'Administration' fees - Pacific Poker

[herring]

Is anybody out there aware of the "administration" fee levied by Pacific Poker on dormant accounts (unused for 6 months).
10% per month till the account is emptied, which takes 10 months!!!!!

Friend of mine just had over $1000 removed from his account into the Pacific Poker coffers under the guise of an 'administration' fee.

This means, no matter how much is in your account, $10 or $100,000, it will be emptied in 10 months after 6 months of inactivity.

See Section 7, subsection iv of their terms and conditions.


7 iv
Should you fail to use your account for six months your account will be considered a "dormant account". The six-month period will run from the date of your last login to your account. In the case of a dormant account, the Company will levy a <u>monthly administration fee at a rate of 10% of the balance</u> in the account on the date that it became dormant. The administration fee shall be deducted from the dormant account commencing from the last day of the sixth month in which the account is inactive and occurring on the last day of every month thereafter, <u>until the balance of the account has reached zero</u> . In the event that you login to your account during the ten-month period during which the administration fee is levied, the Company will cease to levy the administration fee but shall not be obligated to return to you any monies deducted from the account at such time.

http://www.pacificpoker.com
Go to - Fair Play and Security - User Agreement

After a quick check of a few other sites:
Poker Stars and Full Tilt seem to have no dormant account fee.
Party Poker have a $5 per month 'Inactive Account' fee - seems fair.

[questions]

I disagree. How is levying a $5 Inactive Account fee "fair", when that money is on deposit at a bank somewhere collecting interest for the poker site?

[herring]

Yeah, ok, maybe that's not fair either, but surely a trivial matter compared with the Pacific Poker rip-off.

[Richas]

Another victory for the free market over regulation.

The free markateers assume perfect information and an equality of relationship between supplier and customer - neither assumption is true.

[cowboy.up]

10% of month is sick - but if you have a ton of cash (like your friend) sitting dormant for 6 months and not in some interest bearing account, he is an idiot.

and 10%/month will not empty your account in 10 months. i'm assuming it's 10% of the current balance, thus the 'fee' decreases as your account balance decreases.

[Legislurker]

So Pacific tellign me Im getting a check, but I can't cash out, and all the while stalling and deducting me 10% is somehow my fault?

[Dennisa]

While I do not feel too bad for your friend, this is an awful policy if someone dies and it takes time to figure out where the poker accounts and passwords are.

[awjpoker]

Nice considering i could never get their software to work on my new Vista PC and could not use it. Eventually i borrowed an XP PC and emptied the account my self, just as well by the sounds of it, i had been waiting until they got their software to work but gave up.

[herring]

I think lazy idiot would be more apt - however, not the point.

And no , not calculated on the current balance....

.... it's 10% of the balance on the day the account became dormant - so after 10 equal payments, the account is empty.

[cowboy.up]

[ QUOTE ]
I think lazy idiot would be more apt - however, not the point.

And no , not calculated on the current balance....

.... it's 10% of the balance on the day the account became dormant - so after 10 equal payments, the account is empty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hot damn. While I think it sucks - You have to be an idiot to let significant chunks of cash lying on a pokersite for 6+ months.

[Yikes]

[ QUOTE ]

And no , not calculated on the current balance....

.... it's 10% of the balance on the day the account became dormant - so after 10 equal payments, the account is empty.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the first month is 10% and every month after is more than 10% if you go by the current balance.

[TheEngineer]

Wouldn't this be better in the Zoo?