Right. What confused me the most was being asked what address I would like it sent back to and if the original one was fine. Having replied yes and then not receiving any kind of follow-up until a day later when I was told "unfortunately the bitcoin have already been resold."
I was contacted roughly 6 hours ago by the same support person who added "theres not much we can do. If you'd like to provide a contact number we can get in touch with you to discuss available options." I provided my contact number but never received a call. The most frustrating thing about this is receiving 1 reply per day.
I understand that an error was made on my part. But I have a bill of sale for those coins. I suspect the company took twice the escrow fees with the individual making twice the profit.
Its been 24hrs since you post the first message and this is coming. Your suspicions might be right but how do you prove it? How do you get the other individual that it was sold to in other to have a witness to confirm it? Even if you did get the witness, who do you report to in other to make them pay for their bad business practices. Of course nobody and they know that and that is why they feel comfortable in doing that using your own mistake as an excuse.
However, just like my earlier posts, I would suggest you wait and get your funds back because by the time you involve the police, it then becomes a matter under investigation which they see as another excuse to delay further and the worst that would happen after the investigation is to pay you your funds despite the time that has been wasted. When its obvious they are not ready to honour their last message to you, that when you involve law enforcement agents.
Yes, that's understandable. However I don't believe I need the second individual to prove there was a second purchaser as the support staff's response to me pretty much confirmed that the coins had been resold and that the seller would at the very least need to return the money originally paid to him by me. As far as filing a police report is concerned, I'd primarily be focusing on the seller.
I'm not exactly sure how BitQuick's escrow service works, that being if the seller is capable of releasing coins from escrow themselves or if the seller is ONLY capable of confirming receipt of payment to BitQuick. If it turns out that BitQuick is the only party with control of a hold on funds and that they released them again to a second buyer after a support member made it clear that he could see the funds in one of their wallet addresses, i think it becomes at least slightly more interesting.