Lock Poker Spokesman Alleges Revolution Network Misuse of Player Funds
In response to media inquiries and FlushDraw’s extensive report on the fallout between Lock Poker and the Revolution Gaming Network, Lock Poker spokesman Shane Bridges has sent a response to FlushDraw indicating that the beleaguered online site plans to go forward with legal action of some form against Revolution and parent entities IAA Services Ltd. and/or BTG Global N.V., once all parties have been identified.
At issue is an alleged player hijacking attempt by Revolution using a placeholder skin, Pure Poker, that was set up to receive player login requests from Lock Poker customers who attempted to connect to Revolution to play, perhaps unaware that Lock departed Revolution amid messy circumstances and has relaunched itself as LockPoker 2.0 as a standalone entity.
Lock’s departure from Revolution stands separate from Lock’s own failure to pay an immense backlog of worldwide player withdrawal requests, though the fingerpointing as to who’s to blame between Lock and Revolution continues unabated on both sides. Over $400,000 in long-term, unpaid withdrawal requests continues to be documented by a single player keeping track on the 2+2 discussion forums, and it’s possible several millions in again withdrawal requests have gone unpaid by Lock.
In a lengthy e-mailed statement directly to this writer, Lock spokesman Shane Bridges stated, “As you note in your most recent article on FlushDraw the persons who are using the Pure Poker site in a blatant attempt to take Lock players using false and misleading promises, have gone to great lengths to hide their identity. We are continuing to work to try to confirm the actual persons controlling the companies that are being used to hide behind.”
Bridges identified another corporate entity used in connection with the Revolution Gaming poker network services, IAA Services, Ltd. That entity has surfaced only briefly in a Gambling911 piece in which G911 — a major Lock affiliate itself — published a claim by Lock of “51 instances of unscheduled downtime and an additional 81 service failures since Lock joined the [Revolution] network.”
That piece also indicated that Lock had filed, on October 20th, a formal Dispute Resolution Process with the Curacao regulatory authorities supposedly in charge of overseeing both Revolution Gaming and Lock Poker itself. However, the Curacao Gaming Commission and its online offshoot, the Curacao Internet Gaming Association (CIGA), are generally regarded within the online gaming industry as easily obtainable, rubber-stamp regulators of little regard and inconsequential regulatory reach. In other words, Lock itself may find its hopes of securing a claim for the financial damages it alleges every bit as difficult as Lock’s own players have been in finding a jurisdiction that will address their complaints.
However, the disintegrating situation between Lock and Revolution bears close monitoring. According to Bridges:
“In any Court action the very first step is to properly identify all the proper and necessary parties. This process in turn will then lead to a determination of the proper forum within which to bring a claim as there must be some real and substantial connection between the forum and the defendant or the forum and the subject matter of the dispute. I do anticipate that we will be bringing a civil action as against the CEO of the Revolution Network personally, as well as against BTG Global N.V. and, there may be more defendants as our investigations progress. Once we confirm who all the defendants are we can determine where the Court action should be commenced.
“In terms of the issues as between Lock and the operator of the Revolution Network – being IAA Services Ltd. – the parties are bound by a Dispute Resolution process that could eventually lead to an arbitration being conducted in Curacao. Lock’s counsel sent formal notice that Lock was invoking this process on October 20th and to this point there has been no response to this from IAA Services Ltd. In the end we expect there will be a substantial sum owing to Lock and suspect this is why the other party is ignoring all attempts to start this process.”
Bridges continued with the following:
“The Revolution Network CEO has been making untrue and defamatory statements about Lock – specifically alleging that it has failed to make player transfer payments – for some time now. We are confident that ultimately these statements will also be exposed as lies and an attempt to cover up the actions taken by the network operator – specifically the misuse of player funds.
“I can confirm that a formal complaint regarding the conduct of Pure Poker and the Revolution Network has been made to the licensing authority in Curacao – as they license IAA Services Ltd. – and we understand their Compliance Department has an investigation ongoing at this time. Revolution (being IAA Services Ltd.), has claimed to us in writing that ‘The site in question is not operated by the network.’ However, as you note in your article this is simply not true.
Thank you for exposing the deception being perpetrated on players by Pure Poker and the Revolution Network. Their web of lies are already starting to unravel as noted by the 2+2 poster you quote in your article….”
FlushDraw has been promised a copy of any formal legal claim filed by Lock Poker against Revolution, whether in Curacao or elsewhere. FlushDraw is also working to verify the identity of the “Revolution Network CEO” blind-referenced by Bridges in his statement, in addition to providing an expanded list of corporate and online entities connected to Revolution Gaming, Pure Poker and BTG Global. One earlier Bridges statement widely published on poker forums mentioned “Pure Play,” a separate entity wholly unconnected to the Revolution Network mudslinging; Pure Play has no connection to the Lock/Revolution situation.