National Arbitration Forum




National Westminster Bank plc v. [Redacted]

Claim Number: FA0805001195906



Complainant is National Westminster Bank plc (“Complainant”), represented by James A. Thomas, of Troutman Sanders LLP, North Carolina, USA.  Respondent’s personal information is redacted from this Decision.




The domain name at issue is <>, registered with Melbourne It, Ltd. d/b/a Internet Names Worldwide.



The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.


Sandra J. Franklin as Panelist.



Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on May 29, 2008; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on May 30, 2008.


On June 3, 2008, Melbourne It, Ltd. d/b/a Internet Names Worldwide confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <> domain name is registered with Melbourne It, Ltd. d/b/a Internet Names Worldwide and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  Melbourne It, Ltd. d/b/a Internet Names Worldwide has verified that Respondent is bound by the Melbourne It, Ltd. d/b/a Internet Names Worldwide registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).


On June 6, 2008, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of June 26, 2008 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to by e-mail.


A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on June 25, 2008.


On July 1, 2008, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Sandra J. Franklin as Panelist.



Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.



A. Complainant


1.      Respondent’s <> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s NATWEST mark.


2.      Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <> domain name.


3.      Respondent registered and used the <> domain name in bad faith.


B. Respondent states that he has been a victim of identity theft, that the perpetrator is the one who registered the <> domain name, and that he wants the domain name in dispute out of his name.


Preliminary Issue: Redaction of Respondent’s Identity

Respondent contends he has been the victim of identity theft.  Respondent states his American Express card number was stolen and subsequently used to register the disputed domain name and make multiple other purchases.  Respondent has submitted evidence of identity theft reports he filed with several credit bureaus, the FTC and his local police.  Respondent also states he has contacted the FBI and Secret Service in regards to this matter.  Based on the evidence submitted, the Panel finds that Respondent is a victim of identity theft and chooses to redact Respondent’s personal information from the decision to prevent the further victimization of Respondent.  In Wells Fargo & Co. v. John Doe as Holder of Domain Name <>, FA 362108 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 30, 2004) and Wells Fargo & Co. v. John Doe as Holder of Domain Name <wellsfargossl>, FA 453727 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 19, 2005), the panels omitted the respondents’ personal information from the decisions in an attempt to protect the respondents who claimed to be victims of identity theft from becoming aligned with acts the actual registrants appeared to have sought to impute to the respondents.  See also Nat’l Westminster Bank plc v. [Redacted], FA 1028337 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 25, 2007).  According to Policy 4(j), “[a]ll decisions under this Policy will be published in full over the Internet, except when an Administrative Panel determines in an exceptional case to redact portions of its decision.”



Complainant National Westminster Bank holds various registered trademarks for its NATWEST mark, including with the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office showing use since 1973.  Complainant is owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland Group and is part of the fifth-largest financial services group in the world.  Complainant offers its financial services under various domain names incorporating the NATWEST mark, including <>.


The named respondent does not object to the transfer of the domain name <> to Complainant.


The Panel finds that the circumstances of identity theft, along with the named respondent’s desire to have the domain name out of his name, constitute consent to transfer the disputed domain name from Respondent to Complainant.  The Panel, therefore, declines to conduct the full UDRP analysis and orders the immediate transfer of the domain name.  See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat Arb. Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant . . . Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 24, 2005) (“[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.”).  Accordingly, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.




Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.




Sandra J. Franklin, Panelist
Dated:  July 15, 2008







Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.


Click Here to return to our Home Page


National Arbitration Forum