n.joy - You might be right about the terminology in US law, and I am happy you are posting here. Thank you.

I'm assuming you've been keeping up with the thread here Husker, and if that's the case, it should be quite obvious why I keep myself anonymous. If you think I'm going to get myself added to the list of "scammers" and "scumbags" or whatever other name anybody who doesn't agree with the mob gets labeled with, you're barking up the wrong tree. I'm not about to find my name on some revenge website, thanks but no thanks.

As for the Kartinken thing, we've been over that more than enough. I don't think he overstepped his bounds in looking out for a friend, but I also don't really care. I just don't want to hear about it anymore. If I'm alone on that, go nuts, beat that dead horse.

I'd rather talk about, as I stated earlier, the actual reason for this thread - "Re: I assume Zachary Parker scammed me after i bought his FTP funds." Again, as I stated earlier, I don't think it's a scam, I think it's a debt that did not get fully paid. What do you think, and why?

Thank you Tomas, I really do appreciate that.

Why do you ignore the difference between: not paying debt fully (for now) and denying its existence ? Not paying your debts could be justified by difficult life situation and depending on details postponed.
Denying they exist in the first place is just theft/scam. It's similar to making a deal for selling a car. You collect money today and say you will bring the keys tomorrow. You then refuse to bring the keys and go driving around in a car you collected a money for.
Is it again just debt not paid ?

Ah, so you are a friend of Zach's. That clears that up.

Who actually cares? We have a guy who made a deal with a person he believed to have a good reputation. Guy didn't follow through on deal. He's reporting that the deal was not conducted to his satisfaction and providing evidence of that. Seems like those facts are not in dispute. Scammer, cheat, thief, deadbeat or debtor, it seems that Zach repeatedly stated that he wouldn't make good. One of Zach's friends (we are told he is) went so far as to state that Thomas deserved no more money for outing Zach's (you name the issue).

From the POV of someone who stakes people, gets staked, and occasionally loans money, it matters zip to me what you call it. I don't need a legal dictionary. Zach didn't honor his debt to Thomas or he scammed him out of part of the FTP account he sold him based on BS income tax reasoning. It has already been established that Thomas has little recourse aside from public airing of the grievance and hoping Zach will decide his reputation is worth more than the small amount of money he owes. This legal stuff is a distraction, imho.

Zach agreed to a deal then welched plain and simply without all the connotations , analogies and legal eagles. Very telling that Zach is a member of 2 plus 2 but has been absent from this thread.

That's wrong. If you are friends with someone like that, imagine what happens if you get into a dispute with another of his friends, but one who is closer or has been his friend for longer.

Also reading between the lines, Zach was going to pay the full amount but his friends and family advised him he didn't have to, thus leading to his reputation being trashed.

Those are two very good reasons why fairness and objectiveness are the qualities a true friend offers - and that is particularly the case where mental illness is involved and the person isn't always seeing things straight themselves.

+1 to this, great post.

Zach clearly owes the money.
He is at a crossroads in his life. There are 2 clear paths to go down and he can take either one.

Ok, so he's broke and the $4k looks huge and he can't see how he can pay it, though I'm sure deep down he knows he should.
So make a payment plan. Break down the huge problem into smaller parts.
If his friends are telling him he shouldn't pay, they are giving him absolutely terrible advice. They need to give him good advice, not supporting 'my friend, right or wrong'.
And people need to start understanding the power of the internet and social media. This stuff is there FOREVER.
If Zach doesn't pay this, in 5 years or maybe, 10 years time, he will realise he's made a grave error. And it will have consequences that will make him think that $4k was nothing.

Can it be fixed? Yes, it can.

Pay dat man his maney.

The idea that Kens an accomplice is dumb. I know Ken and he's a good dude fwiw.

I have no doubt that Ken is a good dude and Zach is also a good dude. Zach just made a mistake and there is still time for him to fix it. Whatever the misunderstanding was back then, it should NOW be clear to Zack and Ken that Zack was in the wrong and must settle up the debt. It is highly unlikely that all the posters on this subject are wrong in their explanations of why Zach must pay up. It is pretty clear that if you agree to ship $16000. then you must ship $16000., not some other random amount. If Zack is busto, no problem. All he needs to do is make a payment deal with Tomas. Zack's friends need to quit commenting on this thread and convince Zach to pay up.

I would say wrongful use is a very subjective term. I see the website as a warning to other members of the community as well as to deter future really nice people who happen to steal money. My knowledge of the law is naive, but by this definition it seems possible to say that Zach extorted Tomas. Zach said take 12k or nothing. Sounds like a threat to me. It's essentially saying give me 4k or I'm taking 16k. I would also say that this would have instilled some financial fear in Tomas.

However, I doubt any of this legal mumbo jumbo matters. Zach gets to choose if he would like to keep the stolen funds and Tomas gets to choose if he would like make the situation more public. The website will be the result of Zach being a really nice person and stealing money from Tomas.

FWIW, I've put up dozens of these sites as I've had to deal with more than my fair share of scammers over the years in the staking world. I've sought out legal advice and was told that all is good as long as the truth is written. Perhaps that was bad advice, but it hasn't come back to haunt me yet and I've actually recovered some of my stolen funds. I can only wish the same for Tomas.

ROFL

Legend.

It should be totally 100% clear why there is the use of the word "scam". It has all the hallmarks of a scam.

Zach could easily repeat the behaviour and process of setting up and agreeing to a deal, cutting short on the return and then denying all existence of original deal. The "scam" aspect is that Zach declared the matter over without recourse to any other body and protected himself from any acknowledgment of an original deal.

A "deal" gone wrong or a "misunderstanding" would establish a mid-ground with a concession to what both parties need from the deal.

Zach served himself 100% to what he needs and Tomas or no sane mind would agree to such a "deal".

The "scam" is the near 0% acknowledgement of what Tomas would need from the "deal".

@N.Joy, whether he's called a scammer or a thief is really not all that relevant at this point.
That point is that there was a clear agreement between both parties on who should deliver what. Tomas delivered his end of the deal and Zachary did not deliver fully on his end of the deal. The $4k not delivered is initially a debt, but when Zachary clearly stated that him paying $12k only and not the $16k per the agreement and that it is non-negotiable after which he blocked comminication, it is clear that we are no longer talking about a just a debt.
When Tomas does not have any other means to reason with Zachary in order to come to payment settlements (for which he made proposals) it is a very fair course of action to out Zachary to the community and to make it clear he cannot be trusted in financial dealings.
The only way to see it differently if is you are biased by friendship.

I do not know any of the parties involved, but it is quite crystal clear who is in the right here and that is Tomas.

If you are a friend of Zachary and feel he is a standup guy, then I would suggest yourself and/or Kartinken to support Zachary in the repayment of the $4k he owes Tomas and to help him restore his reputation by making things right. People do tend to forgive when people make things right.

Just ask Brad Booth.

I didn't write a friend like you. I wrote a friend loyal like you. I worded it that way specifically because I think he's done more damage than good defending Zach in this thread plus has been giving him awful advice, but I respect his loyalty.

Zach seems to be perpetually broke. Tomas offers much needed cash immediately for funds he may never see again. Zach takes it. FTP funds freed up, Zach broke again, sees chance to pay up most of what he owes but to hold on to a much needed 4k by coming up with 'tax excuse', which is fabricated nonsense but gives him 4k he desperately needs. He thinks he can in this manner keep his rep intact while holding onto funds that are not by rights his; he also believes it will be more likely to fly as he's dealing with a foreigner who probably won't understand how US taxation works.

This may not have been a premeditated scam but rather turned into a spontaneous scam in which a lie was used to justify not holding up one side of a bargain.

Zack is a thief period.He gets 8500,promises 16000,keeps 4000. So if my math is correct he got 8500+4000 he didn't give as promised which = 12,500.
Pretty good deal 12,500 for 12,000

this summarizes my opinion very well

Seeing as this thread has been bumped, I want to say that my opinion of Zach's family has changed somewhat since I posted that they were persuading Zach to scam Tomáš.

I think it is more likely that they see this as someone taking advantage and loaning their (according to other posters ITT) vulnerable, mentally ill son $8500 with a ridiculous interest rate spinning the debt up to $16K.

It would help if someone could explain to them what the situation really is: Zach selling a probable bad debt at about 50 cents on the dollar, which is what other receivables with that debtor were valued at by other people at the same time.

Zachary Parker from Marietta, GA seems like a total scumbag, scammer, and untrustworthy individual to me

its Thai custom to assume a portion of a friend's tax-liability when you do a friend a favor.