When "Withdrawal TO original payment method" should be reconsidered.

[mysticjoz]

Oh the absolute joy of having all my problems solved with one big Random jackpot hit! But... the frustrations, aggravations, added worries and concerns of wondering "why are they holding up the payment?" .. "when is it going to be in my bank?" Or MY biggest question "Why didn't I hit when I depositted with my all access visa instead of hitting when I use QuickTender to deposit?"
IF I had hit the RJ on one of my all access visa deposits I would already have some of the money I won in my bank account. (I say some because I am making more than one small transaction as opposed to one huge one, which could very well throw up a whole bunch of red flags!)
I honestly feel that this rule of paying winnings back to the method used to deposit should be reconsidered! Especially when a player uses more than one option to deposit to that particular casino. I had no choice but to withdraw to Quicktender because that was the method I used to deposit when I won the RJ. Although it is not the ONLY method I use to deposit at Inetbet.
I don't blame this delay on Inetbet at all! But I do find Quicktender at fault.
At first my withdrawal sat there.. doing nothing. I thought it was because I submitted for the full $12,000 to be wired to my bank. I had heard nothing the first few days from QuickTender. So, I lowered my request to $3900. (I had alot of conflicting information regarding red flag amounts, laws regarding banks required to report wire transfers exceeding X amount of dollars) so I opted to choose an amount lower than all the amounts I had been warned about, thus the $3900 conclusion.
On the 16th I recieved an email from Quicktender identity and Quicktender security. Requesting copies of bank statements, liceanse, bills, etc. (the same information we send to our casino's for payment)
I was once again thrilled to have invested $50 two months ago on a brand new scanner/printer/copier/fax .. I sent them every document they requested AND an explanation as to why my drivers liceance is New Hampshire while I am staying with my parents in Mass. a copy of mail forwarded from my NH address to Mass with a USPS forwarding address sticker on it, CC front and back, bank statements, etc. .
I got an email back telling me they understood my situation however they needed a clearer more updated bank statement..which I immediately complied with. (I even c.c'd myself to make sure the copies were clear). I did not hear back (even though I did ask that they let me know that everything they needed had been recieved, as not to delay the payment any longer.) Since I did not hear back again., I assumed they accepted the documents and were processing the withdrawal. Until yesterday..... when AGAIN I recieved the same requests!!
This brought me to the point of worry and concern! Who can forget that I got the run around with the first RJ I won and I did not get paid on! Now, even though Inetbet sent the withdrawals immediately TO Quicktender I am having a problem getting the money to my own bank!!
So I won on October 14th and I still have not recieved a dime!
I have since sent an email to Inetbet asking if I can redeposit a small sum and have them wire it overnight to my bank so this hardship can end.
Just a heads up for everyone using Quicktender. I personally don't think if we use more than one deposit option we should be limitted to only withdrawal option. Thats JMO.. from experience.
I do thank you Inetbet!! You have been prompt, honest and polite. I think I will thank you more if I can take care of what I need to take care of immediately as there were things last week my boys needed, and I thought with no doubt I would have something by today, but today I get a message saying 2-5 business days!

[jleonov]

There is a reason why most casinos enforce you to make withdrawal back to the same method you have used for the deposits - its making easier to prevent fraud and avoid money laundering. A lot of good customers are affected because someone previously abused freedom of money movement, but is an industry standard now.

[mysticjoz]

There is a reason why most casinos enforce you to make withdrawal back to the same method you have used for the deposits - its making easier to prevent fraud and avoid money laundering. A lot of good customers are affected because someone previously abused freedom of money movement, but is an industry standard now.

Yes, I understand that, but IF I had made that one particular deposit via my all access visa and not QT it wouldn't still be in limbo, it would already be in my bank. Since this is my first wire out of QT it takes longer, and we have to go through the exact same process we just went through with the casino. They don't call them "fax back" forms.. but they may as well.
I would think that providing the documents to QT would be enough, because in reality you are actually providing twice the documentation.

I would think for those of us who use more than one means to deposit. for example I only use QT if I am playing with winnings because I fund it with winnings. Had I not had any winnings in QT I would have funded it with my all access visa and since they can not process a withdrawal back TO the all access visa, it would have been wired from Inetbet to my bank.

Which is where my train of thought comes in. For those of us who use more than one method to deposit, we should have the choice as to how we want to withdraw. (I got taken by a rogue a year and a half ago.). So when I hit the RJ at Inetbet., the first thing my boys said is "yeah, sure.. like the other place" I immediately defended Inetbet because I know they are one of if not The most trusted casino on the internet. "No.. this is Inetbet! We will get paid".. I can't directly place blame on Inetbet for this long of a delay because the withdrawal to Quicktender was immediate.. and I do mean, literally immediate. Quicktender should also take into consideration that we provide these documents to the casino itself in order to withdraw!
I can only blame myself for not funding with my all access visa.
Live and learn..

[luckydawg]

I totally agree with you in this. I had basically the exact same thing happen.

Also I have recently read on this forum where part of a payment from inet was sent via qt and part to wire. I guess my question is why is it ok for some and not others.

I could understand it if I were a new player..but I have been a good customer for years.

I think we should have a choice how we want our money sent to us. After all it is our money we are requesting.

[mysticjoz]

I don't know why it is ok for some and not others. I thought they were only wiring directly to a players bank if the deposit was made via a prepaid card. Since there is no way for them to put funds back onto a prepaid card they will process it to the players bank account. That is why my few wires last year (I think there were only two) were directly to my bank because I had used a prepaid card.

Yes there was a post about that.. I did not participate in that thread.
From what I remember from my few wires last year (which were all under $1K).. there is another bank involved, and they get thier cut also.
Apparently, where it is an international wire, it involves an international bank also. So Inetbet would process the wire, it hits the international bank (who takes a "fee") they in turn send it to your own bank (who also takes a "fee") and then it arrives in your account.
At least that's how it was explained to me by my old bank (Citizen's bank).

[vinylweatherman]

There is a reason why most casinos enforce you to make withdrawal back to the same method you have used for the deposits - its making easier to prevent fraud and avoid money laundering. A lot of good customers are affected because someone previously abused freedom of money movement, but is an industry standard now.

Hyprocracy

Casinos do their best to disguise the deposit path to obscure the identity of the receiving casino when it comes to taking money FROM US players, yet suddenly become all highly moral when it comes to PAYING US players their winnings.

When casinos take deposits from US players, IT IS MONEYLAUNDERING BY DEFINITION, if they took the deposits in accordance with money laundering rules, it would be blocked since the banks would know it was destined for an offshore casino. Surely, the same degree of flexibility should be shown when US players RECEIVE money from the casino, so that it takes a path that suits the way the player conducts their affairs, which lessens the risk of THEIR bank asking questions about the transaction.

Perhaps it has nothing to do with "moneylaundering", and more to do with Quicktender wanting their fees when players take money back onshore, as allowing a deposit by quicktender to be grown by winnings, and wired directly to a bank prevents quicktender from charging it's steep wire fees every time players have a decent run of luck.

Quicktender too are assisting in "money laundering" by providing a service that allows gambling transactions to take place without the US banks being able to detect them as gambling related, yet seem to be going overboard with the documentation requirements. Mystic has already sent them to the casino, and has now sent a full set to Quicktender, so what the hell is Quicktender delaying for now

Quicktender have US players by the ******, and they know it!

Two more potential players (when they are old enough) have seen first one RTG not pay out to their Mum, and now as far as they are concerned, they expected a few things this week, and didn't get them yet again because the money has not turned up. They are not going to know that much about the industry (and how one casino can not get the money in and be rogue, yet another can seem to do the same yet NOT be rogue), but when they grow up, they will form their impressions of online gambling from this, and may one day become senators or congressmen, and be in a position to influence how the industry is seen by the US government. It is quite possible that a future administration will take an even harder line than the current one, and drive out even the rogue operators, as well as the reputable ones willing to fight to the bitter end. So far, the US has not been after PLAYERS, but a hard line effort could take this form, along with having internet access monitored to locate potential casino players, leading to highly publicised busts, and heavy penalties.

The problem seems one of trust. A new player is certainly a risk, but it seems that even long term players NEVER gain the trust of the casino, and must be treated with suspicion for each and every transaction. Strangely, casinos wonder why no matter how hard they try, players never seem to fully trust THEM.