CheckNRaise poker (ongame) renegs on WSOP Tickets - Page 4

Shoe · #31 06-14-2006, 01:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the moral of the story is to stick with the big sites like PokerStars and PP. Unfortunatly stories like this give the lawmakers fuel for making online gambling illegal in the USA. I am sorry this happened to you and your family.

[/ QUOTE ]

If anything, I would think it should give them fuel to make sites legal in the USA, where we can ensure that the sites are regulated and legit. But that would just be too logical. (Not to mention the billions $$$ of tax revenue they could collect)

I agree with you that our leaders would be more likely to want to make it illegal for reasons like this, but of course I disagree strongly with that view.

But then again, why make Billions.... when you can make... millions???? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

naschburger2 · #32 06-14-2006, 02:56 AM

I guess there is bad news and good news. The bad news is that you won a seat in the world seats through tournaments using your points and now they have reneged on that. They waited much too long to tell you and you have gone to much expense. The promised monthly payments may or may not happen but I think if we layed odds they are certainly much greater than even money on another reneg and this offer was made only to temporarily save face.
the good news is according to the terms and conditions they could have just cancelled the promo with no compensation. At least you have some hope of getting the money plus a bit more over a ridiculously long period of time. I have played on check and raise in the past but will never play there again and sorry if that effects whether you get your money.

Paul Levy · #33 06-14-2006, 04:06 AM

This does not sound promising.

However I think that as a creditor you may have more leverage than you think. You should ask then for more information, such as what their restructuring plan is and a copy of their latest audited financial statements. And if it's 10k we're talking about, it might be worth at least a preliminary chat with a lawyer, if you know one.

Ultimately, my advice is: don't take a passive stance on this - it's your money, they owe you, and you have the right to take action to get them to pay you.

RR · #34 06-14-2006, 04:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
This does not sound promising.

However I think that as a creditor you may have more leverage than you think. You should ask then for more information, such as what their restructuring plan is and a copy of their latest audited financial statements. And if it's 10k we're talking about, it might be worth at least a preliminary chat with a lawyer, if you know one.

Ultimately, my advice is: don't take a passive stance on this - it's your money, they owe you, and you have the right to take action to get them to pay you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gambling debts are not collectable. This was a promotion of some sort, but I am guessing it is still a "gambling debt."

jwesty5 · #35 06-14-2006, 10:17 AM

[ QUOTE ]
This does not sound promising.

However I think that as a creditor you may have more leverage than you think. You should ask then for more information, such as what their restructuring plan is and a copy of their latest audited financial statements. And if it's 10k we're talking about, it might be worth at least a preliminary chat with a lawyer, if you know one.

Ultimately, my advice is: don't take a passive stance on this - it's your money, they owe you, and you have the right to take action to get them to pay you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good luck with this one.

one_eye_mike · #36 06-14-2006, 10:55 AM

U.S. lawyers aren't much use in another country.

Nalapoint1 · #37 06-14-2006, 12:02 PM

I hope you dont have any cash in your account there.And never count your money until the cash is in your hand.
I have had a stock broker from a major firm that I bought and sold stocks through, bounce a check they gave me when I cashed out one time. It took me a little over a month to get paid but you dont really expect a major firm to bounce a check with all of the regulatory agencies looking on.

Paul Levy · #38 06-14-2006, 12:37 PM

I'm not too sure to what extent this qualifies as a gambling debt.
I would think that the outcome of a prop bet between two individuals is one matter (definitely a gambling debt), but a tourney where the house (which is not involved in the play) only has to allocate the prize pool to the winners is another. I wonder if this might actually qualify as a "trade receivable" against the firm that runs the poker room.

I'm sure there are plenty of cases to refer to that can clear the doubts, but I still think that trying to put some pressure on the firm towards disclosing the true status of their finances and their plans would be in order.

RobDoral · #39 06-14-2006, 08:09 PM

Not a shameless bump, just wishing I'd spellchecked the word reneg before crossposting the hell of out this. Reneges

kyleb · #40 06-14-2006, 08:31 PM

This is pretty [censored] awful. Sorry, man.