I refer to the court decision from 2020.
Link with advertising removed.
Whether my view towards the payment service Provider is morally reprehensible or not, everyone can decide for themselves.
Basically, it will most likely come down to the fact that I pay it, since it is a rather small sum.
Gambling debts are debts of honor, you can often tell the casinos. That the payment service provider must now suffer from it is of course a pity. But Skrill is also not a goodwill angel.
Crankyx3 wrote on 08/03/2022 at 10:40 am: I am referring to the court ruling from 2020.
Link with advertisement removed.
Whether my view towards the payment service Provider is morally reprehensible or not is for everyone to decide for themselves.
Basically, it will most likely come down to the fact that I pay it, since it is a rather small sum.
Gambling debts are debts of honor, you can often tell the casinos. That the payment service provider must now suffer from it is of course a pity. But Skrill is also not a goodwill angel.
Nevertheless, thank you for all the answers.
I have deliberately tried to leave the moral part aside and argue only purely with the facts
If you want to know my opinion I think the court decision won't help you because not the transaction to Skrill was illegal but only the further use
So I'm not even sure if you could theoretically get two on the roof on the one hand because of the legal payment you have to pay and on the other hand because of illegal gambling
Because a big difference to your case and most of the other cases is that they want money back that they lost and you will probably be accused of doing it on purpose
If you are now explicitly about your losses you are free to look for a lawyer to initiate proceedings but to start now with Skrill I think is very risky especially since the costs can quickly rise to over 1,000 if it goes badly
As I said is not meant badly but I know how fast that can go if you do not react and think oh they can me anyway nothing is usually a big fallacy
Skrill claims money from 2020. (Sepa Collect)
Liked this post: Max_Bet
Link with advertising removed.
Whether my view towards the payment service Provider is morally reprehensible or not, everyone can decide for themselves.
Basically, it will most likely come down to the fact that I pay it, since it is a rather small sum.
Gambling debts are debts of honor, you can often tell the casinos. That the payment service provider must now suffer from it is of course a pity. But Skrill is also not a goodwill angel.
Nevertheless, thank you for all the answers.
This post has been translated automatically
Skrill claims money from 2020. (Sepa Collect)
Nobody has liked this post so far
I have deliberately tried to leave the moral part aside and argue only purely with the facts
If you want to know my opinion I think the court decision won't help you because not the transaction to Skrill was illegal but only the further use
So I'm not even sure if you could theoretically get two on the roof on the one hand because of the legal payment you have to pay and on the other hand because of illegal gambling
Because a big difference to your case and most of the other cases is that they want money back that they lost and you will probably be accused of doing it on purpose
If you are now explicitly about your losses you are free to look for a lawyer to initiate proceedings but to start now with Skrill I think is very risky especially since the costs can quickly rise to over 1,000 if it goes badly
As I said is not meant badly but I know how fast that can go if you do not react and think oh they can me anyway nothing is usually a big fallacy
This post has been translated automatically