Receiving L$ from a person for unknown reasons

I'm currently receiving L$ from an unknown individual for unknown reasons.

I tried to contact the individual, but he/she does not reply. I would be all fine with "donations", but i suspect these funds CAN have unclean sources. Who do i contact at LL to get a verification of the source of these funds ? AND can they destroy the object IF it turns out to be "unclean" ?

Go to the Support page and put in a ticket if you're concerned about the source.

any unwanted funds you recieve you can send my way if you really don't want them! hehe

As Ann says, but also pay the money back.

Might want to wait on paying the money back until you have heard back from support. Just in case there is something fishy going on, you don't really want a stream of money going both to and from that other av.

EDIT: heehee, I'm faster then Dakota is, I'm faster then Dakota is, I'm faster then Dakota is, I'm faster then Dakota is WHEEEEEEE!

Wait! I would recommend NOT paying the money back, until your support ticket from LL is answered. Somebody could be gambling on your returning "mistakenly paid" Lindens as a kind of laundering scheme.

Ok, I'm probably being dim, but money laundering scheme? Calm down bugsy..

SL is a closed system, every inworld financial transaction goes through the same application and can easily be tracked by LL. If nothing else they can be tracked by the extraordinarily sophisticated method of logging into both party's account and clicking the Transaction History link.

Log the call with LL, return the money and let LL work it out. At the end of the day, I suspect the OP is going to be spending money elsewhere in LL which will actually make the accounting more complex.

A straightforward nil balance in and out, much easier. If in fact the FBI were about the kick in the door..

It's also possible they've done a typo, or selected the wrong person, and should be paying someone with a similar name to yours. Easily done, but careless.

But, as was said, log a ticket and don't pay it back, unless you're advised to by a Linden.

You betcha there are money laundering schemes here. LL has a history of suspending/terminating accounts for even buying $L from shady sources.

I would hope LL's risk prevention isnt so sensitive that paying the money back would get you in trouble ..

That would be a bit Over-protective, wouldn't it?.

Thanks all for the suggestions,

I did write an essay to support about this, i strongly suspect this item is a commission based slot machine i did before the gambling ban took place. As such, if any of you see a gambling device and my name as the creator, i would appreciate if you either report to me or report the owner to LL.

Money laundering, huh? Interesting!

Let's perform an experiment: somebody send me a bunch of money, I'll launder it and send it back.

I, of course, can't be held responsible for any "shrinkage" that occurs while it's in the dryer. Guessing that'll be around 15% (or more, depending if I find some new hair I like).

Again, I'm happy to be proved wrong, but in my view a "laundering" scheme is actually more likely to be foiled by handing back the exact value to the source. As in most things, context is king and if both transactions are inworld, facilitated by the "PAY" button, here's how I see it working.

Example A.

Avatar 1 pays Avatar 2 L$1000.

Avatar 2 says "what the hell is this?", tells LL what's happened and immediately hands the L$1000 back.

SL Transaction history shows a net nil balance transaction between 2 identified parties.

Example B.

Avatar 1 pays Avatar 2 LS1000.

Avatar 2 says "what the hell is this?" and tells LL what happened.

In the meantime, he keeps the L$1000 and proceeds to then credit other accounts to various values as he goes about his daily business.

In my experience (which I admit is scant), the success of an electronic laundering scheme depends on the complexity and length of the trail. If nothing else it depends on the very basic method of varying the transaction volumes.

Unless you're talking about real currency, in which case this sort of basic technique works because you split up and lose the serial numbers.

I actually think handing the money back in this context makes LL's job easier and actually minimises the OP's exposure to the charge of suspicious behaviour.

***

Actually even in RL hard currency terms, the OP's exposure is minimized. If he hands back the exact notes he receives.

/em receives L$1000 from someone named 'Atticus Scribe'.

Janelle: "What the hell is this?"

/em sends L$850 back.

Janelle: "Ooo, ponytails!

Well alright, as long as you don't mind that the money came from smuggling contraband copies of Emmeline Pankhurst's autobiography into Gor..

I'm not sure about RICO in the US, but in the UK you could get locked up for 5 years if you paid back any money (however small) that might be considered part of a laundering scheme, even if you do it innocently. Hell, you can be locked up for that long if you have any cause to suspect that someone else might be laundering and don't report it to the authorities.

Pep (Dumb laws, but don't kill the messenger)

it could be an attempt of griefing, if the L$ were bought with stolen credit card data or somthing, you're under the risk of loosingup to 150% of what they paid you so far, you heard right, LL may take away from your account more than the ammount they can prove you received from an illegal source

(you might even endup with a negative balance depending on how much you got and how much they've paid you)

it is not mentioned there how to act when you receieve th money (it says to not accept it, but there is no way to not accept money) :/

Yes, I know. I'd love some clarification on this. I suppose the important thing is to tell them, whether you pay back the money or not.

Send them the 100 pairs of white socks they ordered

Ok, I'm no lawyer but this sounds like the usual old "Pile of Poop from Pep".

Obviously I'd be happy to be educated by citation of statute or case law, rather than bald assertion from an unverified talking head.

As a business owner who has certain responsibilities under the new 2007 act (in the UK), all I really know without recourse to qualified legal advice is this is a very complex area of the law which has already lead to the Law Lords being pulled off the golf courses of England more than once.

To reiterate, context and intention would be key in any of these instances, and seriously an unsolicited receipt of a few L$ via inworld payment isn't even in the same ball park.

This is the usual old SL hyperbole, where people like to dramatise and overestimate the importance of an unplanned bout of flatulence.

Let's get back to the real world Pep.

Let's say you receive an amount from a 3rd party into your bank account, to which you're not entitled. Now I'd like you to try holding onto that amount while you wait for the "outcome of your report to the authorities".

I know at times the real world feels a long way away when you spend as much time in SL as some of us do, but pull yourself together for goodness sake.

Report the instances to LL, send the money back via the same means as you received it, and leave your fantasy of being the next Ronnie Biggs at the door.

Or don't...engage a solicitor, pay her 150 quid an hour and be prepared to spend at least £450 before she can regain her breath from laughing so much.. your call..

didn't Furtopia got into some serious trouble a while back cause someone had dropped illegal L$ on some of their tipjars?

Maybe not into trouble, but peoples' accounts HAVE been frozen when they've been involved (however indirectly) in transfers of money that might've been ill-gotten. When the investigation is complete, LL may or may not decide to unfreeze the account depending on what they've decided.

Not paying the money back until you've asked LL if it's OK is just a prudent way of removing yourself from the circle of suspicion if one ends up being created.

I accept that SL may be used for the purposes of "money laundering", it's unregulated and transnational.

If you keep the money for any length of time after reporting the situation to LL, but continue to debit your account in favour of others.. that's when you drop yourself up to the neck in it.

If you don't pay the money back immediately, then you have to freeze your account yourself.

The time spent to investigate your part in any activity will increase proportionately with the complexity of the money trail which flows through your account.

Receive an unsolicited L$1000, pay it immediately back and inform LL.. you're done.

If you don't return it and LL responds within minutes to your query, then fine, it all works out the same. The reality is though, you'll be left holding the baby for a few days.

If LL subsequently assess the situation as suspicious then every little penny you spend will be open to scrutiny, unless you can show them a single transaction for the same value going back whence it came.

As an example, you receive L$1000, you inform LL but then spend L$500 on a new pair of jammies, another L$300 on shoes, and L$200 tipping your favourite DJ. Just take a guess about what and who needs to be investigated by LL before you're cleared.

Now take the example I'm suggesting. You receive L$1000, you send back the L$1000. Where do you think the investigation goes?

If you really want to cover your *arse and get on with your life, you reverse any suspicious transactions immediately AND talk to LL.

Anyway, I'm sure it will all come out in the wash.. so to speak..