Neteller Accnt Hacked (continued) and Neteller Won't Refund

[mattw]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi,
If this is true I suggest you investigate yourself and try to trail your money.

First clue (search for RM Costa Rica):

Radio Maria Costa Rica (abb. RM Costa Rica) is a catholic radio station. My knowledge of this radio station from an other country is that it aggressively asks for donations.

[/ QUOTE ]

very good suggestion. reminds me of the ending in the movie "sneakers."

[caliente]

[ QUOTE ]
In case you are wondering why the h.e.l.l. I was talking to Wachovia, whoever stole my money made a transfer from my Wachovia checking account to my neteller account before making any withdrawals (presumably to a poker account).

[/ QUOTE ]

If you notify your bank that someone transfered $$$ out of your account using EFT without your authorization, your bank has to put the money back. See the Federal Reserve Bank's Regulation E. This rule only applies to consumer accounts (not commercial accounts).

[Orpheus]

Just for the purposes of discussion (since anything would be more informative than debates on the OPs credibility):

I hope you are suggesting that "Regulation E" (aka 12 CFR 205) might provide protection from Wachovia's part of the transaction, rather than the Neteller side, because:

1) NetTeller isn't a US company, so The Federal Reserve regs don't apply to it (and usually only tangentially affect transactions between it and US financial institutions)

2) Neteller may not be regulated as a "bank" in any jurisdiction. Paypal never was, though it strived to qualify as a "real bank" from its inception in 1997 (X.com) until its purchase by eBay. Alas, the increase in respectability (and boost in potential IPO price) came with too many nasty restrictions, like accountability to customers, financial regulation and disclosure, non-arbitrary policies, etc. (I'm not anti-PayPal: I've been a happy -if sometimes worried- customer since the beginning, before it was called PayPal)

Moreover, in the law you cited, there are several clauses that may exclude the transactions between Wachovia and Neteller from this law. I'm not a banking lawyer, but here are just a few:

Regulation E (12 CFR 205)
205.3 Coverage
(c) Exclusions from coverage

(3) Wire or other similar transfers. Any transfer of funds through Fedwire or through a similar wire transfer system that is used primarily for transfers between financial institutions or between businesses [Note: such as Wachovia and Neteller]

(6) Telephone-initiated transfers. Any transfer of funds that:
(i) Is initiated by a telephone communication between a consumer and a financial institution making the transfer;
and
(ii) Does not take place under a telephone bill-payment or other written plan in which periodic or recurring transfers are contemplated.
[Note: we don't know if the transaction was performed by computer or by phone after the computer was hacked, and the requisite data compromised. Neteller routinely authorizes and verifies transactions over the phone that they won't do online. It's the "bald-faced test": most internet crooks feel more secure hiding behind a screen -- though phone based crime has a far longer (and financially larger) historyu, and is no harder (possibly easier) "Inside jobs" by family or acquaintances with physical access to the computer, account numbers and codes are surprisingly common]

(7) Small institutions. Any preauthorized transfer to or from an account if the assets of the accountholding financial institution were $100 million or less on the preceding December 31, 2001. If assets of the accountholding
institution subsequently exceed $100 million, the institution’s exemption for preauthorized transfers terminates one year from the end of the calendar year
in which the assets exceed $100 million. Preauthorized transfers exempt under this paragraph (c)(7) remain subject to § 205.10(e) regarding compulsory use and sections 915 and 916 of the act regarding civil and criminal liability.

[Note: Actually, I was thinking about the final recipient RM Costa Rica, when I pasted this clause, but it serves as a good example of the many exemptions for "pre-authorised transfera". I don't know about your bank, but that's how NeTeller, PayPal IGM-pay EFTs show up when I check my checking account online.

The wording of the line item is no accident: there many exemptions in the Federal Reserve regs for "pre-authorized transfers", have been subverted in practice. It doesn't mean what you think (or perhaps what it originally did). Today, it's "pre-authorized" by your bank T&C. That's the only way, for example, the initial sub-$1 "account verification" deposits could take place routinely.

Preauthorization by T&C turns a "consumer protection" into a convenience and "waiver" for the bank I never told my bank I was going to do business with PayPal, Neteller, IGM-pay, etc.--did you? Did you ever specifically pre-authorize your bank to send money from your checking account to them?]

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
Get a new lead Sherlock , i highly doubt a church is defrauding people's neteller accounts. RM also stands for Real Madrid maybe the football club is going bankrupt and this is how they raise funds?

[/ QUOTE ]

Never thought them behind it, but some of their followers are fanatic enough to consider OP's money ill earned and if they had access to his account details they could transfer it there.

Just a 0,1% shot, my point was that OP will probably be able to track these money down if he puts some effort in it. Somebody stole money from my credit card (fraud involving 1000s of cards) and I found out where the money had went and then the bank paid me back immediately.

[caliente]

[ QUOTE ]

I hope you are suggesting that "Regulation E" (aka 12 CFR 205) might provide protection from Wachovia's part of the transaction...


[/ QUOTE ]

This might answer most of your questions:

http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws...6500-3200.html

[ricochet420]

Oh of course there is no way a "CHURCH" could be corrupt. Holy sh1t, get a clue you moran. [ QUOTE ]
Get a new lead Sherlock , i highly doubt a church is defrauding people's neteller accounts. RM also stands for Real Madrid maybe the football club is going bankrupt and this is how they raise funds?

[/ QUOTE ]

[CountDuckula]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi. It seems like my presence in this thread is required.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you have something to contribute, please do. otherwise this is batman, superman, spiderman, lone ranger, dutch boyd to the rescue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks like the account was deleted, leaving this as authored by "Anonymous". The name of the account was a very mild term equating to the 'S' part of "BS", which appeared to convey the author's opinion of the thread.

-Mike

[other1]

At the risk of continuing a thread that should probably be allowed to die...

Let's assume everything you say is true.. What is it exactly you are upset about other than that your money was stolen? From what you yourself have said, NT is investigating and if they find they are at fault they will refund you. What more did you expect?

[CORed]

Are you sure the email was really from Neteller? It could have been a "phishing" email, with a link to a bogus site that would harvest your ID and password so they could rip you off.

[FlFishOn]

"Yeah -- denial she is a powerful mistress. Maybe if this guy is a flake or a liar or a troll then magically our money is safe and nothing like that can happen."

Brilliantly said. This attitude is everywhere here.

I believe that when these kids invest 60 hours a week playing poker they MUST believe everything is without doubt. perfectly safe and free of cheats. If not then they are dupes and that is a though that will not be entertained.

My eyes remain open, BS detector is at high gain.