Re: Shady potential fraud and thievery (long)
 

[ QUOTE ]


He spoke to the parents of Dave about the debt,



[/ QUOTE ]

Nuff said

Re: Shady potential fraud and thievery (long)
 

I've known several people who have ended up in prison for reclaiming debts or property in similar, but less sophisticated, fashion. Each one was able to rationalize to himself that what he did was perfectly justifiable. Depending on what jurisdiction this is in and how far your friend's friend wants to push this, your friend could end up playing poker for cigarettes for 10-20 years.

Re: Responses
 

[ QUOTE ]
If your friend is caught (and He will definitely be caught, since your other friend will call the bank, which will confirm that hte money was transferred to Party Poker) he will face criminal charges, possibly even federal charges because it might involve transactions across state lines and the wire act. He would almost certainly face some jail time. Not worth it for $700.

[/ QUOTE ]

When Dave's bank account transfers $700 to Daves party account, Sean is not incriminated. Do you see why?

Re: Responses
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If your friend is caught (and He will definitely be caught, since your other friend will call the bank, which will confirm that hte money was transferred to Party Poker) he will face criminal charges, possibly even federal charges because it might involve transactions across state lines and the wire act. He would almost certainly face some jail time. Not worth it for $700.

[/ QUOTE ]

When Dave's bank account transfers $700 to Daves party account, Sean is not incriminated. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop being an idiot. Do you see why?

Re: Responses
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If your friend is caught (and He will definitely be caught, since your other friend will call the bank, which will confirm that hte money was transferred to Party Poker) he will face criminal charges, possibly even federal charges because it might involve transactions across state lines and the wire act. He would almost certainly face some jail time. Not worth it for $700.

[/ QUOTE ]

When Dave's bank account transfers $700 to Daves party account, Sean is not incriminated. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop being an idiot. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

Re: Responses
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If your friend is caught (and He will definitely be caught, since your other friend will call the bank, which will confirm that hte money was transferred to Party Poker) he will face criminal charges, possibly even federal charges because it might involve transactions across state lines and the wire act. He would almost certainly face some jail time. Not worth it for $700.

[/ QUOTE ]

When Dave's bank account transfers $700 to Daves party account, Sean is not incriminated. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop being an idiot. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Dumbest Use of "Do You See Why" I've ever seen on 2+2.

2. Party Poker may be overseas, but they're not on Mars. I'm sure they cooperate with wire fraud investigations, and you're friend is going to inter-account transfer from Dave's Party Account to his own, thus incriminating himself. Not only that, but there's a log of all inter-account transfers, so Dave will be able to see where the money went, will know who has it, can simply call the police, and your friend is busted. Because this involves the transfer of funds across state lines, it is most likely a federal offense.

3. Finally, just because you were an idiot and let your friend play on your party poker account and run up $800 in losses does not mean that you have a legally enforceable debt against Dave. In fact, from what you wrote, I seriously doubt you do. Don't compound your earlier idiocy with a mistake you may regret for the rest of your life. It's only $700.

Re: Responses
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If your friend is caught (and He will definitely be caught, since your other friend will call the bank, which will confirm that hte money was transferred to Party Poker) he will face criminal charges, possibly even federal charges because it might involve transactions across state lines and the wire act. He would almost certainly face some jail time. Not worth it for $700.

[/ QUOTE ]

When Dave's bank account transfers $700 to Daves party account, Sean is not incriminated. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop being an idiot. Do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Dumbest Use of "Do You See Why" I've ever seen on 2+2.

2. Party Poker may be overseas, but they're not on Mars. I'm sure they cooperate with wire fraud investigations, and you're friend is going to inter-account transfer from Dave's Party Account to his own, thus incriminating himself. Not only that, but there's a log of all inter-account transfers, so Dave will be able to see where the money went, will know who has it, can simply call the police, and your friend is busted. Because this involves the transfer of funds across state lines, it is most likely a federal offense.

3. Finally, just because you were an idiot and let your friend play on your party poker account and run up $800 in losses does not mean that you have a legally enforceable debt against Dave. In fact, from what you wrote, I seriously doubt you do. Don't compound your earlier idiocy with a mistake you may regret for the rest of your life. It's only $700.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not the fact that he lost the money on Party that makes it enforceable. It's the fact that he (hopefully) signed a repayment agreement that makes it enforceable.

If he didn't, let it go... playing Spades for cigarettes for 20 years isn't exactly the ideal way to work on your chops.

Re: Responses
 

1) Agreed

2) What if Sean dumped Dave's online chips (using Dave's account) to a 3rd party as another poster suggested, using a library computer??

3) I am not Sean, merely a friend of his (not a great one at that). This post is purely for pentantic puposes.

To my knowledge no such form was signed.

Re: Responses
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's not the fact that he lost the money on Party that makes it enforceable. It's the fact that he (hopefully) signed a repayment agreement that makes it enforceable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha, what do you think the odds are of that? I just assumed (I'm pretty sure correctly) based on the story that there was no written agreement.

Re: Responses
 

The odds of that are approximately one thousand to zero. That's right, a bet of zero dollars on Bender..err..the OP pays a thousand dollars if he wins. Still, not many takers.