DRS advice please

[Systreg]

If the domain's generic, it should be sufficient to outline all the MANY warnings the owner of the domain name received (doesn't matter who owned it - the warning process is the same for everyone).

@Edwin, it's 2 generic words making up a brandable domain.

It matters who was in control of the admin email for it, because Nominet confirm that the web hosting company employed by the complainant were in control of the domain at the start of the expiry period, but they told the complainant they weren't in control of it and so couldn't renew it, so it's important.

I've asked Nominet for clarification on whether the web hosting company were in control for the whole duration of the 3 month expiry period, because if they were, then they're clearly lying to the complainant by saying they weren't.

But the more you ask questions - especially if that leaves a "paper trail" - the more it indicates that you believe their complaint has at least some merit...

Not at all, I'm merely trying to clarify the facts of who was in control of a domain and getting the renewal warnings, because as you and others rightly say, it might not be important as to who owned the domain when it dropped, but it is important if anyone is deliberately telling lies in order to avoid blame, and will form part of my short response to the DRS.

 

[redbird]

............

 

[gimpydog]

@Edwin, it's 2 generic words making up a brandable domain.

It matters who was in control of the admin email for it, because Nominet confirm that the web hosting company employed by the complainant were in control of the domain at the start of the expiry period, but they told the complainant they weren't in control of it and so couldn't renew it, so it's important....../

/......Not at all, I'm merely trying to clarify the facts of who was in control of a domain and getting the renewal warnings, because as you and others rightly say, it might not be important as to who owned the domain when it dropped, but it is important if anyone is deliberately telling lies in order to avoid blame, and will form part of my short response to the DRS.

All of which is irrelevant to your chances of success, IF your registration is abusive.

Given that you are unlikely to be able to prove the complainant has no rights in the name, you really should be concentrating on proving your registration and/or use of the name is NOT abusive, rather than faffing about with petty point scoring over how incompetent the previous registrant and/or their registrar/host was.

 

[grantw]

It matters who was in control of the admin email for it

It's irrelevant. The domain was available to register, you registered it. It's as simple as that.

Investigating why it dropped and including it in your response will give you no advantage at all and, depending on what you write, may give the complainant ammunition to put in a response which you can't respond to.

Keep it simple and just show that the registration isn't abusive!

Grant

 

[Systreg]

Regardless of people thinking it's not important, I think it is

The complainant is under the impression that his hosting company weren't in control of the domain when it dropped, because they told him they didn't have control of it at that point.

Nominet have just replied to my query about that and said:

The renewal reminders and cancellation warning would all have been sent to the (his hosting company name) email address.

How they can claim they had no control over the name is ridiculous, they were getting the renewal warnings and should have told the complainant so that he could renew it, they're clearly at fault, and a DRS procedure is not the place to remedy this.

My response will be short and along the lines of:

I saw a domain that was suitable for my needs, I carried out due diligence prior to registering it. I was fully entitled to register the domain with it having no TM's and no other business having sole rights to the 2 word term of which the domain is made up.

Nominet have informed me that (hosting company name) were in full control of the domain, and that the 4 renewal reminders and final cancellation warning email were sent to the (hosting company name) admin email address.

This seems at complete odds with them telling the complainant that they weren't in control of it. I don't believe this is an issue for DRS proceedings, the (hosting company name) are clearly the ones at fault and I'm an innocent party in this. The complainant should actually be taking legal action against his hosting company for their negligence. The complainant is also partly to blame for his own negligence, the onus is always on the registrant to make sure their domain registrations are up to date.

The end.

 

[gimpydog]

The end.

https://youtu.be/1fuDDqU6n4o?t=14

 

[Systreg]

Case now closed, I kept my DRS response short and to the point.

When mediation started, I gave the mediator the other information I'd gathered about the domain, previous registrants and their we host etc, he replied saying I'd touched on a few questions that he'd asked himself when reading the case, and he'd talk through the case fully with the complainant, and try to get their understanding of the DRS process and the impact on both parties of raising a complaint, that was last week and he replied today:

Following our last email I have contacted the Complainant and discussed the case further with them.

After consideration the Complainants have decided not to take the case forward and I will be closing the mediation and case down today.

I wanted to let you know that this was happening and the registration will remain with you ‘as is’. I also wanted to take the opportunity to thank you for your detailed responses, time and effort throughout the entire process.

 

[Paullas]

Case now closed, I kept my DRS response short and to the point.

When mediation started, I gave the mediator the other information I'd gathered about the domain, previous registrants and their we host etc, he replied saying I'd touched on a few questions that he'd asked himself when reading the case, and he'd talk through the case fully with the complainant, and try to get their understanding of the DRS process and the impact on both parties of raising a complaint, that was last week and he replied today:

Well done...