Tips Metroplay / 666BET license suspended

[Simmo!]

You're right in saying their customer service was terrible. ..Email support was always about 2 days for a reply, even then it seemed as if they only half read your email!

Thanks for contacting 666BET support.

We have received your message. Due to increased customer enquiries, please allow 7 days for a response.

(received today)

In reality, they should be saying 1 Day instead of the normal 2 as 90% of these requests will be asking the same thing: "where the f**k is my money?". There certainly won't be any game or bonus related issues to deal with. Must be the easiest their support ever had it.

 

[Casinomeister]

And they wanted to retry the Baptism By Fire

They should put up a portal since they are probably getting good traffic now.

 

[JackTenOff]

(received today)

In reality, they should be saying 1 Day instead of the normal 2 as 90% of these requests will be asking the same thing: "where the f**k is my money?". There certainly won't be any game or bonus related issues to deal with. Must be the easiest their support ever had it.

They'e probably got rid of the majority of their customer support team

 

[jetset]

Update

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Somebody needs to tell the Independent that despite claiming that this has nothing to do with "day to day operation of 666BET", players' monies are NOT being returned, and enquiries from customers are unanswered. Unlike many newspapers, the Independent do not allow comments on online stories, so it's not as easy as it should be to spread this awareness.

However, this is now mainstream news, not niche news covered in some obscure publication. This should ensure the UKGC are put under the spotlight as this story unfolds, and the prospect of it becoming ever more obvious that players are NOT receiving any of their money back should be a major worry for the UKGC.

 

[dunover]

Somebody needs to tell the Independent that despite claiming that this has nothing to do with "day to day operation of 666BET", players' monies are NOT being returned, and enquiries from customers are unanswered. Unlike many newspapers, the Independent do not allow comments on online stories, so it's not as easy as it should be to spread this awareness.

However, this is now mainstream news, not niche news covered in some obscure publication. This should ensure the UKGC are put under the spotlight as this story unfolds, and the prospect of it becoming ever more obvious that players are NOT receiving any of their money back should be a major worry for the UKGC.

Er....£1 million in cash seized at the home of one of those arrested, and players NOT being paid that we know of and "the criminal investigations have no bearing on the day-to-day operation of the business..." (aside from trivial matter of their licence being revoked)

PULL THE OTHER ONE!

 

[jetset]

This story has now spread to other mainstream media and is pretty hard to ignore; so far the UKGC is declining to comment beyond its original statement announcing the suspension (see CM News), and I guess that with an invstigation in process they have to be cautious.

 

[vinylweatherman]

This story has now spread to other mainstream media and is pretty hard to ignore; so far the UKGC is declining to comment beyond its original statement announcing the suspension (see CM News), and I guess that with an invstigation in process they have to be cautious.

Heads now have to be extracted from the sand. The biggest issue here is the non payment of players, disregarding a direct instruction from the UKGC, and also showing up it's argument that it's there to regulate in the interests of players.

This has the makings of Purple Lounge II, but playing out right under the noses of the UKGC, rather than the LGA (now MGA). Rather than asking them to comment, the UKGC should be pressured to "get their arse in gear" and expedite the return of players' funds as instructed.

There is even the slim chance that this could cause the government severe embarrassment in the run up to May's election, as it would be yet another example of "fat cats" being able to walk away leaving the ordinary people out of pocket, and DESPITE what is billed as the toughest regulatory framework ever to be imposed on this industry. It doesn't help that this is a well known UK brand that was heavily promoted in the media, very different to some obscure offshore casino (Purple Lounge for example), regulated by a small jurisdiction, and probably used by a smaller number of UK players. Purple Lounge DID have some advertising on TV, but this was when the industry was still something of a niche product as far as most UK citizens were concerned.

 

[jetset]

I share your opinion that the UKGC needs to act now in the players' interests if 666Bet is stalling on payments.

Players who can show that the operation is fudging on its obligations to players should be encouraged to submit complaints to the Commission; a few hard fact complaints will oblige it to warn 666 management to pay up or face the consequences of the permanent removal of its licence.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I share your opinion that the UKGC needs to act now in the players' interests if 666Bet is stalling on payments.

Players who can show that the operation is fudging on its obligations to players should be encouraged to submit complaints to the Commission; a few hard fact complaints will oblige it to warn 666 management to pay up or face the consequences of the permanent removal of its licence.

The UKGC site states that it's NOT their responsibility to help players get their money, and I doubt that permanent removal of their licence bothers them in the slightest.

It seems they are simply not responding, rather than fudging or stalling players, and this shows up a glaring loophole in our system of regulation.

Just like Purple Lounge, they were able to lie about what was going on, and despite having changed the original message, they are STILL lying to players who are still being mislead as to the true nature of the issues that have prevented them from accessing the service.

The spread of the story through mainstream media at least means that players will find out far more quickly that they have been screwed over than in the case of Purple Lounge, and the brands involved will face the awkward questions where they will have to show the general public what is REALLY going on when they THINK they are playing with "a trusted UK brand" gambling site.

As the UKGC have already retreated behind "no comment", they are probably already aware that players are not being paid their balances, and that this has the makings of a PR disaster for them, hence they are in "firefighting mode", stalling behind "no comment" whilst they figure out how to "spin" this without making themselves look inept.

 

[Simmo!]

I'm assuming 666bet isn't coming back so any more news from anywhere? Or on payments?

EDITED TO ADD: Just found this on Twitter from last Thursday (2nd April): "Update: We are trying to resolve our licence issues and get back online asap so customers can withdraw outstanding funds. Please be patient."

 

[funnymunny]

Couple of articles out today...

"Troubled online gaming operator 666Bet has broken its silence over the shutdown of its 666Bet and Metro Play sites, claiming that it is negotiating with service providers, including payment processors, in order to return funds to players.

The company apologised for the delay in returning customer funds following the suspension of its UK and Alderney operating licences, stating that it is seeking approval from the UK Gambling Commission to reopen the two sites, allowing customers to access their accounts.

It said that it needed approval to open its sites before it can process any transactions."

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

"Embattled online betting company 666Bet has been forced to issue a new statement addressing the growing unrest from angry customers demanding their money back, saying that the site needs to be online before it could pay outstanding customer balances.

In a statement released on its Facebook page, 666Bet called the UK Gambling Commission’s statement that the site didn’t need to have a license in order for customers to withdraw their money as “misleading.” 666Bet said the site needed to be online to accomplish that task and that a number of its third party providers, including its payment providers, had “immediately cancelled or suspended” their contracts with the company pending its return as a “white label."...

Continues

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Couple of articles out today...

"Troubled online gaming operator 666Bet has broken its silence over the shutdown of its 666Bet and Metro Play sites, claiming that it is negotiating with service providers, including payment processors, in order to return funds to players.

The company apologised for the delay in returning customer funds following the suspension of its UK and Alderney operating licences, stating that it is seeking approval from the UK Gambling Commission to reopen the two sites, allowing customers to access their accounts.

It said that it needed approval to open its sites before it can process any transactions."

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

"Embattled online betting company 666Bet has been forced to issue a new statement addressing the growing unrest from angry customers demanding their money back, saying that the site needs to be online before it could pay outstanding customer balances.

In a statement released on its Facebook page, 666Bet called the UK Gambling Commission’s statement that the site didn’t need to have a license in order for customers to withdraw their money as “misleading.” 666Bet said the site needed to be online to accomplish that task and that a number of its third party providers, including its payment providers, had “immediately cancelled or suspended” their contracts with the company pending its return as a “white label."...

Continues

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The UKGC need to call BS on this. It shouldn't be NECCESSARY for the site to be up and running for them to be able to process the return of customer's funds. They would have records of what is owed, and they could use more traditional methods, such as having staff check the amount due, and then manually making a BACS payment to the players' bank account, writing a cheque, etc.

They could even have the site back online without a licence, they would merely have to disable all the betting and gaming services, only allowing customers to log in and recover their funds.

This is all a stalling tactic, and an indication that they don't actually HAVE the players' money, but believe they will be able to obtain an injection of cash to cover these liabilities, but only once they have their licence back to operate as a going concern.

It's much like Full Tilt, they NEEDED a buyer who was prepared to cover players' balances as part of the deal, but no buyer was going to be interested unless it was certain that they would be able to continue running Full Tilt as a going concern once they had injected their cash into the business.

 

[funnymunny]

The UKGC need to call BS on this. It shouldn't be NECCESSARY for the site to be up and running for them to be able to process the return of customer's funds. They would have records of what is owed, and they could use more traditional methods, such as having staff check the amount due, and then manually making a BACS payment to the players' bank account, writing a cheque, etc.

They could even have the site back online without a licence, they would merely have to disable all the betting and gaming services, only allowing customers to log in and recover their funds.

This is all a stalling tactic, and an indication that they don't actually HAVE the players' money, but believe they will be able to obtain an injection of cash to cover these liabilities, but only once they have their licence back to operate as a going concern.

It's much like Full Tilt, they NEEDED a buyer who was prepared to cover players' balances as part of the deal, but no buyer was going to be interested unless it was certain that they would be able to continue running Full Tilt as a going concern once they had injected their cash into the business.

I don't dispute the bit I've bold'ed in your post, however 666Bet were using products from BetContruct & EveryMatrix. This could also include their back-office systems. It is possible a contractual item for one / both of these providers is that all customers have to hold a valid gaming license in order for them to use their software. It may also be that software provider also have their own jurisdictional license(s) being conditional on only allowing holders of a valid gaming license to use their software.

Not saying that it's the case in this instance, however I've seen clauses such as this many times in the past.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I don't dispute the bit I've bold'ed in your post, however 666Bet were using products from BetContruct & EveryMatrix. This could also include their back-office systems. It is possible a contractual item for one / both of these providers is that all customers have to hold a valid gaming license in order for them to use their software. It may also be that software provider also have their own jurisdictional license(s) being conditional on only allowing holders of a valid gaming license to use their software.

Not saying that it's the case in this instance, however I've seen clauses such as this many times in the past.

This still shouldn't prevent them from manually reuniting players with their money. The clear intent from the UKGC is that the suspension of a licence should not prevent an operator from paying players their balances, so if the way contracts are written in the industry is going against the consumer protection policy behind such regulation, then the UKGC have the power to regulate these industry participants so that they can't use suspended licences as an excuse for keeping players' cash.

The UKGC is supposed to be regulating the whole supply chain, not merely the operators, so should have the power to tweak the rules as necessary so as to remove any "roadblocks" preventing any party from following what the UKGC direct.

The UKGC are regularly tweaking the rules, with a new update set to go live next month, and another in the Autumn.

 

[AffGency]

if the UKGC would be fair in any way and work properly ... they would also told everyone why they suspended the licence in 1st place

everyone is just left in the rain here

 

[funnymunny]

if the UKGC would be fair in any way and work properly ... they would also told everyone why they suspended the licence in 1st place

everyone is just left in the rain here

Lots of speculation the license suspension is in relation to the arrest of one of the company's Directors, due to an unrelated fraud / VAT / money laundering investigation. (666Bet have been quick to state that the Director (Paul Bell) had nothing to do with the day-to-day running of the site & they claim to be a 'casualty' of the investigation).

A google search of 'why has 666Bet license been suspended' will reveal dozens of links to aforementioned stories.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Lots of speculation the license suspension is in relation to the arrest of one of the company's Directors, due to an unrelated fraud / VAT / money laundering investigation. (666Bet have been quick to state that the Director (Paul Bell) had nothing to do with the day-to-day running of the site & they claim to be a 'casualty' of the investigation).

A google search of 'why has 666Bet license been suspended' will reveal dozens of links to aforementioned stories.

If their claim is true, then there is nothing to stop them returning the money to players as they don't need their licence back for this. If they can't, then this can't be as "unrelated" an issue as they are claiming. They would have the money, they have their staff, the ONLY thing they can't do at the moment is accept wagers.

If they fire this director, and the issue really is unrelated, then once they have done this, getting their licence restored is a straight forward process with the new board having to appoint his replacement, and then have him obtain his personal licence from the UKGC, followed by 666Bet applying for the restoration of their operating licence.

If they are going to wait out the investigation until this director is either charged and convicted, or found innocent or charges dropped, then we are looking at YEARS, not months, before they will be able to start operating again and give players' their funds back through the usual process. This would destroy trust in the brand, whereas giving players back their balances now will make it much easier for them to retain these players once they get their licence restored.

 

[funnymunny]

If their claim is true, then there is nothing to stop them returning the money to players as they don't need their licence back for this. If they can't, then this can't be as "unrelated" an issue as they are claiming. They would have the money, they have their staff, the ONLY thing they can't do at the moment is accept wagers.

...

You are ignoring the point made in my previous post.

If their use of 3rd party software is conditional on them having a valid gaming license (and the software provider(s) license(s) are dependent on their clients having the same), then your claim to there being "nothing to stop them... the ONLY thing they can't do at the moment is accept wagers" is incorrect.

Sure, they could send funds via bank transfer or cheques, but if they don't have access to the software, how can they verify what their player balances are?


Coincidentally (and according to a number of sites), the following statement was made a couple of days ago...

“Metro Play Limited would like to clearly reiterate that we were reliably and explicitly informed on several occasions by our potential third party platform provider that they were waiting for approval from the UKGC in order to get us back online, dating back to the end of March.

“The UKGC have now informed us that this is not the case. We have therefore asked the company who offered to provide us with the aforementioned platform to clarify their comments and sought further confirmation from the UKGC regarding this situation as they have been aware of our efforts throughout the recent downtime.”

The same sites also report that another statement is expected on Monday (20th April)

 

[vinylweatherman]

You are ignoring the point made in my previous post.

If their use of 3rd party software is conditional on them having a valid gaming license (and the software provider(s) license(s) are dependent on their clients having the same), then your claim to there being "nothing to stop them... the ONLY thing they can't do at the moment is accept wagers" is incorrect.

Sure, they could send funds via bank transfer or cheques, but if they don't have access to the software, how can they verify what their player balances are?


Coincidentally (and according to a number of sites), the following statement was made a couple of days ago...

“Metro Play Limited would like to clearly reiterate that we were reliably and explicitly informed on several occasions by our potential third party platform provider that they were waiting for approval from the UKGC in order to get us back online, dating back to the end of March.

“The UKGC have now informed us that this is not the case. We have therefore asked the company who offered to provide us with the aforementioned platform to clarify their comments and sought further confirmation from the UKGC regarding this situation as they have been aware of our efforts throughout the recent downtime.”

The same sites also report that another statement is expected on Monday (20th April)

This is just batting the blame back and forth between Metro Play and the UKGC. First the UKGC say that there is nothing to stop the money from being returned to players, and then they tell the platform provider the opposite, that no approval is likely to be forthcoming to enable the operator to access the platform, which they seem to be claiming is necessary in order to return the money to players.

The UKGC seem to have taken shelter, when they should be out there telling the various parties to come up with a plan to return the money to players, or even stipulating a plan that they will approve.


All players are getting is a string of statements, and no money.

 

[citizenx]

This is all a stalling tactic, and an indication that they don't actually HAVE the players' money, but believe they will be able to obtain an injection of cash to cover these liabilities, but only once they have their licence back to operate as a going concern.

That is a ponzi scheme! They should get Bernie Madoff onto their board - if he isn't already.

 

[funnymunny]

The UKGC seem to have taken shelter, when they should be out there telling the various parties to come up with a plan to return the money to players, or even stipulating a plan that they will approve.

I totally agree & I'd suggest the relative inexperience of the UKGC is (at least) partly to blame with how this is being handled. (This is by no means an excuse, but could be a cause). From what I've read, the availability of funds is not an issue (I hope these reports are not proved wrong). It's rather a case of the mechanisms required to undertake the transactions being prohibited / prevented by the rules that govern the licensees.

Not great for anyone involved.

I hope that it's sorted sooner than later, and all Regulatory bodies involved update their rules and guidelines if anything is found lacking as a result. Let's also not overlook the fact that 666Bet have players outside of the UK & they come under the Regulations of the Alderney license, which has also been suspended.

 

[Richas]

I totally agree & I'd suggest the Regulators inexperience is (at least) partly to blame with how this is being handled. From what I've read, the availability of funds is not the issue (I hope these reports are not proved wrong). It's rather a case of the mechanisms required to undertake the transactions being prohibited / prevented by the rules that govern the licensees.

Not great for anyone involved.

I hope that it's sorted sooner than later, and all Regulatory bodies involved update their rules and guidelines if anything is found lacking as a result. Let's also not overlook the fact that 666Bet have players outside of the UK & they come under the Regulations of the Alderney license, which has also been suspended.

We still don't know whether 666 have the money to pay out.

I know that people want the UKGC to do more - I do/did too, when I submitted to their consultation I argued that player funds should be held in trust and the sites should not have the option for basic segregation or "medium" where a bank holds the funds with some protection from other creditors but that is not what we got. we got disclosure and players able to choose between the three options.

The UKGC has not offered any guarantees for this or any other site re player funds, indeed they were explicit that players were making an assessment of risk in the event of insolvency using the information that the UKGC required the sites to give them.

For Bet666 it gets even more complicated, they were operating under a continuation licence thanks to their Alderney and IoM licences. They were not approved, they did not get through the UKGC vetting.

Now the POC tax and the continuation licence require a whole set of financial info from them including from their banks and their auditors and three months in to this process there is a criminal investigation led from HMRC. I hate to say it but it looks at first glance like the higher disclosure standards required by the UKGC and HMRC under the new legislation have uncovered a very nasty situation that Alderney and IoM had not been on top of.

Having a pop at the UKGC for not getting refunds done yet is likely setting them an impossible target, it is certainly more than they claimed for their regulatory oversight.

 

[funnymunny]

...For Bet666 it gets even more complicated, they were operating under a continuation licence thanks to their Alderney and IoM licences. They were not approved, they did not get through the UKGC vetting...

I hate to say it but it looks at first glance like the higher disclosure standards required by the UKGC and HMRC under the new legislation have uncovered a very nasty situation that Alderney and IoM had not been on top of.

You may want to check your source(s) of information... Their IoM license was ceased when they migrated onto their BetConstruct platform last year. 666Bet as a company may still be registered on the Isle of Man, but definitely not licensed there & this is why only the UK & Alderney gambling commissions are the ones directly concerned with this matter.

See

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

and

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

.

Also see PR regarding platform migration

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

and Old / Expired Link

Former platform providers (Novigroup) are still licensed in the IoM, but as per above news items & their own website

"To 666bet Customers

We would like to inform you that as of 18.12.2014 Novigroup Ltd will no longer provide its betting and gaming services to 666bet customers.

The website will remain open solely for the purpose of allowing all customers to withdraw their remaining account balance. We wish to reassure you that all customers’ funds will be paid promptly and in full.

At Novigroup Ltd we take pride in ensuring our customers’ protection, therefore please accept in advance our sincere apologies for any inconvenience you may experience during this period. You can definitely count on our 24/7 support should you need further information. Please do not hesitate to contact us at support@novigroupltd.com.

Sincerely,
Novigroup Ltd
PO Box 227, Clinch's House, Lord Street, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM99 1RZ "

URL Not Found / Outdated

 

[dunover]

I agree, it's a player's assessment of risks. There is no guarantee in any business (aside from banking whereby the taxpayer underwrites deposits up to a 90k? value) against the effects of dishonesty or insolvency.
If the money ain't there, it ain't there and AFAIK there is no government/taxpayer underwriting of online gambling monies!

The only way to prevent this is Escrow (which would be impractical as casinos need a fluid cash-flow) or the owners/operators of ALL UKGC licensed sites putting bonds up in order to operate here. Even then the liabilities of a casino vary daily so the bond may be insufficient to cover the whole 100% of outstanding balances at the time of closure.