Cherry Red Issue

[Artico]

Killed the URL

"Cherry Red Casino and Moneybookers: confiscation of winnings and apparent breach of the UK Data Protection Act"

Everyone should read that article.

I was not sure where to post it, so I decided post it here.

[Casinomeister]

Admin note: moved from another thread that had nothing to do with this.

I'm killing the URL of this "article" since this belongs to ex-member "Caruso" (aka yokspot) who was banned from this site for frequent violations of the forum rules - mainly flaming other members and posting libelous material. He was warned more than enough times, (I keep records of all emails and banning periods for reference). He finally screwed up and was asked to leave.

Since then he has been on a mission to pretty much discredit everything I do here. He has a habit of posting troll-like untrue comments concerning Casinomeister at a number of boards - most of which ban him when they get fed up with his crap.

So no, his URLs are not welcome here. Feel free to discuss whatever he has to say about whatever, but he's burned too many bridges with Casinomeister for me to allow him to benefit from any traffic he may get from this site.

[tonyg82]

I read the article and it seems that if his experience is true, then it does look very bad on Moneybookers and Casinomeister. I've no idea what other offensive things he may have said or whether the article is 100% accurate mind. What's flaming?

However, if Moneybookers are sharing information with Casinos about who they do Moneybookers transactions with, then they may be breaking the law. Data protection etc..

[RobWin]

I read the article and it seems that if his experience is true, then it does look very bad on Moneybookers and Casinomeister. I've no idea what other offensive things he may have said or whether the article is 100% accurate mind. What's flaming?

However, if Moneybookers are sharing information with Casinos about who they do Moneybookers transactions with, then they may be breaking the law. Data protection etc..

Why would you think that it would look bad on Casinomeister? How does Casinomeister come into play here?

[Casinomeister]

I read the article and it seems that if his experience is true, then it does look very bad on Moneybookers and Casinomeister. I've no idea what other offensive things he may have said or whether the article is 100% accurate mind. What's flaming?

However, if Moneybookers are sharing information with Casinos about who they do Moneybookers transactions with, then they may be breaking the law. Data protection etc..

The thing is, you are only seeing half of the story. This member had PABd and when it turned out he committed fraud we closed his account in the forum. The guy was being less than truthful with us - which we don't tolerate by the way - and there is much more to this than what meets the eye.

This is just another attempt to discredit what this site stands for and what we do here.

What's flaming? Take a look at our forum rules - 1.1 to be precise.

[maxd]

Ok, read the 'article' and have a few things to say:

- as far as I know Moneybookers does not share private player data. What I've been told is that the casino supplies the basic player info they have and asks MB to see if there are any connected accounts and what the nature of that connectedness might be (bulk transfers, etc). Is this breaking the law? Not as far as I read the data protection stuff -- it basically says you can't share or sell player banking info -- but I'm no lawyer. This is coming up more and more often so we're all interested in clarification here.

- so the casino gets back a report saying something like yes, this player is connected to X other accounts. Presumably they can go back and forth on this until the casino has narrowed down a group of players at their casino(s) that are sharing funds via MB.

- some casinos are savvy to the moneysharing between player accounts and the likelihood that that is a way for 'syndicate' players to cross-fund each other, or even between multiple (fraudulent) accounts.

- if the casinos add MB account sharing as part of their black-listed activities in their T&Cs then any player caught doing this is in violation of the T&Cs. One hopes that the casinos are looking for large scale violations and not just incidental ones but that has to be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

- in this particular case the player (aka 'Lunkan') was connected to no less than 21 other MB accounts. He initially denied any connection to other players. Then when we got the report from the casino he said that regardless of his connection to any other players there was no "100% proof of fraud." And therein lies the rub: casino says MB evidence of account sharing is an indicator of fraud which they are looking out for and they'll bust players for it. Players say "sure, but who's to say it's fraud?". Bottom line AFAIC is that if casino says "we'll boot you if you do this" and you do that then, tada!, you get booted. In this case the player violated the T&Cs -- knowingly and flagrantly and repeatedly -- and that means it's over for them at the casino whether they are claiming innocence in their MB transactions or not.

- so, as stated, we supported the casino's decision and that was the end of it. The player persisted in pushing, I repeatedly explained the decision and even forwarded a final statement to the casino from the player. The casino stood fast in their decision and at that point we were done with the case.

The moral outrage and indignation that the author of the 'article' expressed is basically one-sided puffery. Since that person is known to have an agenda against me and Casinomeister I don't think it too surprising that he's blowing all the hot air into this one that he can.

[tonyg82]

Why would you think that it would look bad on Casinomeister? How does Casinomeister come into play here?

I'm not sure if it's true or not, but the guy said Casinomeister told him it didn't matter if he was innocent or not, they are siding with Cherry Red and he's now banned from the forum.

Basically Cherry Red said they were not paying him because he had sent/received a Moneybookers transfer from a fraudulant player.

If true Moneybookers may be acting illegally, and Cherry Red are acting very rogueish to say the least. The facts would be nice.

I signed up to them recently via this site actually and received a payout into my bank the other day, so I'm happy with them!

[tonyg82]

Ok good to get some more info Max. The player didn't mention he broke the T&C's and he does sound a bit dodgy. Do you have the T&C's from the other month that say no transferring between MB accounts is allowed?

Also, I think that monetry transfers within an FSA regulated company would be private data. If Moneybookers share this information with casinos then I think they might be breaking UK law, regardless of the Casinos honest intentions.

Either way, I won't be using Moneybookers again.

[maxd]

The facts would be nice.

Read my post.

I do have to say this: people ought to be a little more discriminating before they start waving the "Smells Like Evil!" flag. Ask yourself questions like:

- who is posting that stuff?

- what agenda have they got?

- what is their record at the places they're trying to target?

- what is the record of the places they are trying to take shots at?

- is there any reason to believe the slanderous accusations or is it basically just hearsay?

Once you've asked, and answered, those kinds of questions then you'll be somewhat qualified to judge these things for yourself.

[maxd]

I think that monetry transfers within an FSA regulated company would be private data.

Based on what? I've read the data protection act -- again, not a lawyer -- but when you get down to it they're talking about selling private financial data such as user banking institutions and account numbers and such to telemarketers and the like. There are no specifics about transaction endpoints being protected data, etc.