New Official AMT Thread

[tonyca]

Dear AMT customers/clients/followers.

We write to inform you that due to the pending class action, Lenell et al. v. Advanced Mining Technology, Inc., No. 14-cv-01924 (E.D.Pa.), we will no longer be communicating on the Bitcoin Talk Forum per the advice of our attorneys. We are still working towards resolving all outstanding customer complaints in conjunction with our counsel. Please note that customers may still contact us directly to  discuss issues with their orders, but we will be unable to use the forum as a means of communication regarding specific orders or the pending litigation. You may contact us by phone at 855-866-6463 or by email at josh@advancedminers.com .  We will still handle individual communications regarding orders within the ordinary course of business.

AMT_miners,

I sent you email for following up every week,since you mentioned here. you can communicate  with either email or phone, just sent you an email couple of minutes ago. please response to my email for the options how you deal with mine 2 miner purchased for you.order number is 645 and 962.

Thank you,
Tony

[1714131374]

1714131374

[FrictionlessCoin]

Dear AMT customers/clients/followers.

We write to inform you that due to the pending class action, Lenell et al. v. Advanced Mining Technology, Inc., No. 14-cv-01924 (E.D.Pa.), we will no longer be communicating on the Bitcoin Talk Forum per the advice of our attorneys. We are still working towards resolving all outstanding customer complaints in conjunction with our counsel. Please note that customers may still contact us directly to  discuss issues with their orders, but we will be unable to use the forum as a means of communication regarding specific orders or the pending litigation. You may contact us by phone at 855-866-6463 or by email at josh@advancedminers.com .  We will still handle individual communications regarding orders within the ordinary course of business.

Been waiting for that. Got a hunch that Josh's public offers did not sit well with the legal eagles.

I do pray that AMT and their attorneys realize that this means that they now MUST reply to our emails/calls in a timely manner with at least a canned vetted response as that is the only avenue of contact that is left open to us...

AMT has all the email addresses of their customers.   Why can't they send an email to them?

[opieum2]

I have been pretty pissed these last few days, with all this...so I had a friend of mine take a look at this who works corporate law (he has been on the receiving end of class actions mainly so he understands this well). He talked me down a bit and made some valid points....first them talking to us here is potentially a major problem, secondly giving us offers they cant/may not fulfill is another that will affect their case. That would lead to what AMT_Miners already posted although they may have already been told not to and did it anyway, a problematic matter at any rate. They apparently cant talk to us here...its a public forum and they are pretty much drowning themselves by doing this. He speculated, as he has only the info in the 2 threads to go by and whatever info I told him.  

At any rate it certainly explains the silence and seeing the post from them pretty much confirms that. But he did tell me they MIGHT be under some kind of gag order....its speculative and an assumption...but seems like the lawyers are doing their thing. We just have to see this process through at this point and wait. We really don't have a choice BUT at least we have someone in our corner fighting for us. But he did say based on what I showed him he thinks its likely a slam dunk for us based on other similar cases he has researched. That is pretty much where it stands now.

I am keeping patience as he did make me understand this process which I knew but never been a plaintiff in. That said I figure I will wait it out till I hear back. Looks likely that the result is favorable for us at this point. That's all we can hope for. Not much we can do but wait. All we can do really is speculate unless we get other information otherwise.

[opieum2]

Hi,

I am concerned client of AMT. I have no direct affiliation with the company, although I live close enough to the office and can get updates on the situation. I have created a new thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603863.0

Maybe together as clients, we can resolve the situation without the need for direct communication from AMT itself. Maybe for what ever legal reasons, AMT is being urged to not resolve problems publicly and therefore cannot get to a resolution. As clients working together, maybe we can discuss the possibilities and act accordingly.

Thanks for the offer, have you gone to their office by any chance and did you find anyone to talk to? Will post this on your thread as well as this thread looks dead.

I have been to their office and I have spoken with management, and I believe I can enlighten this group as to what's going on.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603863.0

Interesting question though. If you were at their office, they did say they moved. Whats the new address? Its not on their site...for those of us for RMA's it would be useful.

[FrictionlessCoin]

Do you happen to know why they had even chosen to reply to people in a forum and not directly to their customers via email? I have an order with 2 1.2th miners. Gee if they even send me some competitor's hardware which is cheaper now id be happy.

A forum is a public arena, it seems that here they get a better understand of who's order is what and who's order they can fulfill directly without offering up settlement options via their website. It seems that if they were to email all their clients (some in the class action) then again it would result in a problem, because again that would be settling outside of the class which the other lawyers don't seem to like.    <-  Frowny face.

I am only a client of AMT, but my suggestion is to email AMT with what you'd propose as a form of settlement for your order, from the above options which I overheard while sitting in their office.

Again - my name is Mr. Swim, my order # is 333.

It is AMT's fiduciary duty to send an email to each and every customer about their current situation.

The fact that they are all communicating with this board about their issues is a complete breach of that duty.

Only a small percentage of customers monitor Bitcointalk.  In fact, even less are monitoring this thread because it is so new.[/quote]

[Clients_of_AMT]

Hi,

I am concerned client of AMT. I have no direct affiliation with the company, although I live close enough to the office and can get updates on the situation. I have created a new thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603863.0

Maybe together as clients, we can resolve the situation without the need for direct communication from AMT itself. Maybe for what ever legal reasons, AMT is being urged to not resolve problems publicly and therefore cannot get to a resolution. As clients working together, maybe we can discuss the possibilities and act accordingly.

Thanks for the offer, have you gone to their office by any chance and did you find anyone to talk to? Will post this on your thread as well as this thread looks dead.

I have been to their office and I have spoken with management, and I believe I can enlighten this group as to what's going on.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603863.0

Interesting question though. If you were at their office, they did say they moved. Whats the new address? Its not on their site...for those of us for RMA's it would be useful.

It was their office:  the one located at 355 Lancaster Ave, Bldg E1, haverford, pa, 19041

[Flying Hellfish]

Dear AMT customers/clients/followers.

We write to inform you that due to the pending class action, Lenell et al. v. Advanced Mining Technology, Inc., No. 14-cv-01924 (E.D.Pa.), we will no longer be communicating on the Bitcoin Talk Forum per the advice of our attorneys. We are still working towards resolving all outstanding customer complaints in conjunction with our counsel. Please note that customers may still contact us directly to  discuss issues with their orders, but we will be unable to use the forum as a means of communication regarding specific orders or the pending litigation. You may contact us by phone at 855-866-6463 or by email at josh@advancedminers.com .  We will still handle individual communications regarding orders within the ordinary course of business.

Now if only you asshats had just started the business with normal funding methods instead of using CUSTOMER pre-order money to fund your start up and if you guys hadn't been completely ignorant to your initial investomers you may have been able to avoid the legal ass raping you fellows are likely in for.  Enjoy it, you brought it all on yourselves.

Come to think of it these guys should have just done the exact opposite of everything they did.  I bet in bizzaro world AMT is the MS of BTC mining manufacturing!

[opieum2]

The first time this page has ever made it to page two...whoops lol back to page one. At any rate I am guessing there are interesting days ahead for us in this whole saga. Considering the news with a bunch of mining companies this just seems like par for the course. Hopefully this all works out for the best for everyone. Honestly it would just be better if we were made whole. But the class action in all likleyhood just gets the lawyers paid and we get shafted if AMT's inability to meet the class demands falls short. My opinion but seems like one already expressed as it is.

[regtable69]

it would be my understanding amt will/can pass the buck down to bitmine who in turn may pass it on to the next in the line. strengthened with the fact amt has said theyr not entertaining bitmine in favor of another supplier. so your class actions *may fall short of giving you more than answers to why amt failed thus far, as if amt can dissolve the liabiliry on to their supplier then nothing will get done other than a judge saying "case closed i find in favor of the defendants" next case "amt vs bitmine.ch" pmsl

[Flying Hellfish]

it would be my understanding amt will/can pass the buck down to bitmine who in turn may pass it on to the next in the line. strengthened with the fact amt has said theyr not entertaining bitmine in favor of another supplier. so your class actions *may fall short of giving you more than answers to why amt failed thus far, as if amt can dissolve the liabiliry on to their supplier then nothing will get done other than a judge saying "case closed i find in favor of the defendants" next case "amt vs bitmine.ch" pmsl

Your understanding is incorrect.  AMT has a contract with each customer individually.  Amt also has sales contracts in place with the suppliers and vendors.  Those contracts are COMPLETELY separate.  If there is an issue with the sales contract with clients it will be dealt with between AMT and their customer.  If for some reason AMT's suppliers or vendors have done something to break the contract between AMT and the supplier/vendor it will be dealt with between the supplier/vendor and AMT.  Possibly the damage caused to AMT by supplier/vendor breaking contract may impact the amount AMT could go after but in no way does it matter to the sales contract between AMT and their clients.  You see not a single solitary customer has a contract with Bitmine or IMET or any AMT supplier/vendor but they do have a sales contract with AMT and that is who will pay the price for entering into that contract.  That's just how the world works.  AMT like you have failed to realize some basic business fundamentals.

If you buy a GM car with Firestone tires and a recall happens, do you deal with GM or Firestone.  Of course you return it to the dealership and they happily replace the tires at no cost to you.  What you don't see is that GM is "billing" Firestone for each tire replaced and the labour to install them.  The purchaser deals with whomever they have a contract with, good luck going to Firestone and getting them to replace the recalled tires.

[RickJamesBTC]

Dear AMT customers/clients/followers.

We write to inform you that due to the pending class action, Lenell et al. v. Advanced Mining Technology, Inc., No. 14-cv-01924 (E.D.Pa.), we will no longer be communicating on the Bitcoin Talk Forum per the advice of our attorneys. We are still working towards resolving all outstanding customer complaints in conjunction with our counsel. Please note that customers may still contact us directly to  discuss issues with their orders, but we will be unable to use the forum as a means of communication regarding specific orders or the pending litigation. You may contact us by phone at 855-866-6463 or by email at josh@advancedminers.com .  We will still handle individual communications regarding orders within the ordinary course of business.

Got you now suckers. Thanks for playing.

[regtable69]

it would be my understanding amt will/can pass the buck down to bitmine who in turn may pass it on to the next in the line. strengthened with the fact amt has said theyr not entertaining bitmine in favor of another supplier. so your class actions *may fall short of giving you more than answers to why amt failed thus far, as if amt can dissolve the liabiliry on to their supplier then nothing will get done other than a judge saying "case closed i find in favor of the defendants" next case "amt vs bitmine.ch" pmsl

Your understanding is incorrect.  AMT has a contract with each customer individually.  Amt also has sales contracts in place with the suppliers and vendors.  Those contracts are COMPLETELY separate.  If there is an issue with the sales contract with clients it will be dealt with between AMT and their customer.  If for some reason AMT's suppliers or vendors have done something to break the contract between AMT and the supplier/vendor it will be dealt with between the supplier/vendor and AMT.  Possibly the damage caused to AMT by supplier/vendor breaking contract may impact the amount AMT could go after but in no way does it matter to the sales contract between AMT and their clients.  You see not a single solitary customer has a contract with Bitmine or IMET or any AMT supplier/vendor but they do have a sales contract with AMT and that is who will pay the price for entering into that contract.  That's just how the world works.  AMT like you have failed to realize some basic business fundamentals.

If you buy a GM car with Firestone tires and a recall happens, do you deal with GM or Firestone.  Of course you return it to the dealership and they happily replace the tires at no cost to you.  What you don't see is that GM is "billing" Firestone for each tire replaced and the labour to install them.  The purchaser deals with whomever they have a contract with, good luck going to Firestone and getting them to replace the recalled tires.

snippets from t/c that all customers had to agree to prior to purchase otherwise no purchase could be made.

all shipping after amt gives it to fed ex is "your" responsibility

"• Shipping Charges; Taxes; Title; Risk of Loss. Shipping, handling and tax are additional unless otherwise expressly indicated at the time of sale. Products are delivered to you Ex Works in accordance with INCOTERMS 2010. This means title to products passes from AMT to you upon shipment. Loss or damage that occurs during shipping by a carrier is your responsibility. You must notify AMT within 21 days of the date of shipment if you believe any part of your purchase is missing, wrong or damaged"


and as far as delays goes "outside of amts controll" i.e bitmine.ch delays or otherwise

" Excusable Delay. AMT shall not be liable for any delay or failure to perform due to any cause beyond its control or the control of its suppliers or subcontractors such as, for example, strikes, acts of God, acts of Buyer, Acts of Financial Payment Processing institutions, including freezing/holding of accounts, consumer payments, and interruption of transportation or inability to obtain the necessary labor, materials or facilities. Delivery schedules shall be considered extended by a period of time which AMT deems necessary due to the event circumstances or cause of delay. In the event AMT is unable wholly or partially to perform because of any such cause it may cancel its acceptance of Buyer’s order without liability to Buyer."

them two claws in their t/c wraps up 90-100% of the cases i believe.

weve had this before where it is in contravention of yada statue law bull but end of the day you agreed to the above as a customer. short n curleys being tugged.

[FrictionlessCoin]

it would be my understanding amt will/can pass the buck down to bitmine who in turn may pass it on to the next in the line. strengthened with the fact amt has said theyr not entertaining bitmine in favor of another supplier. so your class actions *may fall short of giving you more than answers to why amt failed thus far, as if amt can dissolve the liabiliry on to their supplier then nothing will get done other than a judge saying "case closed i find in favor of the defendants" next case "amt vs bitmine.ch" pmsl

Your understanding is incorrect.  AMT has a contract with each customer individually.  Amt also has sales contracts in place with the suppliers and vendors.  Those contracts are COMPLETELY separate.  If there is an issue with the sales contract with clients it will be dealt with between AMT and their customer.  If for some reason AMT's suppliers or vendors have done something to break the contract between AMT and the supplier/vendor it will be dealt with between the supplier/vendor and AMT.  Possibly the damage caused to AMT by supplier/vendor breaking contract may impact the amount AMT could go after but in no way does it matter to the sales contract between AMT and their clients.  You see not a single solitary customer has a contract with Bitmine or IMET or any AMT supplier/vendor but they do have a sales contract with AMT and that is who will pay the price for entering into that contract.  That's just how the world works.  AMT like you have failed to realize some basic business fundamentals.

If you buy a GM car with Firestone tires and a recall happens, do you deal with GM or Firestone.  Of course you return it to the dealership and they happily replace the tires at no cost to you.  What you don't see is that GM is "billing" Firestone for each tire replaced and the labour to install them.  The purchaser deals with whomever they have a contract with, good luck going to Firestone and getting them to replace the recalled tires.

snippets from t/c that all customers had to agree to prior to purchase otherwise no purchase could be made.

all shipping after amt gives it to fed ex is "your" responsibility

"• Shipping Charges; Taxes; Title; Risk of Loss. Shipping, handling and tax are additional unless otherwise expressly indicated at the time of sale. Products are delivered to you Ex Works in accordance with INCOTERMS 2010. This means title to products passes from AMT to you upon shipment. Loss or damage that occurs during shipping by a carrier is your responsibility. You must notify AMT within 21 days of the date of shipment if you believe any part of your purchase is missing, wrong or damaged"


and as far as delays goes "outside of amts controll" i.e bitmine.ch delays or otherwise

" Excusable Delay. AMT shall not be liable for any delay or failure to perform due to any cause beyond its control or the control of its suppliers or subcontractors such as, for example, strikes, acts of God, acts of Buyer, Acts of Financial Payment Processing institutions, including freezing/holding of accounts, consumer payments, and interruption of transportation or inability to obtain the necessary labor, materials or facilities. Delivery schedules shall be considered extended by a period of time which AMT deems necessary due to the event circumstances or cause of delay. In the event AMT is unable wholly or partially to perform because of any such cause it may cancel its acceptance of Buyer’s order without liability to Buyer."

them two claws in their t/c wraps up 90-100% of the cases i believe.

weve had this before where it is in contravention of yada statue law bull but end of the day you agreed to the above as a customer. short n curleys being tugged.

What exactly are you trying to argue here?

If AMT ships damaged goods then AMT is obligated to replace them.

If AMT is unable to ship goods due to unexpected circumstances then there should be zero 'liability to the buyer'. 

Two other things to note,  (1)  AMT has never responded in an appropriate way to the return of damaged goods.  We have evidence of this and (2) AMT has never explained to customers the reasons for delays.   No mention of acts of God, etc....

[Flying Hellfish]

it would be my understanding amt will/can pass the buck down to bitmine who in turn may pass it on to the next in the line. strengthened with the fact amt has said theyr not entertaining bitmine in favor of another supplier. so your class actions *may fall short of giving you more than answers to why amt failed thus far, as if amt can dissolve the liabiliry on to their supplier then nothing will get done other than a judge saying "case closed i find in favor of the defendants" next case "amt vs bitmine.ch" pmsl

Your understanding is incorrect.  AMT has a contract with each customer individually.  Amt also has sales contracts in place with the suppliers and vendors.  Those contracts are COMPLETELY separate.  If there is an issue with the sales contract with clients it will be dealt with between AMT and their customer.  If for some reason AMT's suppliers or vendors have done something to break the contract between AMT and the supplier/vendor it will be dealt with between the supplier/vendor and AMT.  Possibly the damage caused to AMT by supplier/vendor breaking contract may impact the amount AMT could go after but in no way does it matter to the sales contract between AMT and their clients.  You see not a single solitary customer has a contract with Bitmine or IMET or any AMT supplier/vendor but they do have a sales contract with AMT and that is who will pay the price for entering into that contract.  That's just how the world works.  AMT like you have failed to realize some basic business fundamentals.

If you buy a GM car with Firestone tires and a recall happens, do you deal with GM or Firestone.  Of course you return it to the dealership and they happily replace the tires at no cost to you.  What you don't see is that GM is "billing" Firestone for each tire replaced and the labour to install them.  The purchaser deals with whomever they have a contract with, good luck going to Firestone and getting them to replace the recalled tires.

snippets from t/c that all customers had to agree to prior to purchase otherwise no purchase could be made.

all shipping after amt gives it to fed ex is "your" responsibility

"• Shipping Charges; Taxes; Title; Risk of Loss. Shipping, handling and tax are additional unless otherwise expressly indicated at the time of sale. Products are delivered to you Ex Works in accordance with INCOTERMS 2010. This means title to products passes from AMT to you upon shipment. Loss or damage that occurs during shipping by a carrier is your responsibility. You must notify AMT within 21 days of the date of shipment if you believe any part of your purchase is missing, wrong or damaged"


and as far as delays goes "outside of amts controll" i.e bitmine.ch delays or otherwise

" Excusable Delay. AMT shall not be liable for any delay or failure to perform due to any cause beyond its control or the control of its suppliers or subcontractors such as, for example, strikes, acts of God, acts of Buyer, Acts of Financial Payment Processing institutions, including freezing/holding of accounts, consumer payments, and interruption of transportation or inability to obtain the necessary labor, materials or facilities. Delivery schedules shall be considered extended by a period of time which AMT deems necessary due to the event circumstances or cause of delay. In the event AMT is unable wholly or partially to perform because of any such cause it may cancel its acceptance of Buyer’s order without liability to Buyer."

them two claws in their t/c wraps up 90-100% of the cases i believe.

weve had this before where it is in contravention of yada statue law bull but end of the day you agreed to the above as a customer. short n curleys being tugged.

A court is not going to give a rat's ass about some bullshit ToS.  Let me break it down, a company cannot take your money for a product that does not exist and then write a ToS that contradicts FTC FEDERAL REGULATIONS and then tell you to fuck off and wait until we are good and ready to send you anything they want at any point.  The whole FTC mail order rule is kinda written so horse shit like this doesn't happen.

Once this hits the real world (ie a court room and not this wild west Deadwood everyone seems to love), a lot of people are going to find out just how bad all the American mining manufactures have really fucked up.  Screwing around with the FTC is going to seem like fun if fraud and or wire fraud charges get brought up in the near future.

[opieum2]

it would be my understanding amt will/can pass the buck down to bitmine who in turn may pass it on to the next in the line. strengthened with the fact amt has said theyr not entertaining bitmine in favor of another supplier. so your class actions *may fall short of giving you more than answers to why amt failed thus far, as if amt can dissolve the liabiliry on to their supplier then nothing will get done other than a judge saying "case closed i find in favor of the defendants" next case "amt vs bitmine.ch" pmsl

Your understanding is incorrect.  AMT has a contract with each customer individually.  Amt also has sales contracts in place with the suppliers and vendors.  Those contracts are COMPLETELY separate.  If there is an issue with the sales contract with clients it will be dealt with between AMT and their customer.  If for some reason AMT's suppliers or vendors have done something to break the contract between AMT and the supplier/vendor it will be dealt with between the supplier/vendor and AMT.  Possibly the damage caused to AMT by supplier/vendor breaking contract may impact the amount AMT could go after but in no way does it matter to the sales contract between AMT and their clients.  You see not a single solitary customer has a contract with Bitmine or IMET or any AMT supplier/vendor but they do have a sales contract with AMT and that is who will pay the price for entering into that contract.  That's just how the world works.  AMT like you have failed to realize some basic business fundamentals.

If you buy a GM car with Firestone tires and a recall happens, do you deal with GM or Firestone.  Of course you return it to the dealership and they happily replace the tires at no cost to you.  What you don't see is that GM is "billing" Firestone for each tire replaced and the labour to install them.  The purchaser deals with whomever they have a contract with, good luck going to Firestone and getting them to replace the recalled tires.

snippets from t/c that all customers had to agree to prior to purchase otherwise no purchase could be made.

all shipping after amt gives it to fed ex is "your" responsibility

"• Shipping Charges; Taxes; Title; Risk of Loss. Shipping, handling and tax are additional unless otherwise expressly indicated at the time of sale. Products are delivered to you Ex Works in accordance with INCOTERMS 2010. This means title to products passes from AMT to you upon shipment. Loss or damage that occurs during shipping by a carrier is your responsibility. You must notify AMT within 21 days of the date of shipment if you believe any part of your purchase is missing, wrong or damaged"


and as far as delays goes "outside of amts controll" i.e bitmine.ch delays or otherwise

" Excusable Delay. AMT shall not be liable for any delay or failure to perform due to any cause beyond its control or the control of its suppliers or subcontractors such as, for example, strikes, acts of God, acts of Buyer, Acts of Financial Payment Processing institutions, including freezing/holding of accounts, consumer payments, and interruption of transportation or inability to obtain the necessary labor, materials or facilities. Delivery schedules shall be considered extended by a period of time which AMT deems necessary due to the event circumstances or cause of delay. In the event AMT is unable wholly or partially to perform because of any such cause it may cancel its acceptance of Buyer’s order without liability to Buyer."

them two claws in their t/c wraps up 90-100% of the cases i believe.

weve had this before where it is in contravention of yada statue law bull but end of the day you agreed to the above as a customer. short n curleys being tugged.

A court is not going to give a rat's ass about some bullshit ToS.  Let me break it down, a company cannot take your money for a product that does not exist and then write a ToS that contradicts FTC FEDERAL REGULATIONS and then tell you to fuck off and wait until we are good and ready to send you anything they want at any point.  The whole FTC mail order rule is kinda written so horse shit like this doesn't happen.

Once this hits the real world (ie a court room and not this wild west Deadwood everyone seems to love), a lot of people are going to find out just how bad all the American mining manufactures have really fucked up.  Screwing around with the FTC is going to seem like fun if fraud and or wire fraud charges get brought up in the near future.

Right there are numerous agreements out there that try to circumvent US Law. This is why organizations like the FTC exist within our legal framework. On a couple of aspects they also cannot pass the buck onto the customer they way they did in those ToS items. Firstly, excusable delay does not mean excessive delay. Those are outlined very clearly in the FTC rules. excusable delays beyond 30 days give the customer the right to a full and prompt refund (prompt defined as 7 days by the FTC).

With the shipping issue there is a tremendous amount for abuse. They could snailmail the shipment in such a way that international shipments can take easily up to 21 days to arrive thereby screwing pretty much anyone in the international market. And running the clock down quick on anyone who bought hardware in the US by using the slowest possible delivery method. Loss or damage by the carrier is THEIR responsibility as they are supposed to insure the product as it in transit. That little shipping bit is the reason why people were getting shitty packaging and all the actions that led to alot of the current problems. Again FTC rules clearly dictate that as well.

Those terms might sound nice to the business side but they have clear contradictions with current FTC regulations. Its not just as easy to make someone sign to something like this. Besides that there is also another side to this. We did not get these terms attached with the sales receipt...OR an option to accept it when we made the purchase. We cannot agree to something we did not see or sign. So in that sense the ToS is null and void. This is why most online transactions require that checkbox to proceed. You see it with new egg and you see it with other companies. Usually once until they change the terms then you have to recheck that box.

[opieum2]

FYI Sabre made an interesting point in the other thread. The fact that the other lawsuit still is not a class action yet...at this point its only representing the named individuals.....which means until its given class status we are not in the process. Might be why they are trying to gag them on this. Not sure the details but we don't know anything ourselves so we are cut out of the process altogether. Kinda sucks. But if they go after AMT for everything they have then the only ones to benefit if this is not a class action are the named individuals in the complaint. Least that's how it appears. 

[regtable69]

it would be my understanding amt will/can pass the buck down to bitmine

Your understanding is incorrect.  

snippets from t/c that all customers had to agree to prior to purchase otherwise no purchase could be made.

A court is not going to give a rat's ass about some bullshit ToS.

Right there are numerous agreements out there that try to circumvent US Law. This is why organizations like the FTC exist within our legal framework. On a couple of aspects they also cannot pass the buck onto the customer they way they did in those ToS items. Firstly, excusable delay does not mean excessive delay. Those are outlined very clearly in the FTC rules. excusable delays beyond 30 days give the customer the right to a full and prompt refund (prompt defined as 7 days by the FTC).

With the shipping issue there is a tremendous amount for abuse. They could snailmail the shipment in such a way that international shipments can take easily up to 21 days to arrive thereby screwing pretty much anyone in the international market. And running the clock down quick on anyone who bought hardware in the US by using the slowest possible delivery method. Loss or damage by the carrier is THEIR responsibility as they are supposed to insure the product as it in transit. That little shipping bit is the reason why people were getting shitty packaging and all the actions that led to alot of the current problems. Again FTC rules clearly dictate that as well.

Those terms might sound nice to the business side but they have clear contradictions with current FTC regulations. Its not just as easy to make someone sign to something like this. Besides that there is also another side to this. We did not get these terms attached with the sales receipt...OR an option to accept it when we made the purchase. We cannot agree to something we did not see or sign. So in that sense the ToS is null and void. This is why most online transactions require that checkbox to proceed. You see it with new egg and you see it with other companies. Usually once until they change the terms then you have to recheck that box.

*edited to shorten post*

i know nothing of the ftc i am a uk citizen alls i know is if i click the terms and conditions not tos (terms of service) i am agreeing to the whole thing as is wether it succeeds any other laws/statutes as its the 'new binding agreement' like a pay day loan that gets you to tick a box or your bank with its un lawful charges. its all fine untill after someone says its not.

in all fairness im a believer of the 'freeman' ethics if it wasnt signed by both partys in wet ink it dosent count for jack no "contract" just 'agreements' and agreements can be bent twisted and broken easily.
and the only thing i am trying to get across is it seems bitmine.ch is the stem of the issue with all subsidiary resellers having the same issues. wether it stems further to bitmines supply or not i do not know. but ALL companys that have any affiliation with similar rigs i.e bitmine rigs, coincraft desks, amt's rigs. all customers receiving rigs damaged, none working, none existent and screaming refund.

FYI Sabre made an interesting point in the other thread. The fact that the other lawsuit still is not a class action yet...at this point its only representing the named individuals.....which means until its given class status we are not in the process. Might be why they are trying to gag them on this. Not sure the details but we don't know anything ourselves so we are cut out of the process altogether. Kinda sucks. But if they go after AMT for everything they have then the only ones to benefit if this is not a class action are the named individuals in the complaint. Least that's how it appears.  

how many ppl are in the lawsuit? i seem to think 5-6 individuals. so they would be the only ones to get anything in the event amt are asked to close down? and the legitimate customers whom amt claim to have shipped to (me included still running 2 months in) loose all support and mpp! that defo sucks

[plp]

they submitted a document so every one is in the lawsuit .. i spoke to the lawyers ..

but you can also file your own small claims court aside from the class action which I am filing tomorrow .

[NotFuzzyWarm]

they submitted a document so every one is in the lawsuit .. i spoke to the lawyers ..

but you can also file your own small claims court aside from the class action which I am filing tomorrow .

Submitted is not the same as class-action being granted. A judge could for whatever reason say it does not fit the requirement. Odds are it does.

For most states there are only a few things that need to be met: Several out-of-state plaintiffs filing the suit, at least X amount of dollars per-plaintiff (for the case against BFL in Kansas it was $10k) and at least 100 other customers determined from company records who would get relief from the lawsuit if ran as a class-action.

Pretty sure that those conditions are met here.

[Flying Hellfish]

i know nothing of the ftc i am a uk citizen alls i know is if i click the terms and conditions not tos (terms of service) i am agreeing to the whole thing as is wether it succeeds any other laws/statutes as its the 'new binding agreement' like a pay day loan that gets you to tick a box or your bank with its un lawful charges. its all fine untill after someone says its not.

By your logic prostitution is legal.  A man with $40 really needs a blow job, he meets a lady that really needs $40, they enter into an unwritten contract for services.  I guess everyone ever charged with prostitution forgot to mention the defence of "but they signed our terms and conditions"...

I actually believe that the plaintiffs lawyers will be extremely happy if they defence uses that strategy as it does nothing but help make the plaintiffs case.

Come on bro, you can't just write a bunch of shit on your website and then tell the FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION to fuck off, well you can but it likely won't end well for the company...