What's contradictory is there is no policy stating that lacking knowledge on their part about some country's jurisdiction may affect transfers. The requirements for a transfer are an active company and a valid person who is signing the documents, which criteria is being meet completely by our company.
In this case they want to make us wait about 2 weeks for a reason
that doubtfully affects the transfer at all, since the general
criteria is being meet on our side. If they made some mistake of
not knowing the jurisdiction in full, why they wouldn't leave that
for themselves instead of involving us in the waiting time?
For me nothing is logical here, especially, when a company that
provided a service to you during 4 years suddenly change their
mind about way they do business without prior notification,
specially when nothing have changed on your part. At least it's
not how business is supposed to work in my opinion.
This line doesn't affect the way our company exists, at least it's not the reason to suspend a business with us. It probably means that the director is not backed by an organisation and it's a private person. We have seen a lot of extracts of currently active companies we work with that have a same line, so it's quite common, though I am not sure what it means exactly.
It seems to me they did not notice it earlier, but now they have and are seeking clarification from the issuing authority.
Seems completely logical to me. Just because they did not notice it before doesn't mean that they are now forced to continue exactly as before...
"doesn't have" on an extract may concern authority to represent a business or something important like that. I don't see what policy is contradicted here? Can you suggest one?
--
Regards,
Terrence Koeman, PhD/MTh/BPsy
Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V.
Please quote relevant replies.
Spelling errors courtesy of my 'smart'phone.
From: Dmitry P <head@global-data-networks.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 3 March 2020 03:13
To: members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: [members-discuss] About transfer policies
Hello,
we are in some weird situation with transfering out an IP range and RIPE
doesn't provide any answers to our questions, the transfer is suspended
for a very weird reason and we are out of options; I would like to hear
other members opinions on that subject with a hope of seeking some
answers that RIPE didn't provide after numerous attempts.
Our company's extracts are created by Ukraine's Ministry of Justice and
have a specific line near the director field which says '(не має)' right
after mentioning the director's name, which means "(doesn't have)" from
Ukrainian.
ПОЧТАРЬОВ ДМИТРО ОЛЕГОВИЧ - керівник з 25.05.2016 (не має);
We had this line on all our extracts since the company was opened and
RIPE has a) accepted us as a member by reviewing those extracts b)
approved numerous in and out transfers with those extracts since 2016
c) recently approved a transfer out about 2 weeks ago using the extract
with the same line.
4 days ago we have requested another transfer and a RIPE rep. has asked
us to clarify about what '(не має)' means in our extract. We have no
clue what it means exactly and never interested because it was present
since a first extract, also because RIPE has never questioned it before,
and as I have mentioned, all the previous extracts came with that line.
We don't have a clue of what it means and the RIPE's rep. decided to
suspend the transfer and make a request to Ukraine's Ministry of
Justice, which was very unexpected decision from our point of view.
She told us that "Though we process tens of requests of Ukrainian
companies every day, it's first time that we see such a record. It's not
entirely clear what it means and what you as a Director "do not have".",
to which I responded it's a false statement, because RIPE certainly HAS
SEEN this line before, at least because my company have performed many
transfers and requests with RIPE, which have been approved using same
extracts. In this case, she talked about her own experience in the name
of RIPE, which already was not very professional.
So I obviously asked why does some her or RIPE's unawareness in
Ukraine's legislation should concern us, to what I got no answer at all.
Are we really responsible for RIPE's lack of knowledge on some subject?
Our company is active and the extracts are all valid on the min. justice
site, also the signee of the T.A. corresponds to the director name -
this all makes us compliant to the RIPE's rules and policies, which, we
believe should have made this transfer complete already.
Notwithstanding our expectations, RIPE didn't provide any answer to our
questions and also didn't tell why this specific matter should concern
this specific transfer, since there were already approved transfers
using same extract. Now we must wait about 2 or 3 weeks until the Min.
of Justice responds them to clarify this, which made us very
disappointed, since we still do not understand why this case affects our
transfer at all.
This is very frustrating and we have no more choices but hearing other
members opinions and suggestions, if any. Doesn't it look like RIPE is
very contradictory to its own policies in this case?
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss@ripe.net
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/terrence%40darkness-reigns.com