What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning them?
 

Lets say the feds announce they have confiscated all american neteller money,and they say that since the money was used for gambling, which is "illegal", that the money no longer belongs to the customers. (or some other validation fro keeping the money)

What would you do personally? What do you think would occur on a national level?

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning them?
 

I would be nothing.

The national attention would be about the same or less as it was for the bill that passed in October.

Just like no one is standing up saying "How can you not let those poor gamblers gamble online if they want to"....

You won't be seeing anyone say "I'm outraged they took those poor gambler's money."

I don't think the DOJ is going to confiscate everyone's money, but they certainly could, and they certainly could get away with it.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

ok, let me add:

what would you do if you had:
$1000, $10,000, $50,000 confiscated?

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

Cry.

'I'm from the Government.... I'm here to help"

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

I'm going to watch V for Vendetta and then get back to you.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

make a large donation to hezbollah

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

[ QUOTE ]
ok, let me add:

what would you do if you had:
$1000, $10,000, $50,000 confiscated?

[/ QUOTE ]

If it looks like the money won't ever be returned, I'd keep my eye open for a class action lawsuit to join. I wouldn't want to challange it alone tho. Theoretically I'd be willing to do this over $5 lost, but obv the more at stake...well the more at stake.

If your still a resident of CA, I think you may have a few on the horizon Geo.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning them?
 

I think there would be alot of people making posts about how unfair it is and how it's all because of Republicans and poker is a game of skill so they can't do this and it's not illegal to bet yadda, yadda, yadda.

And they'll probably all wait for someone to do something about it.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

I know I would play poker, smoke pot, drink beer, the usual.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

[ QUOTE ]
make a large donation to hezbollah

[/ QUOTE ]

Thus proving DOJ's argument. Good plan.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

Playing online poker is not illegal so this wont happen.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

[ QUOTE ]
Playing online poker is not illegal so this wont happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that it could very easily happen. What percentage of the $55 million do you suppose is attributable to Neteller customers that can prove that the money came solely from poker winnings and other forms of gambling legal in their state, and what percentage do you suppose is attributable to sportsbook winnings or poker winnings from a state where poker is illegal?

The government could easily seize the funds, eventully bring a forfeiture action against the $55 million or get an order in a Neteller case that the $55 million is forfeit, and leave it to the Neteller customers to bring innocent 3rd party claims.

Not all, or even most, of the money the government seized is attributable to legal online poker playing by Neteller customers.

OP: I would prosecute innocent 3rd party claims against the US Attorney.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

Do you guys realize there is a BIG difference between seizing funds and forfeiting them? The DOJ can sieze funds it thinks might be illegal, but it takes a COURT OF LAW to transfer (forfeit) those seized funds to the government. In that Court of Law the DOJ has the burden of proving that the funds are illegal gains and subject to forfeiture. How they going to do that? Think Pokerstars will give the DOJ a list of its players and their winnings?

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys realize there is a BIG difference between seizing funds and forfeiting them? The DOJ can sieze funds it thinks might be illegal, but it takes a COURT OF LAW to transfer (forfeit) those seized funds to the government. In that Court of Law the DOJ has the burden of proving that the funds are illegal gains and subject to forfeiture. How they going to do that? Think Pokerstars will give the DOJ a list of its players and their winnings?

[/ QUOTE ]

The burden of proof in a forfeiture proceeding is a preponderance of the evidence standard. Forfeitures of property can occur in criminal cases as well as in civil cases. Yes, it takes a court order. I'd rather not lay out the DOJ's case for them here, but the argument is not terribly difficult to imagine, and there is not likely to be anyone in court that day arguing on behalf of the online poker players/sportsbettors whose money was seized.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys realize there is a BIG difference between seizing funds and forfeiting them?

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course they do not but even you informing them of the difference in an even-handed, well-written post won't stop idle speculation.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys realize there is a BIG difference between seizing funds and forfeiting them? The DOJ can sieze funds it thinks might be illegal, but it takes a COURT OF LAW to transfer (forfeit) those seized funds to the government. In that Court of Law the DOJ has the burden of proving that the funds are illegal gains and subject to forfeiture. How they going to do that? Think Pokerstars will give the DOJ a list of its players and their winnings?

[/ QUOTE ]

PS would sing like a canary if the DOJ grabbed Moneymaker! On a serious note, thanks for being the voice of reason here (and elsewhere) Skallagrim.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

I really doubt that the motives behind any of this DOJ stuff is to steal / seize / confiscate the funds of American players. Some of you guys have very active imaginations.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

"Playing online poker is not illegal so this wont happen."

It's already happened. And the longer the money stays "frozen", the less likely it'll be returned - not enough outcry.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

The original post is about the government seizing funds WITHOUT PLANS TO RETURN THEM.

Please tell us your source that says this has already happpened. Again, you have an active imagination.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning them?
 

how exactly is the us government going to sieze the funds of a foreign bank when that foreign bank didn't break any laws in that country?

Sorry, the DOJ isn't getting any of the funds deposited in NT. NT would be foolish to turn over the funds when they don't have to as they'd be opening themselves up to lawsuits from all their depositors.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning them?
 

That's easy, djoyce. Those aren't the bank's funds, those are customers funds being transferred through the bank. No one has seized NT's actually operating funds.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

$55 million has already been "frozen", "seized" whatever, so it's already happened. People are talking semantics here, discussing the legalities of this and that hypothetical situation. The fact is, people's bankrolls are gone -possession is 99% of the law.

Has anyone received an e-mail from Neteller explaining when their funds will be released?

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

Does anyone actively dispute what I have posted so far? Yes, it is a contrarian view, but I can support it with fact and I am not to be summarily dismissed.

So. . . .

Anyone?

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

So, does this sounds familiar to anyone?

From April, 2002
Sportsbook owners were shocked at a decision in the New Jersey courts this week which empowered the US government to seize funds from Intercash Financial Services, a New Jersey company acting as a middleman for sports bets placed by Americans on Internet gambling sites operated from offshore locations in Britain. These foreign betting companies enticed US players to their online sites by ensuring them that they could safely place their wagers, outside of the confines of US legislation.
The New Jersey ruling by 3rd Circuit Judge Theodore A. McKee affects British companies and citizens but the law will not apply to them directly. He found that the government had only to prove that the intermediary company in New Jersey was violating State law by promoting gambling.
Intercash Ltd. based on the Isle of Man and American Sports Ltd. located in England had argued that since all wagering transactions took place in England, there was no violation of US law. -Casinomeister

And, in the end, the DOJ got the forfeiture of the funds, the decision was appealed and the DOJ won. Yes, there are slight differences between this case and the Neteller fiasco, but generally speaking, they are extremely similar scenarios.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

Slight differences? Online sports betting is illegal. Online poker isnt.

Thats a BIG difference.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys realize there is a BIG difference between seizing funds and forfeiting them? The DOJ can sieze funds it thinks might be illegal, but it takes a COURT OF LAW to transfer (forfeit) those seized funds to the government. In that Court of Law the DOJ has the burden of proving that the funds are illegal gains and subject to forfeiture. How they going to do that? Think Pokerstars will give the DOJ a list of its players and their winnings?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not trying to be negative Skallagram, as I appreciate your posts very much, but didn't Neteller's statement say they were cooperating with the USDOJ with regards to records, forensic accounting and such?

Seems to me they may be in the process of getting the "required info" to confiscate all our monies at this very moment.

Just my opinion.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

I have posted before that Neteller giving up its info COULD mean some trouble for anyone who "forgot" to declare significant poker winnings on their taxes. But no one would do that on purpose right?

As to getting enough info to forfeit the money, the Feds have to prove the money was obtained in one of a specified number of illegal ways. Playing internet poker is not one of those ways. Money that could be proven was obtained by internet sportsbetting MIGHT be the subject of an action (the Wire Act specifically does not apply to bettors though), as I am sure some overzealous DA might devise an arguable theory. All that assumes they can find exactly how much went in AND how much came out, and FROM WHERE AND HOW it was obtained.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

Online poker is not illegal, correct. In the case that I cited, the argument against the USDOJ being able to seize funds was that the business was based in England, therefore all of the wagering went on in England and it wasn't breaking US law. Apparently that didn't matter because all the gov't had to do was prove that the company promoted gambling by acting as the middleman (ie, payment processor). And that was enough for the funds that were seized to be forfeited.
Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the USDOJ and their actions against the Neteller guys. But their situation is similar enough to the one of Intercash that, unfortunately, I'd be prepared for a similar outcome.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

The funds seized in the Intercash case belonged to the company not to its customers. Also, Intercash had a subsidiary based in US with offices in NJ. The statute that it was convicted under was not the Wire Act but a related law that bans aiding unlawful gaming while in the US. Ms. Shullman has an article about this law at Cardplayer and how it might relate to the Neteller case.

Re: What would ensue if gov\'t seized nt funds w/o plans of returning t
 

This is definetly the beginning of da end