Quote:
Originally Posted by imjustshane
That sounds very strange, Ive made some enquires to find out whats happened here.
Shane, can you help give me a little direction before calling Western Union. As I'm sure you've read my story by now, do you see any options for me to receive my money in an expedited way? Is Lock implying that they attempted to send me the $2,000 from the Sender Info (that Ive been provided with for months now) even though there hasn't been an MTCN, and it didn't go through just the other day because I myself as a WU user am "blacklisted"? I haven't been to WU since 2012, sounds a little absurd to me.
My current plan is to ask Western Union if money was sent to me, give them the Sender Info I was provided with - if they ask, and obviously not mention any word related to poker, gambling, or any of that nonsense (I'm not an idiot). But here are the possible outcomes I foresee:
A) I am indeed blacklisted, which would be strictly from Lock and their new processor methods that they've been so "hard at work" improving . And even if this is the case, Lock simply tells me to cancel my other WU withdrawal and to request a check. No apologies, no offering to send me my money in a faster way, absolutely nothing saying "hey thanks for waiting this long, so sorry. You've been a loyal customer continuing to play while in limbo and we really appreciate it". Instead I get treated as if
I'm the one who has inconvenienced THEM.
B) I'm not blacklisted, Lock is full of crap, and I still have to restart my withdrawal over again. I'm starting to believe this newly posted info about their inadequate financial stability/situation and separation of players funds is the truth. It's the only thing that makes sense as to why you will choose to delay someone's payout for 3 months only to cancel it and have him wait again.
C) The seller is blacklisted and I'm not blacklisted which means they should offer to re-send WU.
Shane, if you could just tell me the absolute best way of going about this I would appreciate at least an opinion. If Lock can guarantee me a check that won't bounce that I can receive in the next 2 weeks then I have absolutely no problem letting this whole WU thing go. But obviously I have to at least call WU and find out if this is true if Lock won't work with me on this. I've just heard horror stories with Lock and their checks lately, and last year when I withdrew via check it bounced (now Lock did end up giving me like $100 for the whole nonsense which was nice and did resend my withdrawal through WU) but that still doesn't mean I've gained any confidence in their withdrawal checks. It means that Lock made me gain confidence only in their WU method, and now I don't even have that. When I received a check last year from Lock, it was from a Chase bank account. When I went to deposit it into my OWN Chase account, they wouldnt let me ON THE SPOT, the manager came over and looked into it and said he wasn't allowed to discuss why, but the account I was depositing from was "no good". And then M&T bank took the check on the spot at least, but then bounced it a week later. My father has been a banker for 35 years with HSBC, so I asked him, and he said that essentially Lock must have an account at Chase, but that Chase must have become aware of what was going on and for however long seized activity going out (assuming this may still be the case now).
I'll pay Lock $100 of my $2000 withdrawal if they can overnight me a check that they guarantee won't bounce. If you were running a business, wouldn't you do that for at least a returning customer? The timing with this isn't coincidence with that whole 4/2 separation of funds stuff posted on the other "Truth is Out" thread:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/19...h-out-1316204/