Online gamblers sue their creditors

A California couple that lost more than $100,000 gambling online is suing a host of credit card companies and banks, claiming the businesses shouldn't have processed the wagers.
Lisa and Andrew Harding racked up tens of thousands of dollars in online gambling debt during 2002 and 2003, prompting a lawsuit from credit card company Retailers National Bank, which accused Lisa Harding of failing to pay the bills.

Last week, the pair filed a countersuit against several credit card companies, including Visa International and its USA division, MasterCard International and Discover Financial Services. They also sued banks that issued the cards, including Retailers National Bank and Citibank, and companies they said electronically transferred funds for some of their bets, including Western Union Holdings.


The countersuit, filed in Superior Court in Alameda County, Calif., claims that the companies ran afoul of California's unfair business practices act by processing the gambling transactions and violated a state prohibition against providing credit for gambling. The suit also claims the companies violated the USA Patriot Act, which prohibits illegal money transmissions.

"We brought this so this will not happen to anybody else, so companies will stop making money off of illegal gambling loans in California," said Ira Rothken, an attorney of the Hardings.

Many major credit card companies have policies of not doing business with any sites they know offer online wagering. Rothken said it's up to the companies to enforce those policies--something he said they didn't do in this case. "Evidently, there are bugs in their system," Rothken said.

Paul Klemm, an attorney who's representing Retailers National Bank, said he hadn't received the cross-complaint and wouldn't comment on the case.

The countersuit is seeking to relieve the Hardings of their debt. If it succeeds, it wouldn't be the first suit to put a dent in an online gambler's liability to a credit card company. In two similar suits also brought by Rothken, both Discover Card and Visa agreed to relieve some portion of the charges that online gamblers had rung up.

Online gambling payment has also become a hot topic among federal lawmakers. Two weeks ago, a Senate committee approved a bill that would make credit card payments to gambling sites illegal. The House passed a similar bill in June.


http://news.com.com/2100-1023_3-5062411.html

excuse me if I say: fvck these people for ruining things for the rest of us!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FunkSoulBrother:
excuse me if I say: fvck these people for ruining things for the rest of us!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>




fvcking stiffs.

That's right thanks to these fvckers they will tighten controls for sure... I doubt they win though...

Nice try, "illegal money transfers". They might win though, CA has been very tough in the past preserving the rule that gambling debts aren't enforceable. It will be like many of these other cases for the industry, how helpful or disgustingly bad the judge is. In Lousiana the industry got a pretty fair judge and it opened a whole can of worms as to if casino gaming is under the Wire Act.

People like this are the source of part of the problems in this country. Folks just do not want to be accountable for their actions.

I say they should be stuck with the bill. It is unfortunate that they are in a difficult situation but if it is that bad and since they like to use the legal system, file for fvking bankruptcy. They get the effect of no longer owing the money but they should also suffer the consequences of being derelects and credit risks.

I totally agree that folk should pay up on gambling debts. This includes books such as SIA and Yacrooks who don't like it when the punter wins.

But what the hell was the credit card company doing? They seem to have gone to sleep and allowed this pair to get way beyond their means. So they might well be guilty of irresponsible lending.

I don't know how this plays in US law, but under UK law the card company would struggle to enforce bankruptcy where their own negligence had been a contributing factor.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by peskypup:

But what the hell was the credit card company doing? They seem to have gone to sleep and allowed this pair to get way beyond their means. So they might well be guilty of irresponsible lending.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The credit card company was providing services,thats what they are supposed to do,its not their job to call people and say"hello,can you afford it?"
Americans always suing others for their own mistakes!
However I would prefer to see an online casino getting stiffed rather than the couple falling into desperation.

irresponsible A-holes

i wonder what they would have said if they had WON $100,000 - and then the books said, "you know what - your cards shouldn't have processed your wagers - so we aren't going to pay you." if THAT had happened - these clowns would be in court, too (although who they would sue is beyond me).

these kind of people are the same ones who sue fast food places for making them fat!

i HOPE these a**holes are told to f**k off!!

Basically--this is the type of bulls#$%, that's what wrong with the country today. The damm lawyers that make the laws so that their fellow lawyers can make money by trying such cases.

I have recently made a special rule for myself. I will not vote for anyone for any public office, regarless of party affiliation if they are an attorney!

If the credit card company doesn't get paid because this couple engaged in "illegal money transmissions", then the couple should go to JAIL of initiating the "transmissions". If they engaged in an illegal act and are willing to admit it in court, then throw their asses in jail.

Whatever happened to "take responsibility for your own actions"?