MoneyBookers account hacked and emptied...

The End.

This thread can now finally be left to rest in peace!

Got this e-mail yesterday:
Please note that we have recently received your acceptance of the final decision of the Ombudsman service and are currently in the process of issuing a compensation as per ombudsman’s recommendation. In particular,

(i) €886.46 – representing the value of the disputed transactions – plus interest on that sum at a rate of 8% simple from 12 May 2011 to the date of the settlement; and
(ii) €200.00 – in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused as a result of Moneybookers’ handling of the matter

The total amount of 1217.00 EUR will be added to your Skrill account and made at your disposal within the next 1-2 business days.

Should there be anything else we could further assist you with, please do not hesitate to contact us back.
The money is now in my account! :thumbsup:

KK
 
This thread can now finally be left to rest in peace!

Got this e-mail yesterday:

The money is now in my account! :thumbsup:

KK

I'm so glad this turned out well! They dragged this out for so long... I was truly worried it was going to come to naught for you.

(I still can't understand WTF took them so long :mad: )

But congrats!! :thumbsup:
 
Congratulations KK - What a great result (Eventually!)

What a useful thread to have around as well should anyone else fall victim.

Is there a section this thread could get moved to for easy reference?

Now go make some crazy high roller bets with your free £200! :D
 
It shouldn't have taken such extreme measures. Skrill should have done the right thing after their own investigation. It seemed they just wanted to stall in the hope that KK would just go away and take the hit. We still don't know HOW this happened, Skrill seem to want to keep this quiet, even though others may be exposed to the same type of hack, and don't yet know how to secure against it.

Of course, Skrill must know what happened, else they could not have made their initial decision in a fair manner.:rolleyes:
 
It shouldn't have taken such extreme measures. Skrill should have done the right thing after their own investigation. It seemed they just wanted to stall in the hope that KK would just go away and take the hit. We still don't know HOW this happened, Skrill seem to want to keep this quiet, even though others may be exposed to the same type of hack, and don't yet know how to secure against it.

Of course, Skrill must know what happened, else they could not have made their initial decision in a fair manner.:rolleyes:

I'm sorry, I still don't trust ANY third-party payment processor. I use Neteller, and if VWM had 25 or 50k in his after his famous AWP hit and managed to hold his bowels then fair play to him, because I would be a sack of jelly. They essentially divorce you from the vendor, taking a pretty tidy fee. Convenient yes. Paypal are reknowned for being a no-lose processor. Whatever happens, you take the hit, or the vendor. Never them - becasue it simply isn't allowed in it's bible-sized T&C's. If I won 25k and had it in paypal I would simply await the 'Notification Of Limited Account Access' e-mail whereby they would steal my money for 6 months until they felt safe it wouldn't be charged back. OK, I digress as most gamblers use Neteller or the stupidly-named Skrill (ex-Moneybookers.)
Casinos love them as it gives them control over how they treat players - deposit, win fairly and they rip you off? No worries, as they can't get their money charged back. That's why I like my credit cards ( the two remaining that don't charge as cash advances or other fees.) If a site scammed me, I can argue non-fulfilment of contract, as being paid winnings is a reasonable expectation of the transaction if I meet the T&C's, and get refunded quite fast. Same on debit cards. The consumer protections are clearly defined here in the UK for those methods. Without looking too deep, I'd suggest it's more difficult to get speedy recompense when going through third parties.
I think he found this out for himself as it's taken 18 months to sort out. Abysmal. And that was only through the Ombudsman. Just goes to show you, be careful who you lie in bed with. I would welcome one of VWM's well-researched essays on the difference in protection afforded me here in the UK for both direct card payments and third-party processor payments.....
 
I'm sorry, I still don't trust ANY third-party payment processor. I use Neteller, and if VWM had 25 or 50k in his after his famous AWP hit and managed to hold his bowels then fair play to him, because I would be a sack of jelly. They essentially divorce you from the vendor, taking a pretty tidy fee. Convenient yes. Paypal are reknowned for being a no-lose processor. Whatever happens, you take the hit, or the vendor. Never them - becasue it simply isn't allowed in it's bible-sized T&C's. If I won 25k and had it in paypal I would simply await the 'Notification Of Limited Account Access' e-mail whereby they would steal my money for 6 months until they felt safe it wouldn't be charged back. OK, I digress as most gamblers use Neteller or the stupidly-named Skrill (ex-Moneybookers.)
Casinos love them as it gives them control over how they treat players - deposit, win fairly and they rip you off? No worries, as they can't get their money charged back. That's why I like my credit cards ( the two remaining that don't charge as cash advances or other fees.) If a site scammed me, I can argue non-fulfilment of contract, as being paid winnings is a reasonable expectation of the transaction if I meet the T&C's, and get refunded quite fast. Same on debit cards. The consumer protections are clearly defined here in the UK for those methods. Without looking too deep, I'd suggest it's more difficult to get speedy recompense when going through third parties.
I think he found this out for himself as it's taken 18 months to sort out. Abysmal. And that was only through the Ombudsman. Just goes to show you, be careful who you lie in bed with. I would welcome one of VWM's well-researched essays on the difference in protection afforded me here in the UK for both direct card payments and third-party processor payments.....

I prefer Neteller. They seem more secure than Skrill, and it is easier to contact them when there are problems.

It's true that cards are the safest of all, but they can't handle the kind of volume that Neteller can. I can deposit £2000 or more in one go via Neteller, but try that with a card and the bank's fraud protection kicks in the block the first attempt. You then have to wait to be contacted by the bank to confirm the transaction was legit before they unblock it for you to try again.

When the big wins hit my Neteller, I was quick to initiate a bank withdrawal to reduce my Neteller balance to a more reasonable level, but still a pretty significant one. The surplus being safer in the bank because of the additional protection.

One problem with cards is that once you actually solve a dispute with a chargeback, you quickly end up on a blacklist that could stop you playing at any online casino. It should be a power you have, but never use, rather like a nuclear missile. Chargebacks can also be seen as "mutually assured destruction", as you get revenge on the casino, but also your own ability to play is destroyed.

The power of chargeback is widely abused by fraudsters, so casinos take it VERY seriously indeed.

I used to use a Barclaycard with a considerable limit alongside Neteller, but in the end they followed the industry trend by making gambling deposits a "cash advance". Now, only debit cards remain as an alternate option, but they are also limited by the volume that can be put through them before the bank's systems block for verification.

I don't fancy Skrill at all, as others seem to have had more problems with Skrill than Neteller, plus Skrill seem much harder to contact when things do go wrong.

In some cases, your money is safer in a casino (accredited of course) than some of the dodgier wallets, especially those serving the US market.
 
I prefer Neteller. They seem more secure than Skrill, and it is easier to contact them when there are problems.

It's true that cards are the safest of all, but they can't handle the kind of volume that Neteller can. I can deposit £2000 or more in one go via Neteller, but try that with a card and the bank's fraud protection kicks in the block the first attempt. You then have to wait to be contacted by the bank to confirm the transaction was legit before they unblock it for you to try again.

When the big wins hit my Neteller, I was quick to initiate a bank withdrawal to reduce my Neteller balance to a more reasonable level, but still a pretty significant one. The surplus being safer in the bank because of the additional protection.

One problem with cards is that once you actually solve a dispute with a chargeback, you quickly end up on a blacklist that could stop you playing at any online casino. It should be a power you have, but never use, rather like a nuclear missile. Chargebacks can also be seen as "mutually assured destruction", as you get revenge on the casino, but also your own ability to play is destroyed.

The power of chargeback is widely abused by fraudsters, so casinos take it VERY seriously indeed.

I used to use a Barclaycard with a considerable limit alongside Neteller, but in the end they followed the industry trend by making gambling deposits a "cash advance". Now, only debit cards remain as an alternate option, but they are also limited by the volume that can be put through them before the bank's systems block for verification.

I don't fancy Skrill at all, as others seem to have had more problems with Skrill than Neteller, plus Skrill seem much harder to contact when things do go wrong.

In some cases, your money is safer in a casino (accredited of course) than some of the dodgier wallets, especially those serving the US market.

Yes, up until last year Barclaycard was free. I assume I was correct about better legislative/regulatory protection for direct deposits though?
 
Yes, up until last year Barclaycard was free. I assume I was correct about better legislative/regulatory protection for direct deposits though?

Yes, if a bank goes bust, you are protected for up to 85K now. If an eWallet, technically an "eMoney issuer", you are NOT protected by the investor compensation scheme. In the case of Neteller and Skrill, you can go to the ombudsman, but the fact that this case took 18 months shows how poor a protection this is. If you suffered fraud from your bank account, the bank is supposed to refund the customer straight away unless they have evidence that the customer was involved or grossly negligent. Skrill had the attitude that it was never liable if a customer had their account defrauded, so didn't have to prove negligence or involvement of the customer, nor even make a serious effort to find out what happened so that the customer could use alternate means for recovery. The Ombudsman thinks otherwise, and has finally forced Skrill to refund victims of fraud. Unfortunately, this may only change their attitude towards UK customers, as only they would have this level of access to the ombudsman scheme. Non-UK customers would have to rely on the FSA as the regulator for these electronic money issuers.

It is very much like a retail gift card which you load with money to use at casinos, so is not as protected as money in a bank. If you lose a gift card, or get robbed, the shop is not usually responsible for your loss. If a retail chain goes under, money remaining on their gift cards often becomes worthless, as any new owners often refuse to honour them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top