Originally <a href='/showthread.php?p=16960642'>posted</a> on 11/30/2012:

Quote Originally Posted by benandjerry View Post
Well done Lou, nice to see this resolved. But I also have to ask the same question as KEdge2k, how can OP be charged for the fraudulent activity of those other account holders unless BOL can beyond doubt proof OP was involved? And if there is proof, shouldnt OP at least get to take part of them (hand histories), rather than just being told, you've chip dumped?
The hand history is subjective enough that BetOnline agreed to look past the strangely exact pattern followed by each of the players that lost their balances to LoadNukes: the same amount of cash via the same method, an oddly lesser, exact amount transferred to the poker room and quickly lost, should the players be able to verify their accts. Could all be coincidental, could be friends paying someone back (would explain the equal amounts if dividing a debt four ways) and afraid that an admission would warrant a larger seizure ... but it doesn't really matter, the ********** risk is great enough where it's the sound business decision the sportsbook must make to protect itself, for the reasons mentioned earlier.

The rest of LoadNukes balance is not in dispute, and if she'd like to review the hands formally, BetOnline has no issues with it. Hopefully this one is put to rest soon, we'll update as the player receives payment.