If it was supposedly sent weeks ago and it has not arrived, then obviously its not going to arrive. Maybe instead of just saying that its taken care of on your end, you should initiate a new expedited cash out and get it actually taken care of. How long are you planning on waiting if nothing happens?

Nope, something else.

I spoke to our CEO and was informed all checks from that timeframe have been sent now, after requesting the trace for the previous poster I also added FatalFlaws to the list to be traced and I encourage anyone else from this timeframe to contact me directly now as well.


This is something they are working on adding.

Also it's important to note the check on the validity of the checkout happens at the start of the process. The only reason old cashouts were rejected was because of the situation that was uncovered.

Seriously, if Lock had any brains, they would just send in a bunch of beards to buy up all the 2p2 Lock balances at .35 on the dollar. That's a huge profit margin and if they do it right, it would be untraceable to point the finger back to them.

But, maybe they would just rather steal the money outright instead.

With the new P2P requirement of raking 15% of the received transfer Lock is already making a nice cut.

John buys $1,000 on 2+2 for $350. He then plays on Lock and rakes $150 before he can cash out the remaining $750. Lock receives almost half of the initial purchase price in rake.

Why risk getting caught buying up player funds if you can take a % from the trade on your side without headache?

If you send a check but no one receives it, does it make a sound?

Does this mean they will arrive in people's mailboxes within the next 7 days? What does "they have been sent" even mean? Because experience has shown that it sure as heck does NOT mean anyone will actually be receiving their checks soon.

Is this one of those deals where "they have been sent" will turn into something different 4-6 weeks from now?

Perhaps more exchanges along the lines of, "You said you sent it but I have not received it," ...."Ummm, hello, I've emailed 3 times and nobody has responded. Am I getting my check or not. You said it was sent."
"Oh, okay, let me chase that up for you. From our end, everything has been sent!"

In other words, "they have been sent" has been proven to be completely meaningless when it is Lock that is saying it. 2+ months go by after "your check has been sent" and the customer still does not receive it....AND can't get a response about it a lot of the time.

Are you going to take responsibility for following up on all of these cashouts to make sure your customers actually receive the money that is already theirs to begin with? You should know when your customers have received their checks....and not have to be informed by anyone that it has yet to arrive. Stay on top of it. Follow through.

Or will you have no idea when your customers don't get their checks and then not respond to them when they try to contact you?

I have emailed you about this about a month ago, and yesterday, and now this morning. You are obviously very busy, so I will ask this question out loud.

When the check withdrawals have run this long, and they are no longer visible in the Lock withdrawal history, how do we have any way of knowing that Lock is not just letting them drop out of the system, pretending that we are lying or delusional about being owed money?

Shane, I have never once received a successful cashout from Lock poker. It is impossible to believe Lock is running real business if all that has happened so far for cashouts is supposed failure.

That said, I'm ready to be proven wrong as I realize that things aren't always what they seem. Please add me to this list of players that you have created with the intention seeing that these old cashouts go through.

Thank you, have a good Sunday.

A player posted in the 'refresher' thread that he's been waiting 7 months, since October 12.

I'm pretty sure he's a coach at DC. I would tend to believe him over anything your CEO said.

Jim, Shane is making the idiotic distinction of what has been cleared at THEIR end...vs. what they have sent to the processor and is delayed at THAT end.

Shane is washing his hands of the cashouts they have sent to the processor even if the processor has done nothing. Their answer is, "we will see if we can get in touch with them to find out what happened."

Shane acting like it is out of their hands while the customers still don't have their money is nothing short of offensive and obnoxious.


Seriously, how us a customer supposed to feel anything but helpless and out of luck when they say, "will try to chase someone down and see if there's anything we can do." What? Really?

Yes, there's something you can do. Send the money to your customer.

Actually the exact distinction wasn't cleared at our end, but actually sent by the processor. However I didnt want to overstate that fact till I saw the result of the first trace.

We aren't washing our hands, we are putting a trace on the check to find out if it was returned to the processor or cashed.


As I previously mentioned in the other thread the "see if there is anything we can do" was in relation to a very specific situation where a player has been told a check is on its way to him from the processor already, but he is going to be travelling for the next 3 months so wont be at his address to receive his check. I had previously spoken to him directly to see if there were any options to sort this out for him, the cashier team seems to have told him there isn't and I actually meant I would contact them to further explore any possible solutions they havent considered yet.

Bob

When people like you and SGT speak, a lot of people listen. They know you guys have been around a while spending time on 2+2 helping out and have a deep understanding with a lot of things related to topics on this site. But I hate seeing responses like this and so much energy and emphasis is put on yelling and asking lock to give players their money back like there is hope that lock will turn around into an honest site and everybody will get paid. Maybe you just do it for the fun of it. I know SGT doesn't believe players or gonna get paid.

There should be more energy put into getting lock off the internet as soon as possible, There are players still depositing and playing on this site! That's a problem. Lock can string excuses for cashouts for another year if need be, they've done it for 7 months and for 7 months its "hey pay us". I just believe that as moderators, more time should be spend destroying this company than having 50 threads of questions that wont be answered.

Formula, yes, you've already said that opinion several times. Lots of people have money stuck on there. I'm sure they will be happy to hear you say you don't want any efforts taken to get them their money back and you prefer the efforts be switched to the site being shut down completely.

So.. after the new policy had a few days to settle (in my mind) I've come to believe that the new P2P with the 15% GGR actually isn't that bad.

Let's leave solvent or insolvent out of this and let's just look at the actual policy.

If A receives a $1000 transfer from B he is now required to generate $150 in rake before he would be allowed to cash out the full amount. Now, if A happens to be a rakeback player or even VIP player he'll get about $50+ of the $150 back anyway.

So the new policy on P2P is not that bad. Lock should have announced that right away when they figured what (apparently) was going on and take it from there.

THIS.

I generally agree with your sentiment (that the players should be doing more than saying "give me my money") but I wanted to clarify my stance on the situation.

I believe that any business, online or otherwise, should demonstrate an acceptable amount of competence and customer service, otherwise I don't believe they deserve your money/business. And I believe the more problems a company has, the more the customers should demand from them if that company wants to stay in business.

In this particular instance, you have a company that a) has demonstrated cash flow issues, b) has lied repeatedly to its customers, c) has poor communication with its customers and poor customer service and d) refuses to demonstrate to customers that player funds are safe.

It's a combination of these factors that lead me to feel, strongly, that the poker community should pass judgement on Lock and refuse to play there any more until they fix these issues. And their reluctance to do so makes it that much more likely that they CAN'T fix issues like cash out times or proving solvency, or at least can't prove that player funds are fully accounted for.

I say again, their promise to provide an audit, then their reason for reneging on that promise, makes zero sense. Accounting firms take customer security very seriously. The likelihood of a reputable accounting firm leaking information about Lock accounts to anyone, let alone the players or the DOJ (especially if a non-US firm) is minimal, while the potential gains (reassuring players and having trust restored) is fairly large.

When a site refuses to do something that has a huge upside and relatively little downside, the logical reason they won't do it is because it would reveal something they don't want revealed - in this case, that they DO NOT HAVE enough money to cover all player deposits.

Frankly I believe we should just all assume this is true until they prove otherwise. The evidence is there. Do I 100% know for sure that they don't have all player funds? No, of course not. But I do have the ability to take the evidence I see and think about it logically. And that logic is telling me that Lock is stealing players funds, and that we as a community should STOP GIVING THEM OUR MONEY/BUSINESS.

Ha Love this ^

Can this situation be clarified, please? :

-Accept X$ P2P transfer on Lock.

-Bust your account till 0$.

-Accept another P2P transfer on Lock for Y$ amount.

Playthrough requirement on funds is now Y$ times 15%? (I hope it's this and have a suspicion it may well be this, but not sure) or (X$+Y$).15%?


Also, what effect does Casino play have on Playthrough requirements?

Great

Its only based on the recent transfer if the player received a transfer when they had a zero balance.

Both poker and casino play are eligible to clear the playthrough requirement.

...

I have been waiting since Feburary for a payout and can not get any idea if/when it might come.