QuatroCasino (aka CasinoRewards ) VS momchildobrev

**Bencuri** · 4th August 2011, 09:42 PM

I have just checked my Casino Action account at Casino Rewards, in case I want to add a different e-mail address to withdraw to than the one I used for depositing (registered at Moneybookers), the system doesn't change it. So how was he able to initiate a withdrawal to an e-mail he hasn't registered before?

**Casinomeister** · 4th August 2011, 09:51 PM

Hi Bencuri,

Don't get all hung up about the name change thing.

Please reread my post where I said:

As far as I can tell, there was a misunderstanding between Renee and the Fraud team, perhaps she can clarify this, but I'll try to explain it since she's on Australia time and it might be awhile before she can get back to this.

Renee knew that the fraud team was in contact with MB, and she knew they were also looking at the screen shot in the thread. They said "he changed his name" but this was referring to the screenshot - this was not the MB account that the player had originally tried to make a withdrawal to. (the fraud team's English isn't that good from what I gather)

So she interpreted this as Moneybookers confirming a name change - which in fact they didn't.

There is a big difference of being mistaken and lying about something. And with this case, it doesn't change the fact that this guy had committed fraud.

**Bencuri** · 4th August 2011, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by Casinomeister

Hi Bencuri,

Don't get all hung up about the name change thing.

Please reread my post where I said:

There is a big difference of being mistaken and lying about something. And with this case, it doesn't change the fact that this guy had committed fraud.

Sorry Meister, but it is still not correct. Because what did Renée said?:

'As I said to him, moneybookers has confirmed with our fraud team that you changed the name '

Did MB confirm this? No. So she reported something that is not ture, so what shall I call that then if not lie.

The problem with that you want to say is that it would only stand if Renée would have said: 'The fraud team confirmed you changed your name.'

These are two different things.

And why did Renée say she managed to change her name? The team reported a name change, okay she misunderstood it, okay we say on our side to this, but huh, what a surprise, ther is this other lie happening. Or she misunderstood what she personally did? Even if there was a misunderstanding on the info from the fraud team, I doubt she would misunderstood what she personally tried to do. Or she did something with her MB account, and she missunderstood it as 'name changed'? I doubt she would misunderstood what she did. And if she gets a confirmation from the fruad team, she doesn't need to change anything on her account. So what is that test of changing for? This also proved she was not telling the truth and it is quite messy what she's replying. Even if the OP is fraudster, she behaved in a questionable manner.

And how did the player managed to initiate a withdrawal when the Cashier doesn't let withdrawals to an e-mail that was not used for depositing? I have just tried this option, but it doesn't work. If you log in to the cashier, it offers changing the moneybookers e-mail to withdraw to, but it doesn't allow it for previously unused e-mails (I mean that you didn't use for depositing).

I don't think it is fair that you try to make it seem as if the case was closed under such circumstances. Think of the following, what if it would have happened like this:

1. The player starts the thread.
2. Renée replies, saying you changed your name, our fraud team confirmed it.
3. It turns out the player wanted to withdraw to a different account.

It is quite different then what happened:

1. The player starts the thread.
2. Renée replies MB confirmed the name change. She says she changed her name on MB.
3. The player tried to withdraw to another account, however the cahsier seems not to allow to initiate withdrawals this way.

In the first case I would accept your wish to close the case, but even if the player is really a fraudster in reality, with such messy replies from the Reps, we should make this case more clear. So why don'T you allow him just to prove he didn't initiate withdrawal to another account. If he fails then, okay, we can surely say he was a fraudster, but without that this case remains quite strange. Maybe alone as a case it would not, but considering the previous problems with CasinoRewards, it does.

**Casinomeister** · 4th August 2011, 10:45 PM

Sorry Bencuri, but you just don't get it. The casino has evidence of the guy committing fraud via the Moneybookers accounts. I'm not going to go into this any further.

If this bothers you, then my apologies. But I'm going to say any more on this - that's up to the casino rep to deal with. This player has exploited the forum with a bogus claim, and I refuse to let people like this pollute the forum with their garbage.

He is free to post to his heart's content elsewhere; it just ain't happening here. He is also free to submit his complaint to Tex Rees at eCOGRA. I am positively certain he will be treated fairly there.

**Bencuri** · 4th August 2011, 11:02 PM

But Meister, what fraud actually he commited? We don't even know that! So how could we make sure he is a fraudster when we don't even know what he commited? You say he wanted to withdraw to another account, but how if the cashier doesn't allow it? I am not saying it is not possible at all that the info you got from the casino cannot be correct, but this case is by far not clear, and closing the case at a point it stands now won't reflect a clear picture, and this way I am kind of disappointed, because I don't think it corresponds fully with the Meister's Mission.

I am sorry, but I am unable to draw a concusion that this is a fraudster OP with these added:

1. Renée says she has confirmation from MB that the player changed name. -1
2. Renée says she changed the name on her account in 1 day. It is quite a suspicious claim. And why would she do that when she already has the confirmation from the staff. -1
3. The player is accused of committing a fraud, of that we only know he wanted to withdraw to another account. That's all. But the cashier seems not to allow such transactions to be initiated anyway. -1

So as you see, what we have here is that on one side there are questionable replies from the OP, of that it clearly proved that the nr1 was unture, possibly nr2 as well. And there is nr3 that seems impossible. And of the final reason for the fraud we know simply nothing. And on the other side we have a player with a proof to defend himself against an accusation in nr1.

So the guy whom you call a fraudster presented something which can be a proof at least in a way, but on the casino side we only have untrue statements and an unclear reason for fraud, that the operation of the cashier denies so far. Under this circumstance I cannot really accept that you banned that user. Okay, he posted that bullshit after you banned him, but well, as you see the presented proofs against him are dodgy, so I am not surprised he behaved that way when you banned him because of those dodgy accusations. Anyway don't misunderstand me, I don't say that you allow yourself rely on dodgy info, I just want to say that from the posts here it didn't reveal clearly that the player is fraudster, yet he is banned, and this doesn't reflect that the forum is credible. Do you think that with these facts on the two sides that I presented, we can say 100% that the player is fraudster? I doubt...

**Casinomeister** · 4th August 2011, 11:11 PM

Like I said, I'm not going to discuss this any further. The information I have been provided constitutes fraud.

If the casino wants to explain this in further detail - they are free to do so.

I have also stated that this person can submit his complaint to eCOGRA.

That's it - and I think that's pretty fair.

**Bencuri** · 4th August 2011, 11:28 PM

It may only be fair to you, but not for us, readers. And also not to those who already had problems with Casino Rewards. You have the right not to say more about it and ban the user for your sake, but what is the use of this forum then? There is an OP, he is accused by a rep, it turns out the accusation is untrue, the OP also presents proof that the accusation is fake, this all corresponds with what the OP claimed. So all in all, everything the OP said so far was proved to be true, the reps word proved to be untrue, yet, you banned him. This is what simply happened. Okay, you have that new reason for calling him fraudster, but he was already accused fraudster before, he proved that he is not, so with this background I cannot really believe at this stage that he is a fraudster and with this background he would deserve at least that he may prove us that he is not a liar.

With these considered, what is the use of this forum then? The OPs present problems, and you ban them before we could see the case clearly, letting us know nothing. Even if it was the OP so far whose words turned out to be true. That is quite disappointing. How does this correspond to the Meister's Mission? From this thread the only conclusion that can be drawn is that without making the case clear the Meister decides the case is solved in favour of one side in the debate, and we don't have the right to see clearly. Is this what can be called credibility? Someone proves he was accused with untrue things, he is accused again, and for the new accusation, he is banned, however he was the only one so far who presented proof. I doubt this is what credibility is.

I don't say Miester that you cannot be right and the player may not be a fraudster, but with such acts what is the use of this forum then? Do you think this way the forum can be called credible?

**Casinomeister** · 5th August 2011, 12:01 AM

Either you have not been reading my posts, or I have not made myself clear.

Renee admitted she was mistaken when she said that Moneybookers said the name was changed on the MB account. It was the Fraud Team that said that the name (account user) was changed. Please go back and read that post. It was a simple misunderstanding and the OP ran with that trying to show that he never changed the MB account name. What he did was use more than one MB account with his casino account, and he got caught out.

The guy committed fraud at the casino - simple as that. If you want all the gory details, you're not going to get them from me - you can either wait for the casino rep to explain this, or take my word for it.

I really don't appreciate being badgered here. I suggest you back off.

**Bencuri** · 5th August 2011, 01:13 AM

Well I read your posts, and as I wrote I acknowledge that there was a misunderstanding between Renée and the fraud department. But this is still no reason why she had to say that she tried changing her own (Renée's) name in her Moneybookers account, and she could do it. That is quite impossible, moreover what was the use of trying it when she already had the info from the fraud team that MB confirmed the name change? Okay, she misinterpreted the info received, but she had the info, so why accusing the player then with the another thing as well, that she tried changing her name on her account, and it can be done. So with this twist, even if I'd believe that Renée misinterpreted the info from the fraud team alone, with this twist added the responses seems messy alltogether.

So in such a mess, I can also imagine this: Renée tried to threaten the player, she said they have info from MB on the name change, she said she tried to change her account name and she could, so the OP should remain silent. Then on the other hand OP presented proof, so CR came up with a new fake reason, and in the end the OP was banned. Is there proof against that it didn't happen like this? The only proof so far was presented by the OP whom you banned, while that proof was corresponding to the previous claims of the OP.

I can understand that you don't like what I am writing, but accoarding to common sense the case seems like this. And there is no lie if I write such summaries that I wrote before. So far, we, readers, met responses from the Rep, they turned out to be untrue, we met the claims of the OP, and it was proved the claim is true. So far the OP was the only one whose words turned out to be credible, who presented proof, and the Rep was the one who turned out to be saying untrue things. Yet the OP who presented the proof was banned. Excuse me, but I am unable to conclude credibility of the forum accoarding to this, if I imagine I am an outsider, I come here, and read the thread. The only conclusion I can draw is that the OP presented proof, yet he was banned. Okay, he was accused of something else later, but why didn't you wait until he makes a new move? At least what he claimed first was credible, yet you don't give him a chance. But you give a chance to the info from CR, when so far they turned out to be liars. Okay, maybe they are not, there was misunderstanding, etc., but so far there is no proof here presented on their side but only messy responses.

And by the way, Meister, can you describe us how is it possible to cheat the casino the way the player did it? It seems the cashier doesn't allow to withdraw to an e-mail you haven't used before to deposit. I deposited to Casino Action in the past, I have just tried to change the direction of the withdrawal to a different e-mail, and the cashier doesn't change to the newly added one, only the old one is allowed that I used to deposit. So how could the player initiate a withdrawal to a secondary account?

I think the OP should be given a chance to get a confirmation from MB that he doesn't use 2 accounts, that I guess is illegal at MB anyway.

**Nifty29** · 5th August 2011, 02:17 AM

Originally Posted by Bencuri

Well I read your posts, and as I wrote I acknowledge that there was a misunderstanding between Renée and the fraud department. But this is still no reason why she had to say that she tried changing her own (Renée's) name in her Moneybookers account, and she could do it. That is quite impossible, moreover what was the use of trying it when she already had the info from the fraud team that MB confirmed the name change? Okay, she misinterpreted the info received, but she had the info, so why accusing the player then with the another thing as well, that she tried changing her name on her account, and it can be done. So with this twist, even if I'd believe that Renée misinterpreted the info from the fraud team alone, with this twist added the responses seems messy alltogether.

So in such a mess, I can also imagine this: Renée tried to threaten the player, she said they have info from MB on the name change, she said she tried to change her account name and she could, so the OP should remain silent. Then on the other hand OP presented proof, so CR came up with a new fake reason, and in the end the OP was banned. Is there proof against that it didn't happen like this? The only proof so far was presented by the OP whom you banned, while that proof was corresponding to the previous claims of the OP.

I can understand that you don't like what I am writing, but accoarding to common sense the case seems like this. And there is no lie if I write such summaries that I wrote before. So far, we, readers, met responses from the Rep, they turned out to be untrue, we met the claims of the OP, and it was proved the claim is true. So far the OP was the only one whose words turned out to be credible, who presented proof, and the Rep was the one who turned out to be saying untrue things. Yet the OP who presented the proof was banned. Excuse me, but I am unable to conclude credibility of the forum accoarding to this, if I imagine I am an outsider, I come here, and read the thread. The only conclusion I can draw is that the OP presented proof, yet he was banned. Okay, he was accused of something else later, but why didn't you wait until he makes a new move? At least what he claimed first was credible, yet you don't give him a chance. But you give a chance to the info from CR, when so far they turned out to be liars. Okay, maybe they are not, there was misunderstanding, etc., but so far there is no proof here presented on their side but only messy responses.

And by the way, Meister, can you describe us how is it possible to cheat the casino the way the player did it? It seems the cashier doesn't allow to withdraw to an e-mail you haven't used before to deposit. I deposited to Casino Action in the past, I have just tried to change the direction of the withdrawal to a different e-mail, and the cashier doesn't change to the newly added one, only the old one is allowed that I used to deposit. So how could the player initiate a withdrawal to a secondary account?

I think the OP should be given a chance to get a confirmation from MB that he doesn't use 2 accounts, that I guess is illegal at MB anyway.

You need to let it rest.

Everything has been explained, but you continue to ignore it and keep repeating the same thing.

The rep MAY have been confused initially, but that it what happens when a player tries to defraud a casino. She clarified why she said what she did.

So, the rep made a mistake - the OP committed fraud. Can you not see the difference?

Do you know this momchil person? Or is this personal against casino rewards, given your sour history with them? Whichever it is, you're heading down a path you may live to regret....and I offer that advice in good faith.