- Case Number: a20150219.1
- Status: closed
- Claimant: Lachezar D
- Respondent: CAcert
initial Case Manager: UlrichSchroeter
Case Manager: PietStarreveld
- Date of arbitration start: 2016-06-02
- Date of ruling: 2016-06-14
- Case closed: 2016-06-14
- Complaint: Permanent account removal
- Relief: TBD
Before: Arbitrator EvaStöwe (A), Respondent: CAcert (R), Claimant: Lachezar D (C), Case: a20150219.1
2015-02-19 (issue.c.o): case s20150219.58
- 2015-09-07 (iCM): added to wiki, request for CM / A, no notification sent to (C)
2016-06-02 (A): hands over CM role to PietStarreveld and accepts role as A
- 2016-06-14 (A): Init and ruling/execution mail
- 2016-06-14 (CM): Closed case
Link to Arbitration case a20150219.1 (Private Part)
EOT Private Part
Due to changes in CACert organisation, rules and agreements I wish to no longer be a part of it. I can no longer log-in, because I do not agree with the CACert Community Agreement, which I do not. I do not want to perform as an Assurer as I do not agree with the Assurer terms, conditions and procedures. I want to have my account removed, complete with any personal information that is stored on the CACert servers.
- About the dispute
- The claimant wants to terminate his membership with CAcert.
After the dispute was filed a ruling was given in a20141024.1 that defined a process so that cases like this can be handled by support.
- It is sensible to hand this case over to support who will be able to handle it faster than arbitration.
- Possibility to combine init-mail with ruling
- Even as the dates in his account indicate that he had accepted CCA and by this DRP once, the claimant clearly stated that he does not agree to the current version of the CCA.
- It does not make sense to verify this in a special init-mail.
- There is nothing known that hinders him to leave in general where he would have to be involved in this case. His position is already clear.
The claimant did assurances within last 7 years. The ruling in a20141231.1 clarified that this does not hinder someone to leave CAcert. (According provisions were added to the process that should be used based on the ruling of a20141024.1).
- As there is nothing known that would hinder a simple closure of the account, there is nothing that would prevent handling that case by support, for which no CCA or DRP acceptance is not necessary.
- Because of this no verification of CCA and DRP acceptance is necessary.
- If complications would arise a new arbitration case could be initiated.
In this case a ruling to dismiss the case back to support to handle it based on ruling of a20141024.1 is sensible. To spare the member the amount of mails send by CAcert, the ruling can be send together with the init mail.
The termination of the account of the claimant should be handled by support by using the complete process defined in 20141024.1 starting with step 1. Eva Stöwe, Hamburg 2016-06-14
- 2016-06-14 (A): ruling (combined with init and execution request to support)