As per your other thread the cashier team tells me we should hear back in the next 24-48 hours.


Not sure, Ive mentioned the many posts asking about his return but at this stage he has his hands full with his role in security.


Sorry I just missed your email yesterday, Ive sent it over to our cashier team today to see if there is anything we can do.


We have a secondary processor which has a much lower maximum, this is where your WU that was sent out to you came from so you weren't lied to. I did mention this to them again and they promised to get to your check ASAP.

I cant comment on the corporate structure of Lock here.

A) The lie came when Quinn recently told me that I AS A RECEIVER, was blacklisted from Western Union, which is a false statement considering I was expedited my 2nd WU request in March. How could it have been possible that MY NAME as Quinn stated was blacklisted by Western Union? Not only is that a lie because Lock sent me my 2nd (lesser) withdrawal after telling me my 1st one was cancelled, but I also called Western Union to verify that I was not a blacklisted receiver. I do not doubt that you have a processor with a lower maximum, but that doesn't explain why larger requests are simply ignored and shoved aside.

B) How can you tell me that I wasn't lied to when I just showed you proof that I was. This is the worst, never-ending cycle of lies that I've seen yet. I was told by Lock that the Sender Info was blacklisted. Just yesterday, I was told that it was MY NAME blacklisted, not the Sender Info (both a blatant lie AND a contradicting statement). And if you have a faster processor for lesser withdrawals, why wasn't my $2K WU request from 01/06 broken up into 3 separate processed payments as I continually asked/suggested, but was ignored. Even if I received 1/3rd of the total each of the last 3 months, that would have been fantastic.

C) Where can you comment on the corporate structure of Lock then? If I have an interest in the company in that my money is involved, do I not have the right to know of such information? I understand this isn't a public company where investor relations will be disclosed, but I do believe I have the right to know the company's structure. My point is that if Lock IS broken up into location-subsidiaries, which is a no-brainer and most likely IS the case, then Jen Larson's answer about an independent auditor being liable to the U.S. Government for information on a subsidiary (Lock US) they were not hired to audit was a COMPLETE LIE, and an INTENTIONAL one at that, using "scare" words for us to back off (not happening).

Here's an easy read for anyone wanting to learn the definition of subsidiaries and why a company (like Lock) would almost definitely want to be, and most likely IS, structured with subsidiaries by location to reduce liability (pros and cons). Which would make the whole "we can't find someone to do an audit" line a f'kin joke of a statement, let alone one made by a CEO of a company. Man am I heated.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...com/subsidiary

Relax dude I figured it would be more productive to get questions answered if everything was a bit more organized and I believe Shane said something along the same lines. Btw I was not demanding anything just respectfully asking.

A) The blacklist message comes from the processor and is with them not WU themselves.

B) You weren't lied to, the processor told us you were blacklisted and we are unable to process WU cashouts to you through them. We then pushed the smaller WU out through a secondary option we have to use.

C) I cant comment publicly anywhere on this matter.

Shane, when do you think February WU will be caught up? I have one from the 15th and I know of many others who haven't recieved anything yet from Feb

In regards to C) then why didn't you say that in the first place as opposed to implying you couldn't comment on that here

Oh and real quick Shane, please explain to me, how is this e-mail below from Quinn NOT a lie? I have not been blacklisted by Western Union, I just spoke with WU actually to verify AGAIN. And how are you unable to send funds to MY NAME? That is also a lie. If that's the case, then I would never be able to receive anything from Western Union as a receiver, which again isn't the case. I am baffled that you continue to tell me I wasn't lied to. There is no interpretation of this e-mail, I'm reading it word for word. At first in e-mails months ago, I was told it was the Sender Info that was blacklisted and suddenly the story changed to ME being blacklisted. If MY NAME was blacklisted, it would have been impossible for me to receive my secondary lesser withdrawal in March. You cannot possibly say I wasn't lied to without lying to yourself in the process:


Quinn
MAY 14, 2013 | 01:02AM EDT
Hi,

I'm afraid that we are unable to process your payout via Western Union as you have been blacklisted and we are unable to send the funds to your name.

As soon as your check has processed and been sent you will also receive a confirmation email. Thank you so much for your patience.
All my best,

Quinn

---
CSR, Lock Support

http://lockpoker.eu
http://lockcasino.eu

^ we understand you want your questions answered but can you stop smashing the thread like your questions are priority over others in here. Thanks

Absolutely nothing wrong with digging till you get a satisfactory answer imo.

I think Shane was trying to explain you got blacklisted from that specific processor by the way (not sure). May be some sort of risk assessment on their side, but who knows.

So it isn't relevant to everyone else to see recent e-mail evidence that even Lock Support is lying? The only reason I posted it here was to show it to everyone. I don't want anyone actually believing Lock Support if they can lie like that. That's all. I never asked that my question be answered before anyone else's, nor did I ask Shane or anyone else to trace my personal withdrawal. I just thought it might be nice for everyone to see (with evidence) that even Lock Support is lying to us and for Shane to attempt to comment on it.

I apologize for posting a few times if that bothers people, but it's not as if I didn't wait for responses. I'm not trying to clog anymore "pipes" of questioning by asking follow-ups. If I didn't get such a run-around from Lock Support when I brought the lie up to their attention, I wouldn't have had any need to show other people. Thought it was relevant, if it isn't relevant to you/you don't care, then don't read my posts, what can I say.

General questions that apply to everyone are what I think the OP was going for here. There are plenty of threads that one can find answers for themselves in with regard to their issues. Maybe I am wrong tho

I was trying to be decent toward you in my above post. I just thought from Shane's side of the coin your stream of questions were somewhat bombarding in nature that's all.

My god some of you are idiots. Do you ever stop and think, hmmm I wonder why he would like 1 question followed by 1 answer before another question is asked? There are lots of threads to spew questions at Shane, in this format it is much harder to skip past a difficult question etc. You don't like the thread format, move to one of the hundred others.

We just need everyone to be respectful of each other and I think this format will work well, god knows the other way doesn't work.

+ 1

For the record I wasn't trying to be disrespectful to Vindictive. Probably should have worded that diff.

It really isn't that hard for him to use the 'last unread post' link and multi-quote every unanswered question since the last time he replied to the thread. Trust me on this. That is what he gets paid to do and I don't think it makes sense for someone to write their question down and wait to try and post it until immediately after Shane answers someone else's question.

Shane can you enlighten us with a response please?

Is Lock Poker still involved with the ISPT?

It appears not according to the following tweets:

https://twitter.com/nicholas_palma/s...47700979453954

https://twitter.com/nicholas_palma/s...48036955770880

Sorry I missed this one earlier.

I dont have a timeframe on this yet, with processing limits its very hard to project WU.

All the cashier team will say is they are getting through them as fast as possible, I have also added you to my daily chase up list.

How about January? Still waiting from the 8th, and have been verified since the 24th, still with no sender info.

The email I sent you had no details of my username/email address though.
And the email address I use isnt the same as 2+2.

I will send you an email with my details.

Sorry about that Charlie, I didn't mean to skip over your withdraw...

Ive got those updated details and passed them on to the cashier team


Same for January no specific timeframe, Ive sent them a reminder on yours for you.

What does Verified actually mean and why the big discrepancy in the time between verified and requested?

My last cashout was verified in 2 weeks. One last year was a few days.
Now it seems like the take a month or more.

In that case of WU it seems that you can't request another cashout until they are processed.

Shane, please comment on the possibility of adding bitcoins as a cashout option

Jennifer Larson stated that Lock can't be audited because she could not find an auditing firm that would both guarantee confidentiality (even if the DOJ demanded info) and was willing to take on a gambling site as a customer.

If I could locate such an auditing firm willing to keep confidentiality and take the job, would Jennifer agree to an audit?

Please run this question by her, and then I will publicly provide you with the names of at least three auditing firms that are willing to abide by these terms and take the job.

(BTW, don't just say "I'll pass it along to her" and then ignore it. I will keep bringing this up. You know I will!)

Can you explain the latest "mule account" story that supposedly explains the lack of cashout processing?

Jennifer said that numerous "mule accounts" were created to simply receive transfers and cash out, with little-to-no play.

1) During what time period did this occur?

2) Why were cashouts canceled for 3 weeks for players who clearly WEREN'T mule accounts -- people whom had never received transfers or ones that had been active players on Lock for years?

3) With such a small support staff working for Lock, why were you and Jennifer unable to communicate the playthrough policy to these few staff members for a period of over 3 weeks?

4) If these "mule accounts" really caused a cashout backlog, how come NOBODY seems to have received cashouts for approximately a 6-week period? If this backlog story were true, it would have slowed cashouts down, but not stopped them?

5) JDB Services, which owns Lock, claims to be a payment processor. JDB Services has e-mailed Lock before regarding cashouts. Why does Lock always refer to their payment processors being third-party companies, if their parent company is actually processing the cashouts?