Quote:
I understand why you stated the bolded, checks are usually honor for 6 months after they were issued. Considering that there are no reported successful deposits of checks starting on 4/15/11 and many reports of unsuccessful ones, how would one best convey that "fact"? I deposited a check from FT in March and will include that bank statement. The check I requested 11PM on 4/13 I never received, LDO. It would seem that those that withdrew on 4/15 or cases such as mine would not need much in the way of proof as there is no way we could actually receive the check and if by some miracle we did it would not be good. I understand that may be a big assumption to present to the DOJ. Again how is it best to present these ideas in a coherent and succinct way? That is, if this is useful info/perspective to present.
I think it best not to try an overly complicate the situation; the DOJ will understand that it is impossible to completely prove a negative, so your real job is to just try and do your best to show why in your situation it is more likely that you are telling the truth rather than making things up. The DOJ is also aware (this has been discussed openly between the PPA and the DOJ) that a large number of players did not get the benefit of those late transactions.
You do a good job of outlining your situation in your email, and your posts are well written in general. You really do not need to say much more, though I am sure there are few more personal details you may want to include. After explaining things in a few short paragraphs then explain that you are providing what documentation you can: emphasize first substantiating the date and time of the withdrawal; then showing that the last check you received from FTP you put in "x" account; then that this was your only account/the only account you used for poker/whatever; then how you are showing the deposit sections of the next series of months that show no FTP check being deposited. You may have other details you want to include. For those really concerned about getting all details presented as well as possible, and/or (especially) those who have a lot of disputed money at stake, it may well be worth the cost to hire an attorney to help draft the petition and to speak for you to GCG or the DOJ throughout the process.
The PPA as an organization is currently working on trying to get the DOJ to clarify certain general points. We
hope to get some guidance on very common questions like yours about documenting undelivered checks. Unfortunately it cannot be guaranteed that the PPA will get good and clear answers to most questions, nor that those answers will come with sufficient time to benefit from them. But I am hopeful it will, the DOJ seems to want to make this work easier and quicker for all - but it is also clear that that is not priority number one for them. Priority number one, to the DOJ, is to make sure this process follows all rules, regulations, and orders, and produces reliable results that actually benefits "victims."
So if you have enough at stake disputed in this process, personal professional advice from an attorney truly familiar with the process of remission and familiar with or willing to learn the specifics of the FTP case is strongly suggested.
Skallagrim
Last edited by Skallagrim; 10-06-2013 at 08:50 PM.