Words of warning - My story with Brendon “Brendooor/Brendon1717” Rubie: - Page 2 - Poker News

scoopin_monsters · 01-31-2012, 06:13 AM

Cliffs: valuables left out of the safe at the Crown, no problem, honest maids at the crown.

SEABEAST · 01-31-2012, 06:16 AM

a) there's a very good chance given all the shady stuff he has done in the past and the fact that bwin closed his account (as opposed to finding and blaming the "hackers") that brendooor wasn't actually hacked.

b) the person taking the 10% in the 100k was a well known baller figure in the AU poker community, who played every 10k+ buyin that ran here and was a huge fish. jono merely lent brendon that 10k because the person taking the piece wasn't physically in the casino at that time. the fact that the guy turned out to be a degen gambling addict doesn't absolve brendon from having borrowed 10k from jono to buy in.

DaycareInferno · 01-31-2012, 06:17 AM

who are the people you talked to that agreed he owes you 26k?

tedjam · 01-31-2012, 06:38 AM

wheres the confusion..he owes it ALL
any arguement otherwise is futile

Frenbar · 01-31-2012, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedjam

wheres the confusion..he owes it ALL
any arguement otherwise is futile

Some 3rd party guy bought 10k of horse, OP fronted $10k for 3rd party guy without horses knowledge, 3rd party guy later reneges on paying, how does horse have any part of this?

klunar · 01-31-2012, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frenbar

Some 3rd party guy bought 10k of horse, OP fronted $10k for 3rd party guy without horses knowledge, 3rd party guy later reneges on paying, how does horse have any part of this?

horse asked OP to borrow the 10k as the 3rd party was not present

CubKiller · 01-31-2012, 06:48 AM

Funny I played with this guy a bit in the cash games got a really scummy vibe from him. Also hope he wasn't playing on stake money in cash games he was really terrible.

intel · 01-31-2012, 06:50 AM

I'd say Brendon owes you half the amount he was hacked on bwin for. As a staker you inherent the risk of site collapsing, hacking etc. If you were staked for example, and had 20k on FTP, and black friday happens, you don't owe the staker a dime.
If he was hacked because he did not change from using hotmail, then ultimately it comes back to you for not enforcing it and not letting him know if he is hacked then he owes you the full amount for not changing emails.
So it seems reasonable that he should only owe you half of the $42k at best.

Johnny Hughes · 01-31-2012, 06:57 AM

Is this the Brandon that was Brandi's boyfriend? I think he is my facebook friend. None of this would have happened to Texas friends. We are too honest and afraid of barking iron.

sljons91 · 01-31-2012, 06:59 AM

At the point when brendon refused to change his hotmail OP had the option to

A: have him send all funds back until account is secure by OPs standards.

B: allow him to keep funds in his account unsecured but tell him he is fully liable for the funds.

IMO both parties are equally liable with OP foregoing options A and B.

Obviously assuming there was no foul play. Also assuming he did not mislead OP into thinking the account was secure when it actually was not. Also assuming option A was even an option (I am unaware of the p2p transfer situation on bwin).

Even without option A I think OP, having neglected to discuss liability at the time the security threat was introduced and subsequently not dealt with, is therefore liable.

junky monkey · 01-31-2012, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frenbar

Personally I think the OP is seriously deranged.

Based on the account of the OP, he fronted the $10k to the tournament based on the promise of a 3rd party that had nothing to do with the horse. The OP even admits that he didn't tell the horse about the $10k promised by the 3rd party after he knew that the 3rd party was no good for it and the horse had no idea. This debt is between the 3rd party and the OP, period.

"We both accept his stake however this left Brendon $10,000 short of a buy in for the tournament and did not have the money available to play. I lent him the $10,000 and said I would just get the money from the acquaintance

My first year law school knowledge leads me to believe that there was a contract between Brendon and degen gambler ("we both accept his stake"). Pretty certain a new contract isn't formed upon monster dong offering to get the money from degen gambler (which is a form of an assignment of debt). It does not make sense for monster dong to incur an extra 10k liability for no consideration. The 10k dong gave brendon in place of degen gambler's 10k is a favor.

If it went to court, I think brendon and jonno win vs degen gambler and then jonno vs brendon, jonno wins. Small claims court.

As for the hacking, it would seem to be a case of negligence - tort law. Not securing his cash after actual knowledge of danger. question of what a reasonable person would do etc etc...

Dong/jonno, don't rely on this advice, lawyer up and sue everyone.

gosh I hope I don't get flamed by all the legal geniuses on this site.

confirmedtroll · 01-31-2012, 07:10 AM

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2012/0...-two-11864.htm

fireflytea · 01-31-2012, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Hughes

Is this the Brandon that was Brandi's boyfriend? I think he is my facebook friend. None of this would have happened to Texas friends. We are too honest and afraid of barking iron.

yep...if your friends don't pay...shoot em

IF there is no PTR record of a chip dump on his Bwin account...then obv. it's a bs story and he owes full amount and if he doesn't owe OP the 10,000 he fronted for the 100k tourney...can we agree he owes someone 10k and has yet to pay up.

oNste · 01-31-2012, 07:22 AM

Pretty disappointed to hear news like this. Seemed like a pretty straight shooting guy.

1-2nolimitpro · 01-31-2012, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by junky monkey

"We both accept his stake however this left Brendon $10,000 short of a buy in for the tournament and did not have the money available to play. I lent him the $10,000 and said I would just get the money from the acquaintance

My first year law school knowledge leads me to believe that there was a contract between Brendon and degen gambler ("we both accept his stake"). Pretty certain a new contract isn't formed upon monster dong offering to get the money from degen gambler (which is a form of an assignment of debt). It does not make sense for monster dong to incur an extra 10k liability for no consideration. The 10k dong gave brendon in place of degen gambler's 10k is a favor.

If it went to court, I think brendon and jonno win vs degen gambler and then jonno vs brendon, jonno wins. Small claims court.

im surprised brendons "business friend" didnt advise him to add a confidentiality agreement.

As for the hacking, it would seem to be a case of negligence - tort law. Not securing his cash after actual knowledge of danger. question of what a reasonable person would do etc etc...

Dong/jonno, don't rely on this advice, lawyer up and sue everyone.

gosh I hope I don't get flamed by all the legal geniuses on this site.

you forgot one key piece here...they already made a settlement. i do understand that he feels he was under duress. however, a time frame attached to a settlement offer does not constitute coercion.