Fulltilt froze my account with 47 grand in it

[carlgraham]

Hey SillySal,

PoorLawyer did raise a valid point - the Alderney Gambling Control Commission may provide a meaningful remedy, assuming they actually license Full Tilt Poker, or otherwise govern entities based out of Alderney. The law establishing the commission gives it real powers, and the commission itself has pretty broad authority to investigate licensees. See the Alderney EGambling Regulations for more information, particularly sections 333 onwards.

However, I note that FTP has the Kahnawake Gaming Commission license emblem displayed on each page, with no mention of Alderney. As we're seeing with the Absolute Poker cheating scandal, the KGC may be more of a licensing entity on paper than in reality.

Cheers, Carl.

[PoorLawyer]

[ QUOTE ]
Again with ad hominen arguments - my status is irrelevant to the discussion. I never indicated whether I had any legal training or experience. But, counsel, your attempt to change the argument is pretty transparent.

One claim in your post I took issue was for criticizing someone who said there were no successful cases of individuals suing in U.S. courts to recover for seized funds. I asked you to back up your criticism, and provide proof he was wrong. You sidestepped that question, and have not provided one example of successful litigation. I'd say the brain trust on 2p2 is pretty vast - if there were any cases in support of your position, someone here would likely know about it.

I also took issue with your claim that U.S. courts could successfully exercise long-arm jurisdiction against a foreign corporation, particularly when the EULA has a choice of forum provision in it. Again, instead of addressing that issue (i.e. backing up your assertion that U.S. courts provided a meaningful remedy), you redefined the issue by suggesting other ways people could go after FTP, such as complaining to a foreign gaming commission.

While foreign commissions may provide a remedy, that begs the question of whether U.S. courts can do so. An intriguing idea, worthy of discussion, but not responsive to specific questions I posed.

I'm on your side - I'd love to have domestic judicial remedies against foreign poker sites, hence I think that regulation may be the only practical solution. But if you claim courts can already do it, I think that you should be prepared to substantiate your arguments w/o requesting a retainer.

Cheers, Carl.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't say i've read the full tilt contract you agree to before playing there and, as such, did not know there was a choice of forum clause.

Regardless, the original post I responded to was "[a]n attorney would be useless here." This statement by DD had no basis and still does not. It had nothing to do with obtaining a foreign judgment against an international corporation with a forum selection clause. One could certainly argue that the forum clause is an adhesion contract, but that is so off the point of this thread that it is not worth discussing. Either way I talk enough law during the day and am done.

[Crane]

SillySal. I think you are innocent until you are <u>PROVEN</u> guilty.

[Johny Poker]

[ QUOTE ]
I also took issue with your claim that U.S. courts could successfully exercise long-arm jurisdiction against a foreign corporation, particularly when the EULA has a choice of forum provision in it. Again, instead of addressing that issue (i.e. backing up your assertion that U.S. courts provided a meaningful remedy), you redefined the issue by suggesting other ways people could go after FTP, such as complaining to a foreign gaming commission.

While foreign commissions may provide a remedy, that begs the question of whether U.S. courts can do so. An intriguing idea, worthy of discussion, but not responsive to specific questions I posed.

I'm on your side - I'd love to have domestic judicial remedies against foreign poker sites, hence I think that regulation may be the only practical solution. But if you claim courts can already do it, I think that you should be prepared to substantiate your arguments w/o requesting a retainer.

Cheers, Carl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amateur lawyers, come on. Sue them in a California court. That choice of forum provision is unenforceable. Sillysal lives in California. California law includes the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, which makes unlawful unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods or services. It further includes:
1751. Any waiver by a consumer of the provisions of this title is contrary to public policy and shall be unenforceable and void.
and makes unlawful:

(19) Inserting an unconscionable provision in the contract.

Hmm, think any provisions in FT's ELUA are unconscionable? How about all FT decisions shall be final?

This has been applied by the California Court of Appeals to render unenforceable a choice of forum clause and choice of law clause in an AOL contract. The court stated:

"Certainly, the CLRA provides remedial protections at least as important as those under the Corporate Securities Law of 1968. Therefore, by parity of reasoning, enforcement of AOL's forum selection clause, which is also accompanied by a choice of law provision favoring Virginia, would necessitate a waiver of the statutory remedies of the CLRA, in violation of that law's anti-waiver provision (Civ. Code, 1751) and California public policy. For this reason alone, we affirm the trial court's ruling."

So, if this foreign jurisdiction has no consumer protection statute offering the protections of the CLRA (which I don't know but find EXTREMELY unlikely), then the provisions are very likely to be unenforceable. And for those who think long arm jurisdiction can't apply, tell that to Bodog, they have something like a $400 million judgment against them by I believe a Nevada court, they tried not showing up, got default judgment, tried to argue they were not served, lost on that too.

[sillysal]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Have you at any time used ANY other account on Full Tilt other than pokergirl z? If so, which account(s)?


[/ QUOTE ]

I can’t comment on the specifics of this investigation now but I have answered every question that Full Tilt and Mike Haven have asked me.

[ QUOTE ]
2) Have you ever met BeatMe1/redgar3?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, redgar3 was at the 2006 WSOP Pokerroom.com party in Las Vegas. I was also at the party.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you mind if the mods here check on your IP and see how it matches up with that of BeatMe1's from her earlier posts here?


[/ QUOTE ]

No, they can check my IP and report anything they find.


[ QUOTE ]
Did you know up until now that BeatMe1/redgar3 had the same first name as you?


[/ QUOTE ]

Redgar3’s name was Lisa … My name is not Lisa. That can be verified by numerous sources.


[ QUOTE ]
4) Please tell us exactly what Full Tilt has accused you of, and what evidence they have presented.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am accused of being a bot. The only evidence I have seen is the same information that everyone else has seen posted on 2+2 by Mike Haven i.e stats that are similar to other players.

[Johny Poker]

[/ QUOTE ] I am accused of being a bot. The only evidence I have seen is the same information that everyone else has seen posted on 2+2 by Mike Haven i.e stats that are similar to other players.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is all they got, FTP is a joke. Come on FTP show us something you clowns. How about Mike Haven, where are his comments on the so-called evidence??? If I was a california attorney, I would file suit against these clowns pro-bono.

[_dave_]

[ QUOTE ]

I am accused of being a bot. The only evidence I have seen is the same information that everyone else has seen posted on 2+2 by Mike Haven i.e stats that are similar to other players


[/ QUOTE ]

WOW.

Seriously, the only evidence presented has been that your play is similar to that of other winners? That and it also was only delivered through the indirect medium of 2p2, not to you directly prior ro public disclosure?

Just WOW.

Let us also not forget, You were not accused of being a bot. This was your judgment.

You were accused of something which may take weeks to research, IIRC recipient of fraudulent funds / chip dumping.

There is no way it takes weeks of frozen account to prove use of botting software... it is pretty much an instant hit, no?

Am I mis-remembering the older posts here?

EDIT:

[ QUOTE ]

How about Mike Haven, where are his comments on the so-called evidence???


[/ QUOTE ]

IIRC Mike's last post indicated there was erronious data in the spreadsheet, which he pointed out to FTP, and thus has yet to be elaborated on [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[BurnleyMik]

I still think something is fishy here.

Mike has been extremely quiet about the matter.

Dave, I agree. i mentioned this earlier in the thread. FTPSean mentioned that the investigation took so long because of the time it takes for credit card companies etc to respond to FTP's requests, but if this was botting or illegal software why was the account frozen for over 3 weeks when thy should have had all the information they needed to hand?????

Also if it is true that all the evidence FTP has is the stats, thats pretty bad....

[_dave_]

[ QUOTE ]

FTPSean mentioned that the investigation took so long because of the time it takes for credit card companies etc to respond to FTP's requests


[/ QUOTE ]

TY, that is what I thought I remembered. Something along the lines of an official response saying "sorry it takes so long, we need to wait for responses from our payment processors etc."

Regarding use of botting, it should be more like "Our automated systems, later confirmed our software experts, have observed your use of illegal software on numerous occasions. your account is terminated. goodbye"

EDIT: Like the famous TeddyFBI's Mom case on Stars.

Something is not right here [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously, the only evidence presented has been that your play is similar to that of other winners? That and it also was only delivered through the indirect medium of 2p2, not to you directly prior ro public disclosure?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't believe she actually said the part in bold. Maybe FTP or Mike also gave it to her right before they posted it.