Casino.com requesting notarised documents to be sent to Philippines

[tarrix]

After making a cashout I received an e-mail requesting notarised ID&utility bill being sent to some address in the Philippines. Explaing the difficulties that this request creates and asking to accept electronic versions didn`t help.

I believe such a request is just too much. It is of great inconvenience for me and presumably would be such for any other player.
There are several issues:
1. You spend time and money on this. I wouldn`t trust normal post with a notarised copy of my passport, so the only solution is using services like DHL, which cost pretty much. Notarising isn`t free either. I highly doubt that the casino would compensate this.
2. Security issues. I do have an uneasy feeling about entrusting any casino with my notarised documents, which do have legal force, afaik.
3. WHAT are the grounds for such a request. I have played at online casinos for some time and I have never received such a request. Scanned copies sent via e-mail have always been accepted. What is so special about Casino.com that they decide to make so much inconvenience for their players?

I haven`t found a Casino.com rep here to discuss this matter.I hope that Casinomeister can help.

[vinylweatherman]

After making a cashout I received an e-mail requesting notarised ID&utility bill being sent to some address in the Philippines. Explaing the difficulties that this request creates and asking to accept electronic versions didn`t help.

I believe such a request is just too much. It is of great inconvenience for me and presumably would be such for any other player.
There are several issues:
1. You spend time and money on this. I wouldn`t trust normal post with a notarised copy of my passport, so the only solution is using services like DHL, which cost pretty much. Notarising isn`t free either. I highly doubt that the casino would compensate this.
2. Security issues. I do have an uneasy feeling about entrusting any casino with my notarised documents, which do have legal force, afaik.
3. WHAT are the grounds for such a request. I have played at online casinos for some time and I have never received such a request. Scanned copies sent via e-mail have always been accepted. What is so special about Casino.com that they decide to make so much inconvenience for their players?

I haven`t found a Casino.com rep here to discuss this matter.I hope that Casinomeister can help.

This would not be the first time this has happend, but use the PAB, and create a TEST CASE for Max & Bryan to investigate. NO reputable casino should be asking players to POST such information to an address in a country not best known for tight legislation to protect such sensitive data.

Governments would "have a fit" if they realised that PASSPORT copies like this were being POSTED to these destinations. This is even LESS secure than sending files by email, which is itself insecure, and has been implicated in cases where rogue casinos/employees have "leaked" player data.

Bryan CANNOT take action based on mere allegations, so either a PM, or full blown PAB, on the matter will gather enough evidence (or lack of cooperation) to make a decision of where this casino should be listed on this site.

The philipines are known for their "weak" anti money laundering laws, and ewallets often "ban" players from these countries.

Players from such countries are also under much greater scrutiny.

IF you POST these documents to the Philipines, this is where your data is going to be received, handled, and stored. The data will be handled under Philipine data protection laws, NOT those of YOUR country.

I am guessing that casino.com is Playtech, who are listed here in the UK, so should really be handling sensitive "customer" data in the UK (or at least a country with similar levels of protection) - or are our data handling laws too restrictive for them

There has yet (to my knowledge) to be a case where a player has posted documents to Playtech in the Philipines, had the post "disappear" in transit, and the documents later turn up in the hands of criminals, or worse - terrorists. THIS is the major concern, and it has ALREADY happened in ISRAEL, causing a souring of UK-Israeli relations. The passport copies in this case were used to create false passports, which were then used by an assassination squad to "dispose" of an annoyance to the state of Israel. Blunders meant they got caught, and the link to stolen UK passports exposed.

[love2winalot]

Hiya: Not to derail the topic, but next time someone says that the philippines, in 2010, has weak anti money laundering laws, "like back in 1980" maybe they should go there and see for themself first?

They are more strick than anything the US has to offer. Even $ Cash deposits into banks are held for 48-72 hours before you can touch it. You can xchange money at a bank, but, can not deposit the money into the bank until the next day.........and on and on like this. If a bank in America had these restrictions, they would be broke within a week.

Now, I agree, documents should never have to be sent, "Any where", via normal mail. That is just plain un acceptable. Bodog uses people to process money thru Western Union in the philippines. However, they do not require you to send any documents there.

[vinylweatherman]

Hiya: Not to derail the topic, but next time someone says that the philippines, in 2010, has weak anti money laundering laws, "like back in 1980" maybe they should go there and see for themself first?

They are more strick than anything the US has to offer. Even $ Cash deposits into banks are held for 48-72 hours before you can touch it. You can xchange money at a bank, but, can not deposit the money into the bank until the next day.........and on and on like this. If a bank in America had these restrictions, they would be broke within a week.

Now, I agree, documents should never have to be sent, "Any where", via normal mail. That is just plain un acceptable. Bodog uses people to process money thru Western Union in the philippines. However, they do not require you to send any documents there.

Unfortunately, old impressions die hard. Will Neteller now accept you as a customer?
This is what came up before, and the excuse from Neteller at the time for blanket banning customers from the Phillipines was "weak anti money laundering laws".
It seems the Phillipines have listened, and tightened things up.

What about data protection laws though, and the security of the mail between arriving in the Phillipines, and arriving at these verification offices run by Playtech. These documents are PASSPORTS, so it is not just players you have to convince, but GOVERNMENTS.

Playtech are a listed company, so if anything went wrong with this process, the news & scandal could demolish their shares.

[slotplayer]

if there was no fraud there would be reason to hold cash deposits for 48-72 hours.

[liquuid_fusion]

I had a large win last year at Casino.com and had to send a notarised copy of my passport to an address in Gibraltar.

They were not overly professional about it - I requested by email and in the covering letter that they immediately confirm receipt of the copy, but they never did. They paid my win though, no problems.

[vinylweatherman]

I had a large win last year at Casino.com and had to send a notarised copy of my passport to an address in Gibraltar.

They were not overly professional about it - I requested by email and in the covering letter that they immediately confirm receipt of the copy, but they never did. They paid my win though, no problems.

At least this stays within the UK (Gibraltar being a UK dependency). Sending by post is not secure though, and it seems casinos do NOT take the issue of security as seriously as they should. Where documents are "lost", casinos simply ask the player to "send them again", but do NOT seem overly concerned with investigating WHERE the original "lost" documents ended up.

Casinos CANNOT adhere to ANY data handling procedures on documents they have LOST, can they?

The above case CLEARLY demonstrated their attitude, they don't feel it important that they aknowledge safe receipt, leaving the player to ASSUME the documents arrived OK on the basis that they got paid.

Casinos also overestimate their importance in the greater scheme of things. Whilst sending such documents through the post MIGHT be expected when dealing with a LARGE estate, it is NOT necessary when doing nothing more than transacting with a BUSINESS online.

I have opened online bank accounts, and there has been no need to send such documents, only to sign a form sent to me through the post, and sending it back, as final confirmation of my address, and that I agree to the terms.

Casinos tend to wait until players request a withdrawal before telling them they have to send documents through the post. It is then TOO LATE for the player to take their business elsewhere, since they have to take the risk just to close their current position with the casino (in other words, get their money out), only THEN can they express their disatisfaction by closing their accounts & playing elsewhere.

Currently, governments know little or nothing about this kind of thing going on, else they would be issuing warnings of the kind issued to those going on holiday about letting hotels have their passports "for safe keeping".

The warning is "Don't hand your passport over to the hotel, nor let them make a copy of it". It is OK to SHOW it to them, but you should NOT let them take it away, even for a short time.
A similar warning has been given out by banks with regard to credit/debit cards, although providing copies with the middle 8 digits and security code blacked out prevents the copy from being used for fraud.

IF a big incident is traced back to the way casinos handle and store documents, it could set the industry back YEARS, with some governments telling other, more liberal ones, "told you so". The industry has powerful enemies who will relish such an opportunity, and are bound to exaggerate a molehill into a mountain to further their cause.

[P.V.]

After making a cashout I received an e-mail requesting notarised ID&utility bill being sent to some address in the Philippines. Explaing the difficulties that this request creates and asking to accept electronic versions didn`t help.

I believe such a request is just too much. It is of great inconvenience for me and presumably would be such for any other player.
There are several issues:
1. You spend time and money on this. I wouldn`t trust normal post with a notarised copy of my passport, so the only solution is using services like DHL, which cost pretty much. Notarising isn`t free either. I highly doubt that the casino would compensate this.
2. Security issues. I do have an uneasy feeling about entrusting any casino with my notarised documents, which do have legal force, afaik.
3. WHAT are the grounds for such a request. I have played at online casinos for some time and I have never received such a request. Scanned copies sent via e-mail have always been accepted. What is so special about Casino.com that they decide to make so much inconvenience for their players?

I haven`t found a Casino.com rep here to discuss this matter.I hope that Casinomeister can help.

http://www.casino.com/about/withdrawal.html

[winbig]

http://www.casino.com/about/withdrawal.html

How is that relevant at all? Even the methods of sending docs in says nothing about sending stuff to the Philippines, unless Gibraltar migrated over that way. and of course there's no mention of having to have any documents notarized.

(1) Email to docs@casino.com
(2) Fax to +44 871 900 6966
(3) Post to Casino.com Member Service, PO Box 1240, Gibraltar

oh yea, definitely send docs to some PO Box.

[P.V.]

How is that relevant at all? Even the methods of sending docs in says nothing about sending stuff to the Philippines, unless Gibraltar migrated over that way. and of course there's no mention of having to have any documents notarized.



oh yea, definitely send docs to some PO Box.

I totally agree with everything you pointed out Win Big. I thought I'd post a link from their website showing a different address and an additional unsecure way for tarrix to send documents to them by email. Again I agree with you, just pointing out what the website says verses the other address by tarrix.

You obviously haven't read any of my replies or you'd know I'm on your side and that I don't like these procedures either. Enough said. VinylWeatherman appears to be on top of this and a to him.