Official Neteller Update Thread Part 2

[Merkle]

And how did you expct them to send you checks with the DOJ seizing funds as they enter the US?

[bossplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
And how did you expct them to send you checks with the DOJ seizing funds as they enter the US?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't pursue this route, I offered to fly over there and collect my balance. They were not doing this, at all.

[03 Z4]

I would say how we all feel about NT/DOJ at the end is if we do or do not get all our $ back. I have no problem w/ NT not paying us when DOJ seized their funds. I would think the concensus all along is NT was making $ transfer mainly for purpose of internet gambling and that's a big NO-NO in US (you may not agree w/ that principle but that's another story).

[03 Z4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And how did you expct them to send you checks with the DOJ seizing funds as they enter the US?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't pursue this route, I offered to fly over there and collect my balance. They were not doing this, at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I may be wrong but my understanding is DOJ would not allow NT to touch this $.

[bossplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And how did you expct them to send you checks with the DOJ seizing funds as they enter the US?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't pursue this route, I offered to fly over there and collect my balance. They were not doing this, at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I may be wrong but my understanding is DOJ would not allow NT to touch this $.

[/ QUOTE ]

My money was not frozen, if you are referring to the money in transit that was intercepted.

[03 Z4]

^^^ I meant once DOJ froze their account, NT could not return $ to us if they wanted to.

[Mendacious]

Seems pretty clear to me that in retrospect, Neteller had the funds to pay US customers irrespective of the frozen funds-- as they are forfeiting that $60 Mil. + another $70 Mil. as part of their settlement with the DOJ, and they STILL have the funds to pay.

I agree that they could not have paid electronically, but I see no reason whatsoever that they could not have sent cashier's checks to any customers who requested them. I have no doubt that customers would have paid the fees associated with this. Clearly they had the money to do this, and there is no way whatsoever that the US GOV could have prevented it, short of opening every piece of mail in the system. And I think banks would have had to honor cashier's checks.

Obviously there are many possible justifications for this, but Neteller certainly was misleading about it.

[oldbookguy]

The problem Neteller has was the same as a bank in Macau, the U S froze 25M that belonged to N. Korea.
After unfreezing the funds, it took 60 days (supposed to have been less than 30 and finally ONLY the Federal Reserve could do it since the bank was still on a watch list as NT will be) to transfere the money once unfrozen.

Why, after the bank was under investigation, NO ONE would deal with them in the U S until the DoJ signed a non prosecution agreement with the ACH / funds transfer service for fear dealing in any way with that bank would cause them problems later.

Same for ANY bank transfering money / checks for Neteller to the U. S., that bank / company would then have problems.

BTW, look for this to possibly cause delays July 30 as well, NT will have trouble getting someone to handle the transactions unless the DoJ gives them assurances. That or possibly the Federal Reserve will personally handle the transfers (oh no.......).

obg

[WarmonkEd]

[ QUOTE ]
Seems pretty clear to me that in retrospect, Neteller had the funds to pay US customers irrespective of the frozen funds-- as they are forfeiting that $60 Mil. + another $70 Mil. as part of their settlement with the DOJ, and they STILL have the funds to pay.

I agree that they could not have paid electronically, but I see no reason whatsoever that they could not have sent cashier's checks to any customers who requested them. I have no doubt that customers would have paid the fees associated with this. Clearly they had the money to do this, and there is no way whatsoever that the US GOV could have prevented it, short of opening every piece of mail in the system. And I think banks would have had to honor cashier's checks.

Obviously there are many possible justifications for this, but Neteller certainly was misleading about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the DOJ froze funds being transferred electronically from Neteller to US customers, and you think they wouldn't have noticed or minded if Neteller started issuing cashiers checks? Of course they wouldn't have been able to physically stopped it, but it would've ment more fines for Neteller.

(edit: would've -> wouldn't)

[bossplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem Neteller has was the same as a bank in Macau, the U S froze 25M that belonged to N. Korea.
After unfreezing the funds, it took 60 days (supposed to have been less than 30 and finally ONLY the Federal Reserve could do it since the bank was still on a watch list as NT will be) to transfere the money once unfrozen.

Why, after the bank was under investigation, NO ONE would deal with them in the U S until the DoJ signed a non prosecution agreement with the ACH / funds transfer service for fear dealing in any way with that bank would cause them problems later.

Same for ANY bank transfering money / checks for Neteller to the U. S., that bank / company would then have problems.

BTW, look for this to possibly cause delays July 30 as well, NT will have trouble getting someone to handle the transactions unless the DoJ gives them assurances. That or possibly the Federal Reserve will personally handle the transfers (oh no.......).

obg

[/ QUOTE ]

Edit your post please!!! We don't need Neteller execs trying to scout out more ways to earn interest. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]