Neteller wants us to sign a release but will pay anyhow

PR24680 · Jul 30, 2007

This is what I'm reading in the FAQ.

Neteller would like us to click on some release tomorow when we request our funds. This protects them against any future lawsuits. However, they claim in the FAQ that they will pay us anyhow even if we don't agree to this release. And, oh, if we sign the release they also agree to not sue us in the future for anything.

I can think of absolutely no reason why anyone would want to give this release to neteller, especially if they are gong to agree to pay us our money regardless.

Am I reading their FAQ correctly? Did they make a mistake in their FAQ?

Anti-liberal · Jul 30, 2007

If you sign the release, they will also release you from any claims by them. If you don't sign the release, Neteller states that you will not be released from any future legal actions by them, implying that Neteller could end up suing it's customers. I have no idea how that would work. Possibly shareholders who lost money blaming the U.S. customers who were supposed to know that using Neteller was illegal or something like that. Very weird that they would suggest some sort of legal action against account holders.

WVU · Jul 30, 2007

I don't like the release. I am not signing it unless I have to

Woody0 · Jul 30, 2007

I saw elsewhere a comment about a class action suit against NETeller for freezing customer's funds.

If that happens I would find it to be particularly obnoxious since NETeller was unable to pay US clients due to US government action. However it would be a typical US response to launch legal action against any perceived wrong doing. This could be an explanation for their release.

That said, I would not in any case sign a release.

PR24680 · Jul 30, 2007

there is no requirement to agree to the release

According to neteller's FAQs they are going to pay whether you agree to the release or not.

Since they don't mention any benefits in agreeing to this release, nor can I think of any, I am definitely not signing it.

In general, I just don't sign documents that have no benefit to me, unless seomone such as my lawyer or someone else can explain it to me.

Don't assume just because we agreed to a non interest bearing account that neteller bears zero responsiblility for this. We are not lawyers. The best thing to do is not to sign the release, since they are not forcing us to do it.

fhmesq44 · Jul 30, 2007

can you cut and paste it?

earl · Jul 30, 2007

someone posted the release on another thread. a simple you get paid and we are done with each other, you dont sue us, we dont sue you basically. my question is, which way (if any) gives you more of a chance the feds will not harass you regarding this?

fhmesq44 · Jul 30, 2007

Release

You and NETELLER Plc Group (each, a “Releasing Party”) mutually release, waive, and discharge each other (each, a “Released Party”) from any and all manner of actions, causes of action, suits, promises, damages, judgments, executions, claims, counterclaims, demands, and any other form of liability whatsoever, in law or equity, known or unknown, that the Releasing Party ever had, now has, or hereafter can, shall, or may have against the Released Party from the date You opened Your Account to the Effective Date with respect to Your request to receive funds under the Distribution Plan and Your Account.

The additional definitions below apply to this release:

“You” or “Your” refers to you and any of your assigns, heirs, executors, agents, or anyone else acting on your behalf or in your capacity.

“NETELLER Plc Group” means NETELLER plc and its predecessors, successors, present and former affiliated companies, subsidiaries, assigns, officers, directors, stockholders, employees, and agents.

“Your Account” means your online stored value account with the Neteller plc Group, or any of them, which holds electronic money.

“Distribution Plan” means the distribution plan announced by NETELLER Plc Group on 4 June 2007 pursuant to agreements with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and Navigant Consulting, Inc.

If that is it, the main problem (amongst others) is that it isn't contingent on you receiving your funds. Thus, I wouldn't sign it.

Earl, this release, and whether or not you sign it, is unlikely to have any bearing on the feds harassing you.

earl · Jul 30, 2007

im just paronoid and wonder which side would be to my advantage. on the surface i can see the side for "dont" sign it. but i also wonder if not signed, that gives them some type of opening or leeway to have your info turned over or used in a way that could indict you in any way, shape or form?

fhmesq44 · Jul 30, 2007

earl said:
im just paronoid and wonder which side would be to my advantage. on the surface i can see the side for "dont" sign it. but i also wonder if not signed, that gives them some type of opening or leeway to have your info turned over or used in a way that could indict you in any way, shape or form?

They don't agree to maintain the confidentiality of your information in the release (which is another of the problems to which I generally referred). However, any confidential withholding of your information would likely be limited by government process anyway.

earl · Jul 30, 2007

so your position is no harm from not signing i gather?

fhmesq44 · Jul 30, 2007

earl said:
so your position is no harm from not signing i gather?

I have no idea. They may require it to get your money, although you guys have indicated that isn't the case. I don't know why they could/would sue you, but without signing it that risk remains.

However, personally, I wouldn't sign it b/c it isn't contingent on me getting my money. Now, I sign, don't get my money and they claim I have released them from all claims, which, arguably includes the return of my money and I am f*ed.

lander · Jul 30, 2007

fhmesq44 said:
However, personally, I wouldn't sign it b/c it isn't contingent on me getting my money. Now, I sign, don't get my money and they claim I have released them from all claims, which, arguably includes the return of my money and I am f*ed.

Not provoking you, but is that true? Seeing as how this was part of the w/d process it certainly would seem to imply such a contingency.

Any legalites in here know for certain one way or another?

WVU · Jul 30, 2007

My lawyer instructed me to not sign it and see what happens. If they want a signature before they will release the money he will be modifying the agreement before having me sign it.

Anti-liberal · Jul 30, 2007

I doubt whether clicking a "yes" or "no" is even legally binding anyways. It's not the same as signing something. Errors are made...also they could go in your account and make it look like you clicked "yes" when you didn't, etc...

fhmesq44 · Jul 30, 2007

Lander, without seeing the remainder of the context it is difficult to say 100%, but WVU is correct in that this agreement needs modification before I would sign it (I have no $$ there). I didn't log on to see if any other language is incorporated into the release which modifies it. However, as a stand alone document, what I said is arguably true. Fraud, bad faith arguments, sure, but now you have to sue them in some random jurisdiction.

Anti - it would be entirely binding, just as any time you check the "I agree to the terms" when you download software or sign up for a credit card online bill pay.

Anti-liberal · Jul 30, 2007

fhmesq44 said:
Anti - it would be entirely binding, just as any time you check the "I agree to the terms" when you download software or sign up for a credit card online bill pay.

With downloading software or signing up for a credit card, you can't proceed without agreement; on this Neteller you can proceed whether you agree or not, so proceeding isn't proof of acceptance in Neteller's release.

fhmesq44 · Jul 30, 2007

Anti-liberal said:
With downloading software or signing up for a credit card, you can't proceed without agreement; on this Neteller you can proceed whether you agree or not, so proceeding isn't proof of acceptance in Neteller's release.

Actually, the exact opposite is the case. Not to get into 1st year contracts for you, but arguably the downloading scenario is an adhesion contract (i.e., take it or leave it) and could be unenforceable. you actually have a choice here which would make this more likely to be enforceable.

SportSavant · Jul 30, 2007

I think Neteller has been totally done over by the US govt, and it would be nice of posters to sign what they are asking and collect their money to help them along.

Many companies would have filed bankruptcy or worse under the circumstances

Brock · Jul 30, 2007

I had signed the release. Its my money and I am getting it
back. No big deal.

Neteller wants us to sign a release but will pay anyhow

New member

Rx. Veteran

New member

New member

New member

Woah, woah, Daddy's wrong, Mommy's right.

Member

Woah, woah, Daddy's wrong, Mommy's right.

Member

Woah, woah, Daddy's wrong, Mommy's right.

Member

Woah, woah, Daddy's wrong, Mommy's right.

There's always next year, like in 75, 90-93, 99 &

New member

Rx. Veteran

Woah, woah, Daddy's wrong, Mommy's right.

Rx. Veteran

Woah, woah, Daddy's wrong, Mommy's right.

New member

Member

Forum statistics

Share this page