As the former voice of alarm, I'd like to take a second and try to be the voice of reason.
The current version of the story as being relayed by FTP plus what we know from dealing with PMI ourselves is as follows:
- In July 2010, a batch of transactions is sent for processing.
- All of those transactions are processed - but possibly not without incident, see below in red.
- Some number of those transactions are "put into the wrong bucket" at [Big Bank].
- Six months later [Big Bank] resubmits these transactions for unknown reasons.
- PMI, dutifully processes what [Big Bank] sends them, sending money to locations unknown - but not to Full Tilt Poker.
- A month later, PMI acts on the instructions of [Big Bank] again - or [Big Bank] submitted recurring payments.
- A month later, PMI does so again, but changes its descriptor.
- Full Tilt Poker begins to actively look at the issue.
If you're willing to assume that now Full Tilt Poker is operating above board and as transparently as their legal team will allow their customer-facing representatives to act, the problem now lies at [Big Bank] - which I suspect Full Tilt Poker will be unlikely to ever,
ever, turn over to us.
So, now Full Tilt Poker is "guilty" of not taking a big enough action, and definitely of not acting sooner. They should be letting people know more, and they should have taken us seriously before this went on for months' and I've communicated this to Full Tilt's representatives in public and in private.
...but don't expect much transparency from FTP with regard to how their legal department works with their bank (Big Bank). At
best, we're going to get a vague message later that says,
"We've received information from our bank, and are processing refunds for impacted players."
A note about the July 2010 patches: I had two $200 deposits in July of 2010 (and two $200 withdraws). One of these deposits was accompanied a few days later by the following email:
Quote:
Due to a temporary issue with one of our 3rd party processors, there was a delay in the processing of this deposit(s). This issue has now been resolved and the funds have been taken from your bank account.
The descriptor which will show on your bank statement for this deposit is "WESTERN CLEAR" and will differ from the descriptor originally communicated to you. The descriptor originally communicated to you was "MAS <REMOVED>"
Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience this has caused.
[888 number removed to keep valid processors off this thread.]
This means that they submitted my $200 to [Big Bank], who coordinates their merchant transactions, and two things happened:
- There was a hiccup in processing "temporary issue," "delay."
- Then they were processed with the wrong descriptor, "Western Clear."
There is speculation earlier in this thread that "Western Clear" has some tie to PMI -
but I think it's much more likely that "Western Clear" was simply an invalid descriptor for valid FTP transactions -- and people impacted by PMI were possibly tied to this bad batch.
Among our current questions/actions/next-steps are:
- When will [Big Bank] release full information back to FTP on what transactions were sent "PMI" for processing? [Remember, PMI is just a descriptor on the transaction, not a company name.]
- FTP needs to confirm that passive refunds have occurred, other than taking the bank's word for it. We have no indication of this - at all.
- What will they do once they have the list -- or if they never get the list -- since posting on 2+2 isn't exactly letting people know.
FTP needs to compensate those impacted in some meaningful way. I'm not asking for money, but we at least all deserve
something when this is over. If I got my apology letter and explanation by snail-mail with a keychain enclosed, I'd at least feel as though someone took it serious enough to spend a stamp on it.
There is a separate issue regarding PMI, but only once we understand [Big Bank] and their role in the February and March re-submittals.