DECISION

 

Holding Company of the Villages, Inc. v. Domain Admin / Privacy Protect LLC PrivacyProtect org

Claim Number: FA2506002160595

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Holding Company of the Villages, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by J. Coy Stull of Carlton Fields, P.A., Florida, USA. Respondent is Domain Admin / Privacy Protect LLC PrivacyProtect org ("Respondent"), Massachusetts, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <rentalsthevillages.com>, (the "Domain Name") registered with GMO Internet Group, Inc. d/b/a Onamae.com.

 

PANEL

The undersigned certifies that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge have no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.

 

Dawn Osborne as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on June 13, 2025; Forum received payment on June 13, 2025.

 

On June 16, 2025, GMO Internet Group, Inc. d/b/a Onamae.com confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <rentalsthevillages.com> Domain Name is registered with GMO Internet Group, Inc. d/b/a Onamae.com and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. GMO Internet Group, Inc. d/b/a Onamae.com has verified that Respondent is bound by the GMO Internet Group, Inc. d/b/a Onamae.com registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").

 

On June 18, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of July 8, 2025 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@rentalsthevillages.com. Also on June 18, 2025, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.

 

Having received no response from Respondent, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

On July 9, 2025 pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Dawn Osborne as Panelist.

 

Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the Domain Name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

 

The Complainant is the owner of the trade mark THE VILLAGES, registered, inter alia, in the USA for real estate services since 2002.

 

The Domain Name registered in 2024 is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trade mark adding only the generic word 'rentals', and the gTLD .com none of which prevents said confusing similarity.

 

The Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in the Domain Name, is not commonly known by it and has not been authorised by the Complainant.

 

The Domain Name has been used for a site purporting to offer competing rental services using the Complainant's mark and copying the trade dress colours of the Complainant's site, impersonating the Complainant for phishing purposes. The site offer fake rentals at real properties without the authorisation of the real owners of those properties, copying material without permission from a third party authentic site offering real rentals. Victims of the Respondent's site have been swindled out of thousands of dollars as a result.

 

Accordingly the Respondent's use is not a bona fide offering of services and/or a legitimate non commercial or fair use. It is registration and use in bad faith for fraudulent purposes.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

The Complainant is the owner of the trade mark THE VILLAGES, registered, inter alia, in the USA for real estate services with first use recorded as 2002.

 

The Domain Name registered in 2024 has been used for a site purporting to offer competing rental services using the Complainant's mark and copying the trade dress colours of the Complainant's site impersonating the Complainant for phishing purposes. The site offers fake rentals at real properties without the authorisation of the real owners of those properties, copying material without permission from a third party authentic site offering real rentals. Victims of the Respondent's site have been swindled out of thousands of dollars as a result.

 

DISCUSSION

Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."

 

Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:

 

(1)       the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and

(2)       Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(3)       the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

 

In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules.  The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) ("Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint").

 

Identical and/or Confusingly Similar

The Domain Name registered in 2024 consists of the Complainant's THE VILLAGES mark (registered, inter alia, in the USA for real estate services since 2002) the generic term 'rentals' and the gTLD .com.

 

Adding a generic word and a gTLD to a complainant's mark does not prevent confusing similarity between that mark and a domain name. See Wiluna Holdings, LLC v. Edna Sherman, FA 1652781 (Forum Jan. 22, 2016) (Finding the addition of a generic term and gTLD is insufficient in distinguishing a disputed domain name from a mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).) The Panel finds that adding the generic word 'rentals' and the gTLD .com does not prevent confusing similarity between the Domain Name and the Complainant's mark.

 

Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar for the purposes of the Policy with a mark in which the Complainant has rights.

 

As such the Panel holds that Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy has been satisfied.

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

The Complainant has not authorised the use of its mark. There is no evidence or reason to suggest the Respondent is, in fact, commonly known by the Domain Name. See Alaska Air Group, Inc. and its subsidiary, Alaska Airlines v. Song Bin, FA1408001574905 (Forum September 17, 2014) (holding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name as demonstrated by the WHOIS information and based on the fact that the complainant had not licensed or authorized the respondent to use its ALASKA AIRLINES mark). The use of the Domain Name is commercial and so is not legitimate non commercial fair use.

 

The web site attached to the Domain Name purports to offer competing services to the Complainant using the Complainant's mark and colour trade dress and material taken from a third party site referring to real properties associated with the Complainant to suggest that it is affiliated with the Complainant. It does not make it clear that there is no connection with the Complainant. The Panel finds this use is confusing. See Am. Intl Group Inc v Benjamin FA 944242 (Forum May 11, 2007) (finding that the Respondent's use of a confusingly similar domain name to advertise services which competed with the Complainant's business did not constitute a bona fide use of goods and services.)

 

The Domain Name has been registered for phishing purposes offering fake rentals to scam retirees. As such it cannot amount to the bona fide offering of goods and services and is not a legitimate non commercial or fair use. See DaVita Inc. v. Cynthia Rochelo, FA 1738034 (Forum July 20, 2017) ("a phishing scheme is not considered a bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use.").

 

The Respondent has not answered this Complaint or provided any explanation to counter the allegation that the web site is offering fake services or phishing. The Respondent has not rebutted the prima facie case evidenced by the Complainant as set out herein.

 

As such the Panelist finds that the Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in the Domain Name and that the Complainant has satisfied the second limb of the Policy.

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

In the opinion of the Panel, the use made of the Domain Name in relation to the Respondent's site is confusing and disruptive in that visitors to the site might reasonably believe it is connected to or approved by the Complainant as it uses the Complainant's mark to offer competing services related to properties associated with the Complainant and also uses the Complainant's colour trade dress to suggest it is affiliated with the Complainant. The Panel is entitled to draw adverse inferences from the lack of response from the Respondent. Specifically there has been no attempt to counter the serious allegation that the services provided by the Respondent are fake and the site is phishing. The use of the Complainant's colour trade dress on the Respondent's site shows that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant and its business, rights and services.

 

Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain Internet users to its website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's trade mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of the web site and services offered on it under Policy 4 (b)(iv) likely to disrupt the business of the Complainant under Policy 4 (b)(iii). See Allianz of AM. Corp v Bond, FA 680624 (Forum June 2, 2006)(finding bad faith registration and use where the respondent was diverting Internet users searching for the complainant to its own website).

 

Additionally phishing conduct is evidence of bad faith registration and use within the Policy 4(a)(iii). See Klabzuba Oil & Gas, Inc v LAKHPAT SINGH BHANDARI, FA 1506001625750 (Forum July 17, 2015).

 

As such, the Panelist believes that the Complainant has made out its case that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith and has satisfied the third limb of the Policy under para 4(b)(iii) and (iv).

 

DECISION

Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

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

 

 

 

Dawn Osborne, Panelist

Dated: July 9, 2025