Before: Arbitrator AlexRobertson (A), Respondent: Thomas F (R), Claimant: CAcert (C), Case: a20130716.1

History Log

Original Dispute, Discovery (Private Part) (optional)

EOT Private Part



Interim Ruling 1

The bouncing email address is prima-facie evidence of the CCA violation claimed (CCA 2.5.2 requires community members to keep their email accounts in good working order.)

I note the relief requested is to allow support to attempt to contact the respondent by such other means as they may find appropriate and also that this was the approach taken by the Arbitrator in a20100701.1 hence I rule that support are authorised to attempt to contact the respondent discretely by whatever other means they may choose in order to re-establish contact.

There are a number of reasons to try to re-establish contact with a "lost" community member - good customer relations and the maintenance of the assurance web of trust come to mind, so I am going to suggest that this is made a "precedent" case to allow support to attempt to contact members whose email address no longer works should they so wish! This suggestion is open to comment from interested parties until 2013-08-03.

Alex Robertson
CAcert Arbitrator
Crewe, UK
20th July 2013

Similiar Cases


Mails to primary address of an account bounces


violation of CCA 2.5.2 (Mirko D)

Arbitrations/a20130716.1 (last edited 2013-07-20 12:22:49 by arobertson)