The legality of what Neteller is doing

[BruinEric]

[ QUOTE ]
It is unlikely that you could reach Neteller assets outside of the US with a judgment from a US court.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not trying to be glib here, because I understand your point that the value of a court judgement is dependent on the ability to collect...

...but this is a key part of the point of this thread. Namely that one way or another some Neteller assets "have been reached" by US DOJ / Attys Office, even without a court judgement.

If Neteller had shown *any* inclination to retreat to the Isle of Man and thumb its nose at the US Atty, that would coincide nicely with your point. But to the contrary, Neteller seems intent on remaining a legitimate company trading on the LSE and with some sort of regulatory oversight wherein they can continue to serve non-US-based customers and make a profit.

While all that could certainly change, if Neteller continues to stay "legit," it is more probable IMHO that a series of judgements from the US would not be ignored. Especially if they remain on the London Stock Exchange and governed by the rules therein.

Obviously this is all chit-chat/conjecture on my part, but its interesting stuff. Would really be good to see Neteller fulfill their promises to customers and prompty give them their money.

[crashjr]

There is a big difference between Neteller cooperating with US authorities and Neteller complying with a US civil judgment. The US Attorney would have zero involvement in enforcing a civil judgment that a player or group of players obtained against Neteller in a US court.

Neteller thumbing its nose at the US authorities could lead to actual jail time for executives and directors. Neteller thumbing its nose at a group of poker players with an unenforcable judgement could not.

[SplawnDarts]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who froze what is irrelivant from a practical POV.

[/ QUOTE ]

If all message board discussions had to be relevant from a practical POV, what would we chat about?

Some of us are apparently more interested in the "ingredients" of this debacle than you are. It is interesting to me whether they are obeying a DOJ order, "victims" of ACH freeze-out, or are using US-customer money as a bargaining chip to spare their ownership from further personal prosecution.

[/ QUOTE ]

fair enough - I supose it's an interesting academic excercise in some sense, but it won't get anyone a cent.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
If Bank of America or Wachovia one day just said, "Hey we know it's your money, but we're not gonna give it to you, no eta on when you'll get it"

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting side note, most people don't realize that only checking accounts are demand deposits and the bank must give you the money right away, things like savings accounts the bank has the option to wait 90 days or 270 days or something before paying you.

It's a good guess that neteller funds are not demand deposits under whatever regulations neteller operates under.

[UATrewqaz]

Yes I know some banks have some liquidity clauses in their paperwork and stuff, however there is a certain threshold...

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it legal for Neteller to just freeze all U.S. customers funds as they have?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you please explaoin what it is that you believe "Neteller" to have done... rather than what was done to them?

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes I know some banks have some liquidity clauses in their paperwork and stuff, however there is a certain threshold...

[/ QUOTE ]

threshold?