It says to start paying out in Feb, it doesnt say the process will be complete. Why does that seem so unreasonable? Sure they will send out letters in the mail and email, but the DOJ will also probably make a post online with the remission app with directions and players who are in the know and in tune with all of this can probably start the process very quickly.

I thought they will only start paying out once all claims are received and approved. As far as letters going out, i think they have a minimum time to respond like 3 months.

Now I know you are not serious, just having fun trolling, no problem with that.

But, they did. I withdrew from Full Tilt over and over, a total amount far greater than what I have stuck on there. So did thousands of other people. If the chips had no cash value at all, this wouldn't have been possible.

The chips had value, but the poor business practices of the scumbags at Full Tilt caught up with them, and they didn't have enough money left to cover deposits. That's not the same thing as "fraud" in the way you are using the word.

I want to believe.

No.

I guess a guy like Ford needs to give some input, but to me a major difference with this FTP case is that the funds are already available for immediate remission. Its not like the Madoff case where they have to notify all parties that remission will begin before starting because in the Madoff type cases all the money isnt available from the fraud, its only w/e amount the govt has recovered at that time. So if all the money isnt available then it seems like common sense to have to give everyone a fair shot and proper notice to claim what is available, whereas the FTP case, the DOJ has 100% of player funds available plus about 50M in excess. So if a 2+2 lurker finds out before John Doe that remission is starting, its fine because as long as John Doe is notified and is qualified to recover he can do so at any time because there is enough funds. Idk just kind of typing what makes sense.

I would recommend having a lawyer fill those papers out for you.

Or at least someone who passed 5th grade English class.

I don't know where Mr. Imrich got his info but, with all due respect to him, it seems likely to me he and/or his source may not be referring to actual distributions in February, but to the petition application process beginning in February, which would be extraordinary in and of itself (and which I find "possible", but unlikely). The other makes no sense to me based on ALL other remission cases I have read. I really think something got lost in the translation here.

If we assume the DOJ does hire a Claims Administrator in January and, assuming the Administrator is able to design the claims process and have it approved before the end of January (which, at least for me, is unlikely) AND the administrator has the time to send out the initial notifications as required by statute then the earliest petitions could be considered would be 30 days from the notice receipt date (note: notices WILL be sent by mail and are expected to number over 1 million). It is typical this notification/petition period is actually longer than a strict 30 days.

CFR § 9.4 Petitions in judicial forfeiture cases.
(a) Notice of seizure. The notice of seizure and intent to forfeit the property shall advise any persons who may have a present ownership interest in the property to submit their petitions for remission or mitigation within thirty (30) days of the date they receive the notice in order to facilitate processing. Petitions shall be considered any time after notice until such time as the forfeited property is placed in official use, sold, or otherwise disposed of according to law, except in cases involving petitions to restore property. A notice of seizure shall include the title of the Ruling Official and the mailing and street address of the official to whom petitions should be sent, the name of the agency seizing the property, an asset identifier number, and the district court docket number.

After the petitions are received the following MUST happen.

1. Upon receipt of a petition, the United States Attorney shall direct the seizing agency to investigate the merits of the petition based on the information provided by the petitioner and the totality of the agency's investigation of the underlying basis for forfeiture. The agency shall submit to the United States Attorney a report of its investigation and its recommendation on whether the petition should be granted or denied. Upon receipt of the agency's report and recommendation, the United States Attorney shall forward to the Chief, Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, the petition, the seizing agency's report and recommendation, and the United States Attorney's recommendation on whether the petition should be granted or denied.

2. The Chief shall rule on the petition. No hearing shall be held.

3. If the Chief grants a remission or mitigates the forfeiture, the Chief shall mail a copy of the decision to the petitioner or, if represented by an attorney, to the petitioner's attorney, the appropriate United States Attorney, the United States Marshals Service or other property custodian, and the appropriate seizing agency. The written decision shall include the terms and conditions, if any, upon which the remission or mitigation is granted and the procedures the petitioner must follow to obtain release of the property or the monetary interest therein.

4. If the Chief denies a petition, a copy of that decision shall be mailed to the petitioner, or if represented by an attorney, to the petitioner's attorney of record, to the appropriate United States Attorney, the United States Marshals Service or other property custodian, and to the appropriate seizing agency. The decision shall specify the reason that the petition was denied. The decision shall advise the petitioner that a request for reconsideration of the denial of the petition may be submitted to the Chief at the address provided in the decision, in accordance with paragraph (k) of this section.

Can all of this happen AND checks be distributed in 30 days. I, personally, don't think so. But, everybody should read the info available and decide for themselves. I can tell you that I can find no evidence of this EVER happening in a DOJ/AFMLS remissions case. I suppose this, however, does not mean it can not happen. I suppose "anything" CAN happen. I just find it unlikely it will.

Any developments in the past week or two? I can't read through all the nonsense in this thread. Cliffs appreciated.

Yes, you will have all your funds by end of year and receive $1 for every FTP point.

In before ShipItYo calls BS on that (but still hopes it's true anyways)...

nh wp

How are we supposed to claim our money? And what if we dont know the exact amount we had in our account? I havent been following this at all. So sorry for my ignorance.

You will be notified when the powers that be are ready. Hopefully by spring. They know how much is in your account. FT gave all their info to the DOJ.

Even though FT says they will not tell you your balance people have been able to obtain it if they have the .com client. It is not in the cashier but it is under "requests" on the top of the lobby window. It may or may not still be available to you. If there is a discrepancy between your actual balance and what the DOJ says you could contest it but you would need documentation to prove your contention.

lol

You know it's all in good fun, gotta have some of that in all this mess or we go crazy.

Every good ponzi scheme pays out some to keep the fraud going to induce more investments (in the ftp case deposits).

More of

"When we're ready."

amirite?

I say we get some % back more than one year from now.

This isn't true. A large number of people have outstanding withdrawals that were never credited back to the account. How is the DOJ suppose to know about this if FT doesn't show it on the records.

Like others, I also have read the CFR on this.

Imo, there are slight differences in what we can expect our process to be like, as it's not really the "norm" as to remission.

Btw, the administrator makes no decisions as to the character of one's claims, he/she/they only carry out the mechanism to see that the procedure for payment is followed.

There was no need for any receivership work in this case (other than SDNY actually collecting the settlement fine and clearing other forfeitures to move into the fund). That is the process that usually takes the abundance of time.

In our case, SDNY appears to already be, by basis of their stipulation of settlements and their press release, making a recommendation to the AFMLS, that certain players would be entitled to certain payments. They technically have no authority other than that to decide how much or how little or when or how(other than via remission) that you and your funds will be reunited. (If they did, I am quite sure it would have been a mandatory requirement to be stated in the settlement agreement before anyone signed anything). The AFMLS has complete discretion in this regard.

I would like to think we can presume that in the six months post settlement that AFMLS has been brought up to speed on the case and already has answers in place as to the above parameters. This all could have been accomplished laterally while searching for/hiring the administrator.

IF, a big IF, they have already agreed to pay victims (players) based on their account balances, the process should not be as complicated as other cases where they actually have to make a determination for each and every claim whether the claimant has a right to any payment. They already (we hope) have the data, (names, screennames, addresses and account balances etc) for each potential claimant.

Based on information from sources that I have spoken to over the last few months, I believe it would be possible to see actual payments begin in less than 60 days. I cannot guarantee that this will happen, but it could, especially for those who are in agreement with the figures that AFMLS has as to your balance owed.

There will be, of course, those players who do not agree, (example: limbo funds not calculated into account balances owed)and their claims will have to be reviewed. The same with people who will have issues proving their identities, addresses, ages, etc., that might take time, but it should not hold up the process for everyone else.

The saddest part of this whole process? PokerStars was willing to act as the payor in this case. I am willing to bet that they would have done so without taking any fees whatsoever for the process. They have experience in handling this large number of payouts, are familiar with the background of online poker, and therefore of any and all questions that might come up during the process. Players would have already have their money.

Thanks for checking in on the situation. Very much appreciated.

Are you suggesting it would be possible to have payments out 60 days from now or 60 days from when they begin taking applications?

Thanks.

That's not the question, though. The question is one of would the fact that one player know he's playing with real money while the other knows he's playing with phantom money affect the table action to the benefit of the player with the phantom money. It does not, as the player with phantom money could simply play that same style with real money. More importantly, the real money player could do the same.

well thats 2 people now that think we start seeing some payments in Feb!

Thanks for the update DF!

This.

Exactly ... If anything, the person treating the money as "fake" will play worse because they don't care. That's one reason why play money is easier to beat than real money and $5NL is easier to beat than $5000NL.