Official announcement by londongold exchange regarding their decision towards Intgold

serenity14 · #1 10-19-2005, 04:22 PM

Hi XXXXX

Thanks for your e-mail.

I have just had a read of the thread at talkgold.com and although amazed at
the furore our decision has caused, I am not surprised at the different
opinions of a seemingly experienced cross section of Digital Currency users.

We know there is a lot at stake with each Digital Currency and people hang
to every rumour and comment. We have to ignore most of this as it tends to
get in the way of our day to day business. You may have noticed we don't
contribute to forums nor advertise HYIP's nor advertise (knowingly) on HYIP
web sites etc as we try to keep our distance and at least attempt to be
independent and diplomatic. With this in mind, we did not intend to make
waves with INTGold. We have actually had a successful business relationship
over the last few years and have exchanged an incredible amount of currency.
We have seen, but ignored the bad publicity, the scam warnings and various
other negative INTGold feedback as we did not seem to be affected. We
adhered originally to their requests for ID when we first became an
exchanger. We adhered to their request for ID when they suddenly changed to
verification levels a few months back. We have also adhered, to their latest
request, but this time were not prepared to wait weeks before the actual ID
was accepted. We had to wonder, when would it happen again?
We have 4 operating INTGold accounts and it is painful when you can't send
out orders from any of them for days on end, because of restrictions that
you should not be experiencing.
But for me, that is not the major issue. The final straw was that we were
never advised when things like this were going to happen. We have tens of
$1000's of USD coming in to the accounts and tens of $1000s also going out,
we have cash flow to predict, orders to line up, promised timescales to
stick to and most importantly, INTGold customers eagerly awaiting funding of
their accounts. People use us as a trusted exchanger and rely on us to
deliver. I am not prepared to carry on trading on a knife edge. We have
enough problems with fraud, banks, delays, banks, overwhelming demand, and
(did I mention) banks!! So, when suddenly, out of the blue we are unable
once again to transfer or cash out ANY INTGold (well up to the level 2 max,
which lasted about 10 minutes), it really does mess things up.

No reasons, no warning, no nothing. So my gripe is the fact that I cannot do
business with this uncertainty.
I cannot comment on their financial situation, rumours of closure or their
long term commitment as I simply do not know their position, (although it
does add fuel to the fire when things like this happen).

So, to recap, we are not a fraud (as I have read on the forum). We have sent
our ID docs (4 times now) (BTW we have also sent the same docs to allow us
to be an 'official exchanger' to e-gold (including notarized IDS and
contract), e-Bullion, GoldMoney and Pecunix).
We are peeved at their lack of customer support because we are supposed to
be an exchanger, representing and advertising the INTGold name. We just like
to try to be good at what we do and in a difficult industry we don't need
this additional hassle, and nor do our members.

Oh, and for the record, after some UK bank account closures, we now have 3
UK banks and the UK Post Office system as options to purchase Digital
Currency in the UK. Some are in the company name and some in personal names.
It is no secret, the banks (and credit card companies) do not like our
industry so we have to sometimes temporarily use personal accounts to get
around the ever increasing hurdles of opening bank accounts.

I hope this helps to inform your forum members of the facts relating to our
recent decision to suspend INTGold trading.

Best regards

Andy Heron
General Manager
London Gold Exchange
www.londongoldexchange.com
support@londongoldexchange.com

International Digital Gold Currency Trader

CarnivorE · #2 10-19-2005, 04:44 PM

This statement obliterates Ratebygold's theory that LGE refused to comply with Intgold's demands. We didn't really need it to know that Ratebygold is a liar though !

gold-talk · #3 10-19-2005, 04:52 PM

Ratebygold is the same person running Intgold. Sure ratebygold is going to use everything they can to make it look like its everyone else fault and not Intgold.

This note from LGE just shows that Intgold does not have a clue. Messing with the companies that are the front line is just crazy.

CarnivorE · #4 10-19-2005, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Ratebygold is the same person running Intgold.

The more i think about it and the more i wouldn't be surprised if it was the case indeed ! It is amazing that he's the only company who will voice such a strong support towards Intgold while all major exchangers have agreed about the problems they have been encountering while dealing with Intgold.

Quote:

This note from LGE just shows that Intgold does not have a clue. Messing with the companies that are the front line is just crazy.

Without exchangers accepting to deal with them, Intgold will disappear faster than they yet no doubt have already planned.

Phaedrus · #5 10-19-2005, 05:22 PM

This just underscores everything I've said about INTGold. They are the picture you see in the dictionary when you look up "unprofessional."

Can't find the old thread where I lined up the problems they've had since they started, because of the problems with user-specific searches since the new forum was set up. But we can review in brief:

1) E-Bullion threatened legal action for basically ripping off their site

2) Sections of ToS copied and pasted from GoldMoney, edited so poorly they didn't take out terms like "digital gold"

3) It's gold/no wait it's not/no it is again, only now it's gold or USD -- your choice/fûck it it's just USD

4) The disputed corporation status, domain problems etc.

5) Arbitrary changing of terms, lies about legal compliance

6) Immediately reducing the max for a Level 1 account again after a week, most likely because of a run on the bank

7) Changing them yet again

8) Started offering daft 1% per annum term deposits, not exactly confidence-inspiring.

9) ^^^^^ LGE problem, which has been seen by other exchangers too.

Exchangers are the bread and butter of any digital currency. Frankly I hope INTGold keeps pissing off its exchangers.

Phaedrus

Executive · #6 10-19-2005, 06:43 PM

First of all Rate By Gold is NOT IntGold. Nobody from IntGold wastes their time reading posts on message boards.

Second, London Gold Exchange dealt with IntGold for YEARS and they even stated in that update that their problems with them were fairly recent. I feel their reaction was WAY overrated, although clearly not to the extent of some anti-IntGold folks posting here.

I went to LGE's site looking to do an E-Bullion to IntGold exchange a week ago when Trader Jack paid me, and I couldn't. Then I went to GoldNow's site: Same problem. So the only way I could do it was to go to a site that like Trader Jack also runs their own program: E-TradeXchange. ETX charged me over 9% (more than StormPay!!) but it wasn't that much money so I did it. They had the IntGold in my account in 2 hours. It isn't every day I have to exchange one currency for another.

The fact is that IntGold is one of the most reliable and honest currency services online. I know this from my own personal experience as a customer dealing with them for 2 & 1/2 years.

People who have problems with IntGold are those who refused (for whatever reason) to give their true and complete street address & phone number and / or proof of identity to verify their IntGold accounts. Those who don't usually have something to hide.

Some processors have dropped IntGold as a payment option due to misinformation on their part. If they had been in phone contact with IntGold as I have, they would have resolved whatever problems they were experiencing. I've found IG's customer service to be professional and prompt. Maybe it's because I'm small potatoes compared to London Gold Exchange, but that reinforces my point: The fact that IntGold would go out of their way to help me with my account, they will help anyone if you approach them the right way and you are honest with them.

Maybe LGE didn't get on the PHONE because that's the best way to deal with IntGold. But they are in England and IntGold is in Texas. Could it be that LGE is too cheap to make an international phone call? I don't know. Those guys don't like E-mail, and sometimes a phone call does it all!

ratebygold.com · #7 10-19-2005, 06:57 PM

And the issue is between LGE and INtgold. Anyone/Business who wants to stop accepting intgold is their loss. More business for us...

Phaedrus · #8 10-20-2005, 04:52 PM

posted by Executive:

Quote:

People who have problems with IntGold are those who refused (for whatever reason) to give their true and complete street address & phone number and / or proof of identity to verify their IntGold accounts. Those who don't usually have something to hide.

This continues to be about the most puerile argument imaginable in favour of account verification. "Something to hide ..." Pfpht.

If INTGold wants to verify its customers, I think that's super. If INTgold's customers want to be verified, again, I think that's super too. But when INTGold changes their verification rules three times in seven months (twice in ten days!) with never the slightest warning, and then freezes the funds of those who do not comply, and then cites mysteriously hard to locate "legal compliance" issues, then they are acting in an extremely unprofessional manner.

If you can produce ONE example -- one and only one -- of a US bank that changed its terms, froze even one -- just one! -- accountholder's money and did not get sued back to the Stone Age and/or censured/fined by the government I will send you $100.

Consider that official! Make an easy $100 by demonstrating an historical precedent which lends legitimacy to INTGold's decision to freeze its accountholders' money via policy fiat.

(Difficulty: must be policy change, not "frozen by court order" or "CTR issues" or whatever; i.e. must be the same thing INTGold has done and not something with the same net effect)

Quote:

Some processors have dropped IntGold as a payment option due to misinformation on their part. If they had been in phone contact with IntGold as I have, they would have resolved whatever problems they were experiencing.

You can't possibly be seriously suggesting that exchangers who do six and seven figures a year in INTGold exchanges are not in contact with INTGold. Hell, I think my feelings about INTGold are pretty clear and I am probably in better contact with INTGold than most other people. INTGold has an outstanding anti-fraud track record, especially with regards to account hacks. ******* has an outstanding anti-fraud track record, especially with regards to fraudulent debit card transfers. We go together in this regard like peanut butter and bananas.

(Note that I am not officialliy empowered to "speak for *******" and only work with them in the capacity of managing their debit card division. I have no idea how Ragnar feels about INTGold, or peanut butter and banana sandwiches for that matter.)

Quote:

I've found IG's customer service to be professional and prompt. Maybe it's because I'm small potatoes compared to London Gold Exchange, but that reinforces my point:

INTGold would provide better service to you because you do less business with them? This seems logical?

INTGold has very clearly had yet another visit from the Fück-Up Fairy. At least four exchangers -- just the ones I know about -- have had this happen recently. It is very very very obvious that there is some sort of problem there. It is also very very very likely that Jeff & Co. are working on fixing that problem -- but why should it exist in the first place, especially in light of all the other issues that have occurred with INTGold in the last year?

Phaedrus