frapi07 wrote on 17.05.2023 at 16:34: Everyone lives as he wants and does what he wants. Am not a fan of it either (Falke knows that too), but banning the mouth or even banning... why? Banning certain content should be viewed very skeptically. No one should be banned here as long as they don't cheat or put anyone in danger.
I won't comment on the topic itself, except to say good luck to you guys. I think even 50% is too little But that's just by the way
Everyone can think about it as he wants. I personally don't care how someone sees it. It's just counterproductive when in every thread where it's about reclamation, the same people immediately buzz out to put down the thread creator.
The TE has already decided to initiate a clawback and is asking for information here. The private opinion, how someone sees this morally, helps the TE exactly zero.
I thought because it was at least for a while as credit on the account. So in principle it is quite simply looked what went in, what went out.
Exactly. Only the actual total loss is refunded.
This is because there was no legally valid contract and thus there is no valid business agreement. The casino's payouts are already part of your money, so to speak, and the loss is thus illegally retained money. The casino therefore has no right to keep your money and will be obliged to repay you.
frapi07 wrote on 17.05.2023 at 16:34: Everyone lives as he wants and does what he wants. Am not a fan of it either (Falke knows that too), but banning the mouth or even banning... why? Banning certain content should be viewed very skeptically. No one should be banned here as long as they don't cheat or put anyone in danger.
I won't comment on the topic itself, except to say good luck to you guys. I find even 50% too little But that's just by the way
i see exactly the same but if certain contributions are removed / deleted then the whole has nothing to do with freedom of speech but rather with censorship.
i see exactly the same but if certain contributions are removed / deleted then the whole has nothing to do with freedom of speech but rather with censorship.
Hope you do not mean my other post, I deleted it myself because Falke had a better answer.
I find the topic, legally speaking, quite interesting. I'm generally not a friend of this lawsuit, is out of the question for me, but can also understand somewhere that there are players who see it differently.
Are any taxes subsequently deducted from the amount claimed? Or from the 40% or 50% that you get back in the end? That would still be the hit, but I could imagine it.
Max_Bet wrote on 17.05.2023 at 17:13: I find the topic, legally speaking, quite interesting. Am generally not a friend of this Klagerei, comes for me out of the question, but can also understand somewhere that there are players who see it differently.
Are any taxes subsequently deducted from the amount claimed? Or from the 40% or 50% that you get back in the end? That would be still the hit, but I could imagine it.
No. The money paid in is normally already taxed money and you only get your own money back, so to speak.
The process financier has to pay tax on his share, of course, because it is new income for him.
And does the law firm then deduct the cost of the lawsuit and the work from the actual recovery or does the client then have to advance that before the gambling houses pay?
This post has been translated automatically
Anonym
verified
Former Member
Money back because of gambling law
17th May. 2023, at 08:45 pm CEST#28
0 Likes
Nobody has liked this post so far
Milo1 wrote on 05/17/2023 at 10:53 am: 40% is top. Most are above that.
I am on 3 casinos, 2x with 40% prov. and 1 time with 30% prov.
With the latter is even already a comparison offer 😉
Info gladly per pn, since I do not advertise for it
refucs wrote on 17.05.2023 at 18:50: And the law firm then deducts the costs from the process and the work from the actual refund or does the client then have to advance that before the gambling stalls pay?
No, you don't have to pay anything. That's the whole point of a litigation funder, after all.
The litigation financier pays your attorney's fees, any court costs, etc. So he advances the money. The lawyer then gets this money back from the casino, because they have to pay all the costs if they lose.
You just wait for your money to arrive. The lawyer or PF then splits the money right away, so he takes his percentages and transfers the remaining amount to you.
In some cases, you may have to appear in court. The hearing usually lasts only 15 - 30 minutes. But that is all you might have to do. Nothing more. And the hearing always takes place at your place. So you don't have to travel far for the hearing.
Why should you give up your claims. If the law agrees with you. As I said, with me the chances of success are good. And I am happy if I get a part of my losses back. So the 40% success fee you think is justified and acceptable? or are there other service providers who are just as successful and have a better price?
KAKI81 wrote on 05/17/2023 at 9:28 pm: Wiso should you waive your claims. If the law agrees with you. As I said with me the chances of success are good. And I am happy if I get back a part of my losses.... So the 40% success fee you think is justified and acceptable? or are there other service providers who are just as successful but have a better price?
You mean 40% goes to the process financier and 60% to you? That's ok. There are slightly better offers between 30% and 35%, but all contracts are roughly in this range.
Money back because of gambling law
Liked this post: CashOut, frapi07, Lionking, Marieangels, moody
Everyone can think about it as he wants. I personally don't care how someone sees it. It's just counterproductive when in every thread where it's about reclamation, the same people immediately buzz out to put down the thread creator.
The TE has already decided to initiate a clawback and is asking for information here. The private opinion, how someone sees this morally, helps the TE exactly zero.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
Example: Mr. X. has won 10k€ with a 50€ deposit. However, he never paid it out, but gambled it away little by little. Can he claim it back?
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
No. You can only get back directly lost money.
Example: You have paid in 10,000 € and paid out 5,000 €. So you can claim back 5.000 €.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
I thought because it was at least for a while as a credit on the account. So in principle, it is quite simple to see what went in, what went out.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Liked this post: CashOut, Lionking, Marieangels, Max_Bet
Exactly. Only the actual total loss is refunded.
This is because there was no legally valid contract and thus there is no valid business agreement. The casino's payouts are already part of your money, so to speak, and the loss is thus illegally retained money. The casino therefore has no right to keep your money and will be obliged to repay you.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
i see exactly the same but if certain contributions are removed / deleted then the whole has nothing to do with freedom of speech but rather with censorship.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
Hope you do not mean my other post, I deleted it myself because Falke had a better answer.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Liked this post: frapi07
No all good, it was not explicitly about your post
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
Are any taxes subsequently deducted from the amount claimed? Or from the 40% or 50% that you get back in the end? That would still be the hit, but I could imagine it.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
No. The money paid in is normally already taxed money and you only get your own money back, so to speak.
The process financier has to pay tax on his share, of course, because it is new income for him.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
Ui
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Liked this post: refucs
No, you don't have to pay anything. That's the whole point of a litigation funder, after all.
The litigation financier pays your attorney's fees, any court costs, etc. So he advances the money. The lawyer then gets this money back from the casino, because they have to pay all the costs if they lose.
You just wait for your money to arrive. The lawyer or PF then splits the money right away, so he takes his percentages and transfers the remaining amount to you.
In some cases, you may have to appear in court. The hearing usually lasts only 15 - 30 minutes. But that is all you might have to do. Nothing more. And the hearing always takes place at your place. So you don't have to travel far for the hearing.
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Money back because of gambling law
Nobody has liked this post so far
You mean 40% goes to the process financier and 60% to you? That's ok. There are slightly better offers between 30% and 35%, but all contracts are roughly in this range.
This post has been translated automatically