PM me if interested in joining potential class action suit v. Neteller

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
Not being from the USA I don't know how this would work but as there are a lot of lawyers on this thread would be intersting to hear any views and other opinions.

Imagine player A deposits 500 into a site from neteller then later withdraws back into neteller 2500 from the site. Therefore there is a taxable gain of $2000?

If a class action lawsuit only returns a certain % is the player still also liable to pay tax on the full $2000? So could end up costing them more money than they have in Neteller in the first place.

What sort of percentage of players do you think have fully paid tax on their winning transactions in neteller? Are the non tax payers going to be in for a big shock once all the EFT and other banking records the DOJ have been after have been reviewed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dotti, I was hooted at a couple of years ago when I brought this up, but there is an accounting concept known as "constructive receipt". What this means is you do not owe taxes on money until you have actually got the money.

People were wondering about paying taxes on their gambling gains that were still in online accounts. I pointed out that having money online was still under the site's control and you did not have "constructive receipt" of the gains until you cash out and get the money completely under your control.

I think the money currently trapped on neteller is a good example, as is winnings on poker sites that could be seized for a number of reasons. Pay taxes on your winnings when they are under your control in a US Bank.

As far as neteller records go, the US Govt. would have been able to get those anytime they wanted, suit, arrests, or nothing. Neteller has always said they would comply with the US Govt. requests.

The Govt. can also get the records from the EFT processing companies or your bank anytime it wants them, these companies will also comply to any requests.

The EU recently raised a big stink when a HUGE database of financial transactions was turned over to the US Government by the European banking network. The US is datamining the transactions looking for terrorist financial activities, although now that they have the transaction data, nothing is stopping them from looking for other things.

[skoal2k4]

not any reason... sections g, i, and j.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
taken from the TOS we all agree to when opening a neteller account

[ QUOTE ]

14. Limiting Access or Terminating your Account

14.1 At our discretion, we may suspend or limit access to your Account (including without limitation, placing a hold on funds in your Account, limiting your ability to send or redeem, transfer or withdraw electronic money from your Account, limiting your payment sources) or terminate your Account, at any time and for any reason, including but not limited to the following:

(a) breach of any of these Terms of Use;
(b) if we have reasonable grounds to believe that your Account has been used in connection with unauthorized or unusual credit card or bank account use, including without limitation, notice of same by your bank or credit card issuer;
(c) abuse by you of the reversal or charge back process provided by your bank or credit card company;
(d) receipt in your Account of potentially fraudulent funds;
(e) refusal to cooperate in an investigation or to provide adequate confirmation of identity or other identity or security information when requested;
(f) initiation of transactions that may be considered to be cash advances or assisting in cash advances;
(g) we believe your Account has been used or allegedly used in or to facilitate fraudulent or illegal activity;
(h) return of a payment for insufficient funds in the bank account;
(i) we believe that your Account, whether active or dormant, or your conduct, poses a security, credit, fraud or business risk to us; and
(j) to comply with money laundering or terrorist financing investigations conducted by government authorities, agencies or commissions.


[/ QUOTE ]

you lose your class action lawsuit

[/ QUOTE ]

If you believe that a provision in the agreement that permits Neteller to indefinitely place on hold hundreds of millions of dollars, at its sole discretion, for any reason it chooses, is enforceable, I guess we disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Terms (g), (i), and (j) seem pretty clear. But I bet you could still get neteller to pay all your fees for the suit out of the plantiff's money they hold, so no worries.

[jaminbird]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Remember, in your first year of law school, studying something called the "minimum contacts doctrine" in Civil Procedure?

[/ QUOTE ]
The old International Shoe case. However, Neteller had no assets or employees in the US. Their customer agreement stated that the customer agreed that he was doing business in the Isle of Man and could only sue there. Not sure if Neteller had minimal contacts in US.
From the beginning of this ordeal, I have wondered about standing of online poker players to file Declaratory Judgement on legal status of online poker. I doubted that any issue in controversy existed until the Neteller situation. I was just wondering if the frozen Neteller US clients have standing for such an action. I am not involved because I do not have any funds with Neteller.

[/ QUOTE ]

See Asahi Metal Industry (480 U.S. 102) where the Court held a company's knowledge that their products would end up in the U.S. sufficient to establish jurisdiction.

[poorolrich]

IF, in fact, Nettellers funds are frozen as reported how in the hell are they suppose to refund any monies???

[poorolrich]

I bet the lawyers would get more of that $207 than you.

[Rigel]

Is there an arbitration clause in the Neteller user agreement? Such clauses have rendered many consumer fraud lawsuits stillborn since federal courts are so willing to broadly interpret the Federal Arbitration Act to get cases off their docket. And you can bet that whatever entity handles the arbitration is going to be biased in favor of Neteller.

[[Phill]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
taken from the TOS we all agree to when opening a neteller account

[ QUOTE ]

14. Limiting Access or Terminating your Account

14.1 At our discretion, we may suspend or limit access to your Account (including without limitation, placing a hold on funds in your Account, limiting your ability to send or redeem, transfer or withdraw electronic money from your Account, limiting your payment sources) or terminate your Account, at any time and for any reason, including but not limited to the following:

(a) breach of any of these Terms of Use;
(b) if we have reasonable grounds to believe that your Account has been used in connection with unauthorized or unusual credit card or bank account use, including without limitation, notice of same by your bank or credit card issuer;
(c) abuse by you of the reversal or charge back process provided by your bank or credit card company;
(d) receipt in your Account of potentially fraudulent funds;
(e) refusal to cooperate in an investigation or to provide adequate confirmation of identity or other identity or security information when requested;
(f) initiation of transactions that may be considered to be cash advances or assisting in cash advances;
(g) we believe your Account has been used or allegedly used in or to facilitate fraudulent or illegal activity;
(h) return of a payment for insufficient funds in the bank account;
(i) we believe that your Account, whether active or dormant, or your conduct, poses a security, credit, fraud or business risk to us; and
(j) to comply with money laundering or terrorist financing investigations conducted by government authorities, agencies or commissions.


[/ QUOTE ]

you lose your class action lawsuit

[/ QUOTE ]

If you believe that a provision in the agreement that permits Neteller to indefinitely place on hold hundreds of millions of dollars, at its sole discretion, for any reason it chooses, is enforceable, I guess we disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Terms (g), (i), and (j) seem pretty clear. But I bet you could still get neteller to pay all your fees for the suit out of the plantiff's money they hold, so no worries.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tbh, like most i didnt, and never do, read the T&Cs.

However i dont see how J alone isnt a slamdunk win for Neteller, even assuming that any US court will hear the case in the first place.

Let me put it this way - YOUR government stopped them processing YOUR money.

The idea that your case could put MY money at risk initially concerned me. Then i realised that you have even less of a case as i thought when i went to bed.

[Eric H]

[ QUOTE ]

Dotti, I was hooted at a couple of years ago when I brought this up, but there is an accounting concept known as "constructive receipt". What this means is you do not owe taxes on money until you have actually got the money.

People were wondering about paying taxes on their gambling gains that were still in online accounts. I pointed out that having money online was still under the site's control and you did not have "constructive receipt" of the gains until you cash out and get the money completely under your control.

I think the money currently trapped on neteller is a good example, as is winnings on poker sites that could be seized for a number of reasons. Pay taxes on your winnings when they are under your control in a US Bank.

As far as neteller records go, the US Govt. would have been able to get those anytime they wanted, suit, arrests, or nothing. Neteller has always said they would comply with the US Govt. requests.

The Govt. can also get the records from the EFT processing companies or your bank anytime it wants them, these companies will also comply to any requests.

The EU recently raised a big stink when a HUGE database of financial transactions was turned over to the US Government by the European banking network. The US is datamining the transactions looking for terrorist financial activities, although now that they have the transaction data, nothing is stopping them from looking for other things.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are mistaken.

“Income although not actually reduced to a taxpayer's possession is constructively received by him in the taxable year during which it is credited to his account, set apart for him, or otherwise made available so that he may draw upon it at any time, or so that he could have drawn upon it during the taxable year if notice of intention to withdraw had been given.” IRS Regulation 1.451-2(a)

[mo42nyy]

“Income although not actually reduced to a taxpayer's possession is constructively received by him in the taxable year during which it is credited to his account, set apart for him, or otherwise made available so that he may draw upon it at any time, or so that he could have drawn upon it during the taxable year if notice of intention to withdraw had been given.” IRS Regulation 1.451-2(a)



Well I cant draw on it at any time now can I?