Well I can tell you this we recieved that email on 3/31/04.But the twist that pissed us off was the actually suspened our account.
Verotel,never gave us any warning that we were not complaint and Believe we are because we also use ccbill and had satified them with our sites.
Verotel will pull your account without notice,but they hate it when our lawyers slap them silly for doing stupid shit.
We were awarte of the transparency letter we got and took care of it.The main reason we decided to put most of the funds with them for processing was they didn't have knuckle heads doing stupid shit like ccbill.
We were in fact the first to change or name before and i mean months visa came down on the word l****a,but kept school hehe we have always been kinda proactive but you'd be surprised the shit they come up with .
And HELL NO theres nothing underage or has ever been on or sites.
We have yet to get a response also from them we just tell the members t ocancel demand a refund and use the other billing company or change it back.Lets see what happens from here but we're pretty much done with them after 3yrs of service.
Don't know if I should but what the hell heres a letter haha
Dear PJ:
This email correspondence is sent in follow up to my client’s initial response to your notice of funds withholding. It appears that your company may be in breach of its duties to remit the appropriate funds to our client in accordance with your fiduciary obligations as a billing processor. If you have any evidence that our client has posted any illegal or underage content, please forward links immediately for our review and further action. We take any allegations of involvement with child pornography very seriously, and intend to investigate this matter to the fullest extent. If, on the other hand, there is no evidence of underage content, such allegations may be considered defamatory, and subject to a demand for retraction, or further formal action.
If the basis for withholding of funds is premised upon ‘virtual’ underage content, or models who are over the age of 18, but who appear to be younger, such content should not form the basis for any concern on the part of Verotel or Visa/MC. It has been conclusively held by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Free Speech Coalition v. Ashcroft case, that sexually-oriented material involving young-looking adults is fully protected by the First Amendment. Aside from this constitutional protection, there would be no workable set of criteria that could be developed to determine whether our client was operating within Verotel’s tolerance levels relating to such content. In other words, your classification of simulated underage content could well be different than mine or anyone else’s classification, due to the lack of any written guidelines or criteria to determine same. If you have received instructions from Visa/MC relating to young-looking adult content, please forward a copy of those regulations to my attention, along with a list of links to any content that you contend violate those regulations.
Frankly, it defies logic and common sense for Verotel to simply claim that illegal content exists on our client’s site, and, without any evidence or opportunity to respond, announce that your company intends to penalize our client by suspending the account and withholding funds for a period of 6 months. Such actions, at the very least, will be considered a violation of your bailment responsibilities relating to the subject funds, and may give rise to claims for conversion or civil theft. It is our hope that this matter can be resolved amicably, in accordance with reasonable business practices and procedures. Accordingly, please feel free to contact me to discuss a negotiated resolution of this matter.
Sincerely.
/s/
Lawrence G. Walters, Esq.
Weston, Garrou & DeWitt
www.FirstAmendment.com
781 Douglas Ave.
Altamonte Springs, FL 32714
407.389.4529