Putting Adults in Charge at Hashfast

[Entropy-uc]

We have lost patience with management at Hashfast.  As outside observers, it is impossible to separate incompetence from systematic fraud but it is clear that one or both is pervasive at the company.

We have waited patiently on a moderately large order (62 Sierras) while 6 months from our promised shipping date has gone past.  Over a month ago we cancelled our orders and demanded a refund as is our legal right. Not only has a refund not been forthcoming, no one at Hashfast bothers to respond to messages.  However when we inquired about purchasing another $1M in hardware, we had three emails and phone calls within an hour.

We have determined that a lawsuit is an ineffective approach at this point.  Instead we are going to apply to the court to have a receiver appointed to take control of the company.  By law, if 3 creditors, owed over $15k IN TOTAL apply to the court, the company can be placed under the control of a receiver.  The receiver will take control of the assets and debts of the company, determine if the operation can continue under new management or liquidate the assets as needed.   The receiver will also be obligated to find and report for prosecution any misuse of company funds that he finds.

Understandably this is a drastic move, but we believe it is our only option.  Hashfast has no right to operate using our money, and clearly they cannot operate without it or our refund would have been paid long ago.  If you would like to join us in this action, PM me.  All of the legal fees to move forward have already be paid.

Some people will not want Hashfast to be disrupted in this way, but we believe it is the only fair way to handle the situation.  Experience with MtGox and Bitfloor has shown that allowing an insolvent company to continue operating just results in additional losses for everyone (and often rewards insiders who cheat and steal from the rightful creditors).  By taking this action, all money flows from Hashfast will be reviewed and any fraudulent payments will have to be returned.  It will also stop boards that were paid for last year from being resold to scammers like Ken Slaughter rather than being delivered to their rightful owners.

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

[1713966845]

1713966845

[1713966845]

1713966845

[1713966845]

1713966845

[1713966845]

1713966845

[cedivad]

As outside observers, it is impossible to separate incompetence from systematic fraud

No, it's only incredibly difficult.

[Micky25]

Excellent! Push it through!

[chairforce1]

Admiring initiative. I'm interested in how this turns out.

[perezoso]

Bravo!  Please keep us updated, and send the cause number when you have it.

[dogie]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

[solarion]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

I read it as, "follow the existing laws or we take your company".

[cedivad]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

No, he opened this thread to collect claims from other customers. By going on alone you wouldn't have all of the benefits. Worst case scenario is HashCrap paying him forcing him to pay their legal fees. Best case scenario is HashCrap being run from the customers investigating their previous expenses and having even more proofs to use in a penal case against what will be the old management.

He is not even alone in what he is doing. It's an idea that many had since January and others are trying to implement since a few weeks.

(i've placed a poor, 5 BTC bounty for a successful forced bankruptcy and i would be incredibly happy to pay it)

[Minor Miner]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

Interesting way of phrasing things but you are not correct in your sarcasm.

When you have demanded a refund and the company has not paid it, you are a creditor.
When creditors are not paid, they have remedies under US law.
When creditors force a company into chapter 11 or 7 bankruptcy (because the company has NOT repaid the creditors), the court appoints someone to run the company and clean up the mess.   This seems to be the part you do not understand.  That court appointed party goes in and figures out what is the BEST OUTCOME for everyone involved and tries to salvage as much as they can for the people who are stakeholders in the company.    Which includes TAKING back money/assets that had been wrongly distributed during the course of the business.

If you are truly interested, you can do a little research into the madoff case and just how far the appointed law firm went to get money back to FAIRLY divide up among the stakeholders.   Read a lot of articles because they went after everything.    Pretty solid law firm.

And it is not a "threat", the majority of the cost has already been paid to the law firm.

[cedivad]

The problem is that you can't ask the court appointed guy to take time back. If we don't wait another 6 months we still have pretty good chances of getting everything back.

[dogie]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

Interesting way of phrasing things but you are not correct in your sarcasm.

And it is not a "threat", the majority of the cost has already been paid to the law firm.

There was no sarcasm and it is a threat - do x or we will do y.

[cedivad]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

Interesting way of phrasing things but you are not correct in your sarcasm.

And it is not a "threat", the majority of the cost has already been paid to the law firm.

There was no sarcasm and it is a threat - do x or we will do y.

Again, how is it a threat? It's the consequence that the law imposes in similar conditions. It's in no way a threat. It's a simple description of the brighter future for HashCrap customers.

An edit because maybe it's not clear enough. The forced bankruptcy thing fails, by definition, if the debtor pays the creditor. This can happen after that the forced bankruptcy has been filled. HashCrap might decide not to pay anyone but to be ready to pay people forcing them into bankruptcy. That's the worst case scenario i was talking about before.

[Minor Miner]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

Interesting way of phrasing things but you are not correct in your sarcasm.
And it is not a "threat", the majority of the cost has already been paid to the law firm.

There was no sarcasm and it is a threat - do x or we will do y.

No your tense is incorrect.  It would be more like because YOU REFUSED TO DO X, the consequences are Y.  There is no "we will do unless...", it is already paid (and HF already knows the law firm that will be filing so this is not a surprise to them).   A threat would imply that a demand was JUST made.    Demand was made, and ignored (and re-made and ignored (MANY TIMES)).   This is the repercussion and the only solution.   While they could avoid and refund everyone, why would they after ignoring everyone in the past?   If they intended on conducting themselves in an ethical manner, they would have done that by now.  Honest people do not ignore their creditors for months after defaulting on their contracts, hiding behind an answering service.   Honest people pick up the phone and explain themselves and see if there is anything that can be done to rectify the situation.   Honest people do not hire people to harass customers that have legitimate complaints nor personally attack their customers in public (perhaps someone could put the link to the attacks HASHFAST CL posted against individuals who requested the refunds they were entitled to).    Let the court appoint someone and then we all will get the real facts and we can all decide for ourselves what happened at this company.   Considering I was told several times by several Hashfast employees that units would definitely start shipping in 10 days and then Edward received the chips 24 days later, I will be very interested in seeing the invoice and other paperwork from the foundry.

And the post is not addressed to HF at all.   It is addressed to the creditors who should know what options they have.   One order alone is over the threshold and we have 3 others that have documented claims, but we would prefer to file with more creditors already on board as it will make things simpler during the restructuring process.

This is not a game and it is time for people to realize there are consequences to bad behavior.   I believe that the more bad actors that are pushed out of bitcoin, the faster bitcoin will adopt and be accepted by people at large.

[dogie]

Look at the tense of the quote from the OP... it will be filed (we will do y...) unless you refund (unless you do x). This isn't rocket science :/

If this wasn't an open challenge/threat to HashFast and you were suing them regardless then there wouldn't need to be a forum post.

[ak49er]

Look at the tense of the quote from the OP... it will be filed (we will do y...) unless you refund (unless you do x). This isn't rocket science :/

If this wasn't an open challenge/threat to HashFast and you were suing them regardless then there wouldn't need to be a forum post.

So it's a threat, or it's not a threat. Makes little difference as far as I can tell.  Unless it's a bluff and they call it.  Unless it's a double bluff.

[Minor Miner]

Look at the tense of the quote from the OP... it will be filed (we will do y...) unless you refund (unless you do x). This isn't rocket science :/

If this wasn't an open challenge/threat to HashFast and you were suing them regardless then there wouldn't need to be a forum post.

The more creditors on the initial filing the better because the creditors are the stakeholders.   But yes, one downfall is that if they refund every single person on the filing, then the filing will be useless and the OP stated this and we would be out all the money that we have paid the law firm to research and prepare this.  Is that clear enough for you?   
Do you have an order or a refund request with Hashfast? 

[Bicknellski]

We have lost patience with management at Hashfast.  As outside observers, it is impossible to separate incompetence from systematic fraud but it is clear that one or both is pervasive at the company.

We have waited patiently on a moderately large order (62 Sierras) while 6 months from our promised shipping date has gone past.  Over a month ago we cancelled our orders and demanded a refund as is our legal right. Not only has a refund not been forthcoming, no one at Hashfast bothers to respond to messages.  However when we inquired about purchasing another $1M in hardware, we had three emails and phone calls within an hour.

We have determined that a lawsuit is an ineffective approach at this point.  Instead we are going to apply to the court to have a receiver appointed to take control of the company.  By law, if 3 creditors, owed over $15k IN TOTAL apply to the court, the company can be placed under the control of a receiver.  The receiver will take control of the assets and debts of the company, determine if the operation can continue under new management or liquidate the assets as needed.   The receiver will also be obligated to find and report for prosecution any misuse of company funds that he finds.

Understandably this is a drastic move, but we believe it is our only option.  Hashfast has no right to operate using our money, and clearly they cannot operate without it or our refund would have been paid long ago.  If you would like to join us in this action, PM me.  All of the legal fees to move forward have already be paid.

Some people will not want Hashfast to be disrupted in this way, but we believe it is the only fair way to handle the situation.  Experience with MtGox and Bitfloor has shown that allowing an insolvent company to continue operating just results in additional losses for everyone (and often rewards insiders who cheat and steal from the rightful creditors).  By taking this action, all money flows from Hashfast will be reviewed and any fraudulent payments will have to be returned.  It will also stop boards that were paid for last year from being resold to scammers like Ken Slaughter rather than being delivered to their rightful owners.

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

Interesting direction here is hoping that you can manage to pull this off. It would definitely put companies on notice if you can get this done.

[lenny_]

Good luck with it!

[Entropy-uc]

We anticipate actual filings will be made next week.  Hashfast can easily prevent this by paying the refunds that are owed.

So this is meant to be a threat to get a refund, give it us or we take your company?

The court will appoint a receiver who will decide to either liquidate the company or bring in management to operate it as a going concern.  We will not be any more involved than any other creditor once Hashfast is placed into involuntary bankruptcy.  This is an ordinary process allowed to creditors of companies that fail to meet their obligations.  Literally centuries of law has been developed to make the process fair for everyone involved.

If refunds are paid, we would have no standing with the court to request bankruptcy.  To keep things fair I am offering others the chance to participate in this filing if they are in the similar situation to us of being unwilling to act as Hashfast's interest free bankers.

[dogie]

Look at the tense of the quote from the OP... it will be filed (we will do y...) unless you refund (unless you do x). This isn't rocket science :/

If this wasn't an open challenge/threat to HashFast and you were suing them regardless then there wouldn't need to be a forum post.

The more creditors on the initial filing the better because the creditors are the stakeholders.   But yes, one downfall is that if they refund every single person on the filing, then the filing will be useless and the OP stated this and we would be out all the money that we have paid the law firm to research and prepare this.  Is that clear enough for you?   
Do you have an order or a refund request with Hashfast? 

No business or interest in Hashfast what so ever, just a commentator.