have renewed this during that 90 day period .... I really don't know what is the actual fact anymore! New labels and printing plates have been ordered and we shall hopefully have new labels pretty soon.

Regards.

Barbara

 

[cjd]

You need to talk to a lawyer that specialises in this - I've just read through this and it's mostly hearsay. A first meeting would not cost you anything and give you a proper opinion - but you do need a specialist, not just the guy in the high Street.

To me it sounds like you have prior use of the name so the site can't be used to sell a product, if you had trade marked the name you would hae an even stronger claim.

Deliberately keeping domains for gain and not trade is frowned upon and so long as you have the necessary prior use and good advice you should be able to get it back with a combination of bribe and legal threat.

 

[XEC Internet Consultants]

Why don't you ring Nominet yourself to find out what really happened?Lots of people on here have suggested that. As far as I can see whoever was responsible for registering your name (your host?) misled you (there is no such thing as lock state for UK domains) and it's even possible the name was never regsitered in your name at all, i.e. the host company registered it in their name. You will definitely have received paperwork from Nominet if you had been the registrant and all your details were up to date. It is virtually impossible for you to lose a domain that is correctly registered. If something has gone wrong then I am sure that Nominet will help you best it can.Until you speak to Nominet don't waste your time with legal advice - as far as I can see you don't have a leg to stand on in terms of the new registrant. You may well have a case against the host if what you say is correct as they have given you appalling advice which is so bad as to be unbelievable.Finally, I would chuck you host, especially if it is the same one that has allowed a Trojan to get onto your other site.Stephen.

Hi Darren, how's tricks? Hope you and Louise are fine. Hope you are selling lots of Venderbase - excellent bit of software!

Bit of a bugger this, as previously mentioned, we did inform our hosting company the moment we found out it went down and they said the site/name was on "lock" and that there was nothing they could do and we had to wait for the "unlock" date, whatever that means. Now I am being told by people here that we could have renewed this during that 90 day period .... I really don't know what is the actual fact anymore! New labels and printing plates have been ordered and we shall hopefully have new labels pretty soon.

Regards.

Barbara

 

[Vending Siting Services]

Why don't you ring Nominet yourself to find out what really happened?Lots of people on here have suggested that. As far as I can see whoever was responsible for registering your name (your host?) misled you (there is no such thing as lock state for UK domains) and it's even possible the name was never regsitered in your name at all, i.e. the host company registered it in their name. You will definitely have received paperwork from Nominet if you had been the registrant and all your details were up to date. It is virtually impossible for you to lose a domain that is correctly registered. If something has gone wrong then I am sure that Nominet will help you best it can.Until you speak to Nominet don't waste your time with legal advice - as far as I can see you don't have a leg to stand on in terms of the new registrant. You may well have a case against the host if what you say is correct as they have given you appalling advice which is so bad as to be unbelievable.Finally, I would chuck you host, especially if it is the same one that has allowed a Trojan to get onto your other site.Stephen.

Hi Stephen

Thanks for the post.

I will call Nominet. All this is so confusing for me as I am not sure who our host is! The previous web hosting company were bought out/went into liquidation so this is where the problem may be, I just don't know, but I do know that when we took on our new web hosting company they built the jellybeans site for us for free, therefore they should have been aware of pending renewal dates etc.

I'll keep you all updated, I may be back for help with regard to what I need to know.

Speak soon.

Regards.

Barbara

 

[robertt]

A friend pointed me towards this thread (I am a UKBF lurker) and I must say I am utterly shocked at not only the lack of decent advice, but the frankly uninformed misleading nature of it. There is some sensible / informed posts eg Jeewizz and XEC but its in a minority

The upset is understandable, however directing grief at the current registrant is incorrect, likewise those who have called their actions 'illegal' and say they are 'frowned upon' or '
I can appreciate that the practice is not lawful' are just wrong.

As Dwebs-Ltd and others have stated you have had a three month period, most of which when the site would not have worked (suspended state kills the resolving nature of the name) and several renewal notices. If you have outsourced this to a company, then they have failed in their duty.

Someone, either yourself, or a company you have appointed has cocked up and there is the fault. You can follow legal routes ie DRS/nominet/Registrant, however failure to renew is just that.

As for 'bribe' and veiled threads I cannot believe they are even being hinted at let alone discussed?! As for I am sure this will make a good story for the papers to pick up on - what would that be? "I cocked up by letting a hosting company I didnt know lose my name?" IMHO its shocking stuff :|

I often buy/sell/trade and do services relating to generic domains such as this, and it is not unknown for domains to be left to expire, likewise various stories to attempt to recover them.

I would strongly suggest looking up the difference between a domainer and a cybersquatter as currently you are suggesting the current registrant has done something illegal. Needless to say thats very very dodgy ground both for the posters and UKBF as you are basically saying someones legit business is illegal.

IMHO I would start by finding out who your hosting company is/was and discovering exactly what agreement you had in place with them with regards to renewals and various guarantees.

Feel free to drop me a PM if you want a quick (free) chat regarding .uk stuff likewise if any mods' are about they might want to have a read of the content of the thread.

Cheers,
Rob.

 

[cjd]

As for 'bribe' and veiled threads I cannot believe they are even being hinted at let alone discussed?! As for I am sure this will make a good story for the papers to pick up on - what would that be? "I cocked up by letting a hosting company I didnt know lose my name?" IMHO its shocking stuff :|.

You are very easily shocked Robert, I suggest you get out more ;-)

 

[Vending Siting Services]

Thanks for your post Robert, one query, why does my post need moderating?

I was told that a cyber-squatter had taken my domain address by using software to clinch the deal. I am only reporting what I have been told. I am fuming about this enough without being told I am posting something that is not a fact. It is a fact as that is what I have been told - now I am beginning to understand that this has been bought legally and there are other issues I have to address.

The individual who has purchased my old domain name knew that the content has only been used for charitable reasons. He lowered the price from £20k to £12.5 as it was charity based ..... I am still upset by this as there is no way I am paying that amount of money!

I'm just trying to get things sorted, please don't add insult to injury.

Barbara

 

[robertt]

You are very easily shocked Robert, I suggest you get out more ;-)

Probably There again I only pop in and out on here and generally the advice is quite sound so to see things so warped was a tad

Thanks for your post Robert, one query, why does my post need moderating?

I was told that a cyber-squatter had taken my domain address by using software to clinch the deal. I am only reporting what I have been told. I am fuming about this enough without being told I am posting something that is not a fact. It is a fact as that is what I have been told - now I am beginning to understand that this has been bought legally and there are other issues I have to address.

You have answered your own question - you posted something branding the current registrant something they are not ie. a cybersquatter and a thief.

As you are now aware that your inital post title (and aspects of other posts) are untrue I was suggesting perhaps it needs editing to reflect that?

How would you feel if you were mentioned in a google'able thread on a third party forum accused of illegal activity?!

 

[khalid1]

Barbara,

Jeewhizz and Robertt have both hit the nail on the head so I won't repeat what they said.

I would take some of the advice given with a pinch of salt from other members as they have no clue what they are talking about. I also buy and sell domain names although not in the same manner as the new owner of your site has....he simply say an opportunity and took it.

The best thing you can do is follow the advice given from the members named above and move forward.

Good luck, I guess you have learned a very valuable business lesson. Renewing domain names is as important as everything else in your business.

 

[cjd]

Worth reading the Mike Rowe Soft case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MikeRoweSoft.com

The domain name MikeRoweSoft.com was initially registered by Canadian student Mike Rowe in August 2003.[2] Rowe set up the site as a part time web design business, choosing the domain because he thought it would be funny to add "soft" to the end of his name.[6][7] Microsoft saw the name as trademark infringement because of its phonetic resemblance to their trademarked corporate name and demanded that he give up the domain.[1][8] After receiving a letter on January 14, 2004 from Microsoft's Canadian legal representatives Smart & Biggar, Rowe replied asking to be compensated for giving up the domain.[5][9]

etc.

You CAN get the domain back, if you can prove prior use or trademark infringement. (And yes I do know that UK law differs from US law).

However, as the site is not currently used, you can not easily claim passing off - but it does make the name useless to anybody else and therefore devalues it.

You do have other legal tools available to you but you need proper advice.

 

[Mustaka]

Having some experience with this type of thing my read on the situation is as follows.

1. Hosting Company - Your hosting company being a hosting company should know inside and out the procedure for taking control of a domain. I dont even work for a hosting company and I know the procedure. They have failed you epically.

2. Assumptions - You assumed everything was being taken care of. A website being down for six weeks would be the end of most businesses. Who has ever heard of a 6 week outage. That should have been a clear indicator something was seriously wrong and should have taken all your attention to resolve.

3. Cyber Squatter - My guess is this guy is a cyber squatter. The statement he has put up is well crafted by stating the business he will be conducting using the URL is different than what it was originally used for. You only have a claim to the name if uses it to piggy back of your existing business. If any DNR claim is logged with Nominet he will win it. Cyber Squatter's know all the tricks becuase it is their business to know how to win DNR claims. They will be ubber experts on such matters.

4. Resolution - What you need to do is weigh up the cost this situation is having on your charity work. The price he has set is a painful lesson however the cost of putting new stickers on 40k machines for a new web address is probably not to far off his price.

5. Advise - Pay the man. Get your website back up. Switch to a decent host. Seek council on recovering the funds from your previous hosting company through legal channels.

 

[J-Wholesale]

Every single one of our vending machines up and down the country has had this web site on it since the mid-90's. We must have 40,000+++

You've quoted the buyers details (name, and address) earlier, along with the domain name in question. If they're on the ball, they'll have a Google Alert set up for their business name, which means they'll find this thread today or tomorrow. It's already indexed by Google.

My point: You've just told them exactly how important and valuable the domain is to you. Whatever chance you may have had of negotiating a low figure is probably gone now.

 

[level200]

How much does it cost to trademark a domain name?

 

[Ididit]

Hi Barbara,

Imagine you owned a house with a mortgage.

You find out that the mortgage isnt being paid and you contact the bank to find out why.

The bank tells you dont worry everything is fine we will sort it out we know what we are doing.

The mortgage doesnt get paid and the house is repossessed and sold off at auction.

who would you blame, the bank or the person who bought your house cheap at auction?

If you had innocently bought the house cheap at auction would you appreciate being called a thief and a cheat?

You have been told a number of times already your NEW hosting company are the ones that cocked up, they have been telling you a load of rubbish and it sounds like they are STILL feeding you a load of rubbish probably to defelct blame away from them.

 

[SEO-Doctor]

This is your web hosting companies problem, they are responsible. Legally they must give you time to renew, and hasn't actually happened.

This used to be the problem years ago, even with the top domain investors in the world as their portfolios were too large to manage. This all changed though with the new regulations. You should speak to nominet too.

 

[Dwebs-Ltd]

3. Cyber Squatter - My guess is this guy is a cyber squatter. The statement he has put up is well crafted by stating the business he will be conducting using the URL is different than what it was originally used for. You only have a claim to the name if uses it to piggy back of your existing business. If any DNR claim is logged with Nominet he will win it. Cyber Squatter's know all the tricks becuase it is their business to know how to win DNR claims. They will be ubber experts on such matters.

Plus in most cases the cyber squatters are nominet members and vote / suggest regulation changes. I know of quite a few that are squatters and have forced through regulation changes. So basically they have made nominet work for them rather than for the domain owner.

 

[robertt]

This is your web hosting companies problem, they are responsible. Legally they must give you time to renew, and hasn't actually happened.

The only 'legal' aspect is what is in contracts / agreements. Lots of renewal notices will have been flying around somewhere, and someone has chosen to ignore them.

Who and why...?!

Plus in most cases the cyber squatters are nominet members and vote / suggest regulation changes. I know of quite a few that are squatters and have forced through regulation changes. So basically they have made nominet work for them rather than for the domain owner.

That is quite strong stuff - do you have examples of such 'cybersquatters' and the regulation changes that have been forced through?

 

[Dwebs-Ltd]

That is quite strong stuff - do you have examples of such 'cybersquatters' and the regulation changes that have been forced through?

examples....
http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/29579_sebclark.pdf
http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/20690_Seb_Clark_OS.pdf

If you look for the name in those links then do some google'ing you will see what i mean

 

[Vending Siting Services]

The only 'legal' aspect is what is in contracts / agreements. Lots of renewal notices will have been flying around somewhere, and someone has chosen to ignore them.

Who and why...?!

This is exactly what we are looking into now. Someone has been getting the renewals and has not been telling us .....

 

[robertt]

examples....
http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/29579_sebclark.pdf
http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/20690_Seb_Clark_OS.pdf

If you look for the name in those links then do some google'ing you will see what i mean

Right, so you have accused someone conducting illegal activity on a public forum - any examples of official rulings rather than just threads such as these around the web? Interesting point though - as it shows what damage can be caused to reputations by unfounded allegations on the web.

You have also said such people have forced through regulation changes. In the PDF you linked Mr Clarke was disagreeing with a default transfer process, yet Nominet brought one in anyway? Likewise on other areas in the second PDF, if you compare requests to current DRS rules.

So what you mean is Nominet are ignoring such feedback?!

Likewise as a Nominet member yourself, did you partake in the consultations? Its hardly fair to tarnish the processes if you do not get involved yourself.

Incidently I found two threads:
http://www.fwfr.com/fourum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5774&whichpage=4
http://www.vegetableoildiesel.co.uk/forum/viewthread.php?tid=4420 Mr Clarke has responded in both it seems.

One from 2008 contained a very good 'timeline' for situations such as these which seems to be the cause for unrest:

1 - Domain name is running fine.

2 - ISP renewal notice comes through and is ignored.

3 - Nominet email renewal notice comes through and is ignored.

4 - Nominet PAPER renewal notice comes through the post and is ignored.

5 - Domain name is suspended and does not work for email or website for THREE months, and no action is taken.

6 - Nominet delete the domain after 6 months of attempted contact and three months of suspension.

7 - Someone else registers it in reasonable assumption that the previous owner didnt care that much about it.

How much time do people think should be used to tell people that a name is due for renewal, and how long should Nominet wait *after* that point before re-releasing the domain?

IMHO if a domain name ceases to function for three months and I do not notice (and a total of 6 months of renewals), I would hardly call the name vital

 

[Dwebs-Ltd]

Right, so you have accused someone conducting illegal activity on a public forum - any examples of official rulings rather than just threads such as these around the web? Interesting point though - as it shows what damage can be caused to reputations by unfounded allegations on the web.

You have also said such people have forced through regulation changes. In the PDF you linked Mr Clarke was disagreeing with a default transfer process, yet Nominet brought one in anyway? Likewise on other areas in the second PDF, if you compare requests to current DRS rules.

Examples not all cases. Forced through in respect of members who have the same interests teaming up.

I don't see any major problems with the current DSR process certain sections could do with changing but it will not happen.

Nominet's site contains the relevant docs with the info and changes you just have to do your homework.

We should use their real name "Domain Catchers"

If you have a spare hour or so have a read through nominets news section not related to cyber squatters but nominet has been having issues http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/2008/?contentId=5753 .

 

[robertt]

Examples not all cases. Forced through in respect of members who have the same interests teaming up.

I don't see any major problems with the current DSR process certain sections could do with changing but it will not happen.

Nominet's site contains the relevant docs with the info and changes you just have to do your homework.

I am sorry this is simply wrong.

You could say I have done my homework as I currently sit (vote conducted via the whole membership) on the Nominet Policy Advisory Body (PAB) and am more than aware of how policy is formed and then if/how it is implemented.

*Any* stakeholder can suggest policy changes and then depending on the nature of the Policy it can take the Short -> Long Process outlined on (http://www.nominet.org.uk/policy/develop/) .

At no point is there a straight 'vote' on changes by the membership. Bear in mind even if there was, the membership is vastly made up of ISP's such as yourself, so any changes would be greatly peer moderated.

Thus me asking for examples where Nominet has acted directly on the wishes of criminals as it is a very very serious matter if true.

From the arguements above I am guessing its more of a personal perception rather than reality, but again as a member yourself I would really encourage you to get involved and understand processes out there.

If you have a spare hour or so have a read through nominets news section not related to cyber squatters but nominet has been having issues http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/2008/?contentId=5753 .

I have freely volunteered two days of my this week in London on Nominet PAB stuff, and spend far too much time on associated information, and I wish it was only an hour to summarise the issues out there

 

[Dwebs-Ltd]

I am sorry this is simply wrong.

You could say I have done my homework as I currently sit (vote conducted via the whole membership) on the Nominet Policy Advisory Body (PAB) and am more than aware of how policy is formed and then if/how it is implemented.

Interesting so you posted on UKBF without explaining who you are and what part you play in nominet.

As always its my view, I've been part of DSR's with 'cyber squatters' in the past, they know exactly how to work around nominet and for a standard registrant they have no chance.

As a registrar the cyber squatters have an advantage over a normal registrant which shouldn't be the case. It should be registrant vs registrant. Advantage being knowledge and experience etc

 

[robertt]

Interesting so you posted on UKBF without explaining who you are and what part you play in nominet.

'Interesting' in what way?! View my profile and its pretty clear who I am, likewise if my signature would show up it shares the same info. I am *very* googleable , likewise click my username and search my post history on here, there is little secrecy on who/what I do.

Likewise as you say , Nominet's site contains the relevant info, you just have to do your homework

Similarly as an active member of Nominet you would have had even more information on me popped through your letterbox for the PAB elections this time last year - I hope you voted!

As always its my view, I've been part of DSR's with 'cyber squatters' they know exactly how to work around nominet and for a standard registrant they have no chance.

As a registrar the cyber squatters have an advantage over a normal registrant which shouldn't be the case. It should be registrant vs registrant.

*Everything* ought to be balanced and unprejudiced - however seeing a registrant as a 'cybersquatter' automatically means you have a non-neutral stance. I own www.taylor.co.uk and have had (not to completion) DRS threatened on it, they thought I was 'cybersquatting' when it is my surname. Am I a cybersquatter?! I hope not

As the cliche goes, there are two sides to every story and to be totally fair you need to have no prior prejudice or mis-information.

 

[Dwebs-Ltd]

*Everything* ought to be balanced and unprejudiced - however seeing a registrant as a 'cybersquatter' automatically means you have a non-neutral stance. I own www.taylor.co.uk and have had (not to completion) DRS threatened on it, they thought I was 'cybersquatting' when it is my surname. Am I a cybersquatter?! I hope not

I don't see registrants automatically as cyber-squatters. A individual / company who registers hundreds / thousands of domains with the only purpose to sell is what I believe is a cyber squatter.

If a domain is being used for a purpose I don't have a problem. When its sat there with a page collecting adsense that's when I see it as pointless.

 

[robertt]

I don't see registrants automatically as cyber-squatters. A individual / company who registers hundreds / thousands of domains with the only purpose to sell is what I believe is a cyber squatter.

Cybersquatters are people who target names where other people have rights to benefit from that association.

eg. some could argue Dwebs Ltd's registration of stuff like Windows2010.co.uk is pre-empting Microsofts launch of the new OS pencilled in for that year, or using specific TM'ed product names in URL's such as your mssql2008hosting.co.uk could be 'abusive' whereas I am sure its legit/licensed/unconnected - a perfect example where registrations could look 'bad' without knowing the full story.

It does not take volume to be a cybersquatter, however those with lots of domain names can often find their exposure to such claims greater due to the numbers involved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domaining are well worth a read.

 

[Dwebs-Ltd]

Cybersquatters are people who target names where other people have rights to benefit from that association.

eg. some could argue Dwebs Ltd's registration of stuff like Windows2010.co.uk is pre-empting Microsofts launch of the new OS pencilled in for that year, or using specific TM'ed product names in URL's such as your mssql2008hosting.co.uk could be 'abusive' whereas I am sure its legit/licensed/unconnected - a perfect example where registrations could look 'bad' without knowing the full story.

mssql 2008 hosting being a service we offer same as 2008hosting.net.

There will not actually be a product called Windows 2010 and you will see what its for later in the year.

All though my bargain purchase this week is 2008hosting.com £210.

 

[Ididit]

Hi Babara,

Do you know who or what 'action now' are?

jellybeans.co.uk was origianly registered to them

 

[Vending Siting Services]

Hi Babara,

Do you know who or what 'action now' are?

jellybeans.co.uk was origianly registered to them

Action Now was an old company of mine. Can't remember when we closed it down, many years ago though.

I am out of my meetings now! I am going to call Nominet. Let me see what they say .....

I'll be back to report.

Barbara

 

[Vending Siting Services]

UPDATE:

Have now spoken with Nominet.

They have informed me that the domain name expired 28 February 2009.

The old web hosting company who were looking after our domain name went into liquidation.

E.non (USA) took over the management of jellybeans.co.uk - many 1,000s of other domain names as well I would imagine.

E.non sent renewal to my old web hosting company for the renewal - who are no longer trading ...... they obviously did not get a response.

Now this is making sense.

Nominet also informed me that it is good practice to check up owners details to ensure that they are correct, which they have obviously not done.

I have spoken with E.non who I think can now understand my frustration. They bought the data from old web hosting company who went into liquidation whose details were still on the renewal, they sent out renewal to them and did not get reply.

When we found out when site went down, we did not know who was looking after it!

I have to send in email to E.non's legal department to give whole story and let's see what they say .....



Barbara

 

[robertt]

Nominet also informed me that it is good practice to check up owners details to ensure that they are correct, which they have obviously not done.

...

When we found out when site went down, we did not know who was looking after it!

Likewise it seems the registrant was a defunct company from a few years ago, and as per anyones contract with Nominet you have to keep them informed of identity and contact information changes eg. If you move address, or change registrant / entity.

This can also be done via your 'agent' aka your ISP. Going by the cock up in that part not to do so, and the registrant still being 'action now' even after that company was 'closed many years ago' its not a suprise that the ISP has gone out of business.

A certain degree of responsibility has to rest with whoever ran the charitable business, as on it closing 'action now' , the domain name ought to have been transferred to the new entity that traded as the charity. Similar responsibility has to be shouldered by those who decided not to take an interest in who was running elements of their online presence.

Further, 'e.non' is likely to be the Enom registrar - http://www.<b>enom</b>http://www.enom.com

On a side issue I am appalled though that this thread has been allowed to stay up here un-edited for four days and is well indexed by google despite you (a moderator I now notice!) knowing that the title if not the contents of a similar nature are untrue

 

[scrizzle]

You should still be able to reactivate the domain 30days after its expired. It should be on hold be the registrar.

Once the domain expires, it follows this cycle.
Length: 1-45 days
Registrant may still renew domain, but services (like email and hosted DNS) will stop working during this stage. Registrar is permitted to send delete command to registry.

then

Redemption Grace Period
Length: 30 days
Domain is held in RGP (Redemption Grace Period) for 30 days. WHOIS info will be deleted, and the domain will remain inactive. The domain can still technically be renewed by the registrant, although it may cost nearly $200.


Length: 5 days
The domain will be deleted from the registry in 5 days and may not be recovered by the registrant.

 

[robertt]

wrote some incorrect stuff

That is the .com (and others) cycle

Totally different from .uk !!

Not sure whats with UKBF at the moment but there is some really incorrect 'advice' being thrown about

 

[XEC Internet Consultants]

You should still be able to reactivate the domain 30days after its expired. It should be on hold be the registrar.

Once the domain expires, it follows this cycle.
Length: 1-45 days
Registrant may still renew domain, but services (like email and hosted DNS) will stop working during this stage. Registrar is permitted to send delete command to registry.

then

Redemption Grace Period
Length: 30 days
Domain is held in RGP (Redemption Grace Period) for 30 days. WHOIS info will be deleted, and the domain will remain inactive. The domain can still technically be renewed by the registrant, although it may cost nearly $200.


Length: 5 days
The domain will be deleted from the registry in 5 days and may not be recovered by the registrant.

Not true in this case - it's .co.uk!

 

[Vending Siting Services]

On a side issue I am appalled though that this thread has been allowed to stay up here un-edited for four days and is well indexed by google despite you (a moderator I now notice!) knowing that the title if not the contents of a similar nature are untrue

Yes, the title of this thread is now incorrect as I have now found out differently, I posted the heading as this is what I was told.

So, how do I change the heading? I am not a Moderator on this forum so I shall report myself to the other Mods.

Any suggestions for an alternative heading?

How I lost my cherised website ...... and someone wants to charge me £20k to buy it back?

 

[XEC Internet Consultants]

How I lost my cherised website ...... and someone wants to charge me £20k to buy it back?

But it wasn't working for weeks so if it was that cherished I still can't understand why didn't take proper advice.

 

[Vending Siting Services]

But it wasn't working for weeks so if it was that cherished I still can't understand why didn't take proper advice.

I did the day it went down ..... I was being led by my web hosting company - if your solicitor gave you advice in an area you knew nothing about would you check him out, would you know how to?? If you are reassured, guaranteed everything will be OK - wouldn't you think that it should be OK? I am not a computer wizz, neither do I understand such things, having owned it for many years with absolutely no problem I did not foresee any problems as I do not have any experience in this field.

You can always be so wiser AFTER the event, believe me I have learnt alot here in the last two days - it's an area that I have absolutely no knowledge about or understanding, neither do I pretend that I know.

Peole are criticising people here for posting rubbish, to me I am grateful as they are trying to help for which I am very thankful. It is good to have many people's opinions, we can all learn from it and let's hope this unfortunate circumstance does not happen to anyone else.