* Case Number: a20130716.1
  * Status: init
  * Claimants: CAcert
  * Respondents: Thomas F
  * Initial Case Manager: AlexRobertson
  * Case Manager: PhilippDunkel
  * Arbitrator: AlexRobertson
  * Date of arbitration start: 2013-07-20
  * Date of ruling: 201Y-MM-DD
  * Case closed: 201Y-MM-DD
  * Complaint: CCA Violation

  * Relief: Authorisation to attempt to contact via alternate route

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


== History Log ==
 . 2013-07-16 (issue.c.o) case [[https://issue.cacert.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentZoom&TicketID=228364|s20130716.9]]
 . 2013-07-16 (iCM): added to wiki, request for CM / A
 . 2013-07-16 (iCM) Announcement to (R) "bounced" 
 . 2013-07-20 (A) I take this case and appoint PhilippDunkel as CM
 . 2013-07-20 (A) Initial Mailing
 . 2013-07-20 (A) Interim Ruling 1

== Original Dispute, Discovery (Private Part) (optional) ==

 * '''Link to Arbitration case [[Arbitrations/priv/a20130716.1|a20130716.1 (Private Part)]], Access for (CM) + (A) only)'''  

## ==> INCLUDE SECTION BOT
<<Include(Arbitrations/priv/a20130716.1)>>  
## <== INCLUDE SECTION EOT


==== EOT Private Part ====

== Discovery ==
 . (A) 2013-07-20 Initial Mailing 
 {{{
In this particular case I intend to skip the normal initial mailing about
CCA acceptance as the Respondent's email address is bouncing and support (ie
Werner! ) is assumed to have accepted CCA on the basis of his position
within CAcert
}}}
 . (A) 2013-07-20 "Bounce" information regarding (R) primary email
 {{{
host said: 550 5.1.1   User unknown (in reply to RCPT TO command)
}}}

== Ruling ==
=== 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.) <<BR>>
<<BR>>
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 [[Arbitrations/a20100701.1|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. <<BR>>
<<BR>>
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. <<BR>>
<<BR>>
Alex Robertson<<BR>>
CAcert Arbitrator <<BR>>
Crewe, UK <<BR>>
20th July 2013<<BR>>







== Similiar Cases ==
|| [[Arbitrations/a20090618.7|a20090618.7]] || Mails to primary address of an account bounces ||
|| [[Arbitrations/a20100701.1|a20100701.1]] || violation of CCA 2.5.2 (Mirko D) ||

----
 . CategoryArbitration
 . [[CategoryArbCaseCCAViolation]]
 . CategoryArbCaseOthers