A few more notes/questions about the bank statement (link):

1. The statement shows a negative balance as of 10/26, but you indicated you first became aware of a problem after you returned back to Florida and tried to use the card to rent a car. Did you not attempt to use the card in Punta Cana anytime between 10/26 and 10/31, during which charges would have been rejected due to a negative balance? The bank statement snapshot indicates the card was used several times there between 10/24 and 10/26, so this would mean you decided to suddenly stop using the card on/after 10/26, just two days into your trip. The only way charges would have been allowed after 10/26 is if you had overdraft protection backed by another liquid account at the bank (seems unlikely as you've indicated all your funds were in this account), or if you opted-in for credit-backed overdraft protection (requires a credit card or line of revolving credit).

2. Western Union's maximum allowed transfer via their online portal is $9,750 USD - the bank statement shows at least two transfers of $9,900/each. I called Western Union to see if the limit is higher for transfers made at a retail location - they indicated the limit is actually lower for retail locations. The fees for such transfers are $2.99 (bank recipient) or $10 (retail cash recipient), with the remainder of the fee covered by the vig in the currency exchange (lower amount to receiver in localized currency) - this means the difference between WU's $9,750 USD limit and the statement debit of $9,900 can't be explained by fees charged.

I was wondering if the bank still has some responsibility here. If the bank statements you posted in the Vlog are consistent with the scammers withdrawal patterns, that means the first withdrawal should have happened around the 21st-ish and you left the country on the 24th. The bank should have called you before you left the country then no? Plus, any bank that calls you because they suspect suspicious activity and suddenly can't reach your phone should be even more suspicious. Bring this up with the bank.

I can't believe the bank wouldn't lock the account when SAME-DAY withdrawals were made from Punta Cana and from half a world away in India. According to the last bank statement, these same-day withdrawals from both locations happened 3 times. Did they think he was traveling from Punta to India and back 3 plus days in a row?

43k is more prolly 85% of American's have in savings. 43k is ton if u have say 1k apartment and no family

Interesting

If I recall the story correctly, Bikeking's friend wouldn't let him stay at his place, so BK decided to live out of his car temporarily, found it a not-uncomfortable situation, and chose to extend the arrangement indefinitely.

Can you accept that living in his car doesn't cause him physical discomfort?

Your repeated inability to accept the idea of someone living out of his car feels like you have first world expectations of how people should behave. It's like someone not understanding why some people might not be interested in having "Merry Christmas" shoved in their face without being evil.

I recall he continued to do the car thing to give his Vlog a unique angle besides just being a normal boring vlog. Seemed like a good idea for Vlog content...

In the comments some people mentioned some other youtubers that have huge popular followings because the car vlog angle was good for youtube.

Then he proceeded to do almost nothing related to the car in the vlog since the original video.......

I feel your pain.

I remember believing some former scammer's story here about how he found christianity, changed his life, and wanted to repay all the people he owed, etc. Many people didn't believe him, but he sounded very sincere, and I was pulling for him. In the end, it was just a new wrinkle in his ongoing scam.

"It is what it is." - Indeed, but what is it? These forums do have a reasonably good record of getting to the bottom of fishy stories, one way or the other - particularly when written documents don't make sense, and numbers don't add up.

Who knows, it might just be a bank without an accounting department, without a working computer system, and without functional fraud detection procedures. Or it could be a big troll. Or something else.

Maybe we'll figure it out.

You might be missing other typical monthly life expenses, and a possible bad downswing at what was soon to be 2-5, for good measure. Then the squeeze and high stress could be on.

That actually says more about America than the individual.......lol a ton.

So if he was living in a van he'd be perfectly normal, but since he's living in a car he's mentally ill?

GTFO

That's the only part that makes any sense to me. What I don't get is why he doesn't put in more hours, why he plays daily tournaments, why he couldn't convince his roommate to let him stay at his place, and why he decided to stay in Vegas when he could take shots at bigger games in a place like LA where the games are easier and his cost of living would still be (virtually) nothing.

This.

The Bank deliberately circumvented the law against disguising transactions to stay below federal reporting laws.

I can't remember the name of the law, but a bank can't structure or approve of transactions meant to circumvent federal reporting laws. I would use the miscreant behavior of the bank as a prominent part of my actions to recover my funds.

According to Consumer Affairs Suntrust bank has the lowest rating and most complaints. Looks like theyr'e a horrible bank.

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/fina...rust_bank.html

Well then, maybe their statements really are filled with arithmetic errors. We'll know soon when bikeking clears up pocket_zero's questions.

Suntrust may well be an awful bank (nearly all banks are), but be wary of review sites who extort fees in exchange for a company being allowed to defend itself or alter negative ratings:

"In exchange for a monthly fee, Accredited Members receive information about consumers who have posted reviews on our website in order to resolve complaints posted by those consumers. While ConsumerAffairs never changes star ratings at a company's request, a consumer may choose to change a star rating after resolving a complaint. In addition, if a consumer does not respond to a request for more information, or the consumer’s complaint is resolved privately with the company, or the factual basis for a complaint is unresolved, the consumer’s star rating may not be displayed and will not be included in a company’s overall star rating."

Not to mention the self-selection bias of such reviews.The reviews for the country's biggest banks aren't much better:

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/fina...lls_fargo.html
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/chase_bank.html
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/bofa.html

I feel like this is probably close to what the truth really is, he must have friends or something back home that watch so it’s really important that t looks like he made it. I’m not saying he sucks at poker tho, just nobody can make a living off of 1/2 anymore.

His story was on poker news site today

It’s even worse than that. A lot of people look at you like you’re rich if you have that kind of money. One blogger in the poker world said he felt insanely rich when he had around $30k for the first time in his life.

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2017/...mind-29524.htm

Sheesh, Poker players are dumb.

wrong gguy

They edited the link, here it was from their twitter account, but now goes to the other article:

https://twitter.com/PokerNews/status/941044076215963652

Poker News took the article down

Taken down since it appears to be a load of hooey?