Bogus Complaint Aladdin's Gold/Club World complaint - player fraud

[maxd]

... without proving anything ....

To whom should it be proved? We've already said -- many times now -- that we've seen the evidence in the case and are satisfied that it justifies the casino's actions. If you accept that some casino info has to be kept private for casino security reasons then who do you imagine should sit in judgement of such a case?

Sure, regulation would be wonderful -- I'd be out of a job but that's another issue -- but the reality is that here we are, today, without such. And yet we must do our best and deal with these cases as they come to us. So who?

I respectfully suggest that there is no one, at least not at this time, and that given the situation the case has been reviewed and dealt with appropriately. The casino is not at fault here, IMHO, and such statements are needlessly inflammatory.

 

[lottethedog]

The "trust" CM has in CWC to always be right....staggering.

I have read all the posts, and still wonder if the player had lost, whether CWC would return the deposits then..

 

[The Dude]

The "trust" CM has in CWC to always be right....staggering...

Nice troll comment. I don't trust anyone to be right all of the time. That's asinine. I do trust them to do the right thing. They closed the account and refunded the deposits. That was the right things to do. Many casinos would have confiscated the deposits because this account is connected to fraudulent accounts = multi-accounting gnome.

Commit fraud in a Vegas casino and see what happens.

As for Tom not chiming in was we closed the PAB, he offered to comment but we felt it wasn't necessary. I don't think it's a good idea to publicly explain in detail what casinos look for in detecting fraud. As it has been mentioned countless times before, describing these details only enable the fraudsters to continue doing their damage.

 

[chuchu59]

To whom should it be proved? We've already said -- many times now -- that we've seen the evidence in the case and are satisfied that it justifies the casino's actions. If you accept that some casino info has to be kept private for casino security reasons then who do you imagine should sit in judgement of such a case?

Sure, regulation would be wonderful -- I'd be out of a job but that's another issue -- but the reality is that here we are, today, without such. And yet we must do our best and deal with these cases as they come to us. So who?

I respectfully suggest that there is no one, at least not at this time, and that given the situation the case has been reviewed and dealt with appropriately. The casino is not at fault here, IMHO, and such statements are needlessly inflammatory.

No you wont. With your experience and integrity the regulators will initially hire you on excellent terms for at least 3 years to devise rules and regulations for this industry.

 

[maxd]

The "trust" CM has in CWC to always be right....

Aside from the trollish nature of your comment let's have look at what you are actually saying. As I read it you are saying that:

• our decision was based on "trust" as opposed to ... evidence?
• we "always" so decide on CWC cases.

Item (a): how many times do I have to say it? We heard the OP's case, we asked the casino for the evidence to back up their decision, they provided it, we delved into the evidence until we were satisfied that a reasonable decision could be made, and then we made our final decision.

So where did "trust" come into it? The only thing we trusted them to do was to provide us with legitimate data on the player's case. Are you suggesting they faked that evidence? Certainly possible but we've handled many CWC cases over the years and never once has there been any indication that such has actually happened. If there was then we would be highly sceptical of what they said, asking for corroborating evidence, cross-checking that against other sources and so forth, as we do with certain other casino groups.

So far CWC has done nothing to make us think they would fabricate evidence and until they do we'll work on the assumption that what they give us is legit. And just to be clear I'm talking about actual evidence, hard facts, not opinions or hearsay.

The bottom line is that "trust" has very little to do with how we conduct the PAB investigations. Much to the annoyance of many of the people I work with on these I generally "trust" anyone that can prove what they say. Casino people are none too fond of me since they generally only know me as a relentless PITA.

Such comments as yours are easy to toss about and require laborious rebuttals, like this one. In fact they are the very heart of trollish behaviour, as Bryan has called it.

Item (b): we "always" decide in CWC's favour. Completely untrue. We've had a number of differences over the years, some of them quite serious. I venture to say that if you knew anything about what you were talking about you'd know, or would have heard, about such. Nuff said.

So keep it up with the trolly BS. You'll soon see how far that gets you hereabouts.

With your experience and integrity the regulators will initially hire you on excellent terms for at least 3 years to devise rules and regulations for this industry.

Thanks Chu. I seriously doubt it but it's a nice thought.

 

[The Dude]

The decision for club world casino to refund the players money and confiscate his winnings (without proving anything) is the very reason why regulation is a must. A truly reputable casino would pay in full and then perhaps ask player not to return.

Casinos get away with this as there is no legal ramification. This behavior by club world will in the end be a major contributor to their survival or demise.

That's a bogus comment. The player won zilch since this is considered a fraudulent account. Why is that so hard to understand? I'd like to see you run a casino for a day or two and pay fraudulent players in full - asking them to "perhaps" not return. You'd be the laughing stock of the industry and in the poor house in a New York minute.

It has nothing to do with regulation - properly regulated casinos get hammered by fraudsters as well.

 

[SAunnyS72]

That's a bogus comment. The player won zilch since this is considered a fraudulent account. Why is that so hard to understand? I'd like to see you run a casino for a day or two and pay fraudulent players in full - asking them to "perhaps" not return. You'd be the laughing stock of the industry and in the poor house in a New York minute.

It has nothing to do with regulation - properly regulated casinos get hammered by fraudsters as well.

This ...

Please let me put it harshly ... It is like a bank robber after being caught says " but I had an account in that bank" ... Wonder how many banks will last after such payouts lol

 

[vinylweatherman]

Nice troll comment. I don't trust anyone to be right all of the time. That's asinine. I do trust them to do the right thing. They closed the account and refunded the deposits. That was the right things to do. Many casinos would have confiscated the deposits because this account is connected to fraudulent accounts = multi-accounting gnome.

Commit fraud in a Vegas casino and see what happens.

As for Tom not chiming in was we closed the PAB, he offered to comment but we felt it wasn't necessary. I don't think it's a good idea to publicly explain in detail what casinos look for in detecting fraud. As it has been mentioned countless times before, describing these details only enable the fraudsters to continue doing their damage.

This IS giving more detail about this case than before, and explains the comments "documents are not the issue". Surely the evidence cannot be watertight, else this would not have lasted a year, and the OP would have been booted from the forum for participating in this.

There HAVE been a few cases where an innocent player has been wrongly accused of "gnoming", and has struggled to clear their name. Some of these players have been found to be frauds and banned from CM before being able to provide enough further evidence to have the decision overturned.

My worry is that ANY innocent player can find themselves caught up by mistake in one of these "fraud rings", and have a significant disadvantage as they are treated as though they have already been found guilty, and are thus fighting an uncooperative casino that is more inclined to say "talk to the hand" than allow them to submit further evidence to show that they are not frauds.

If documents are so unimportant in such cases, with even "basic" internal checks taking precedent, why are players having to send copies of passports, driving licenses, etc via email if possesion of a JPEG of legitimate documents to prove ID is by no means a guarantee that you will be accepted as who you are.

Without knowing what goes on in secret (which we will never hear from the industry), how can we be confident that innocent explanations for inconsistencies are being thoroughly explored before damning the player.

There will always be heated debate on this because it is only players that win and withdraw that get checked at this level, losing players are none the wiser, and although many were attempting fraud, there are innocent players who played in good faith, lost, and never knew that their bets were void, and they would not have been paid had they won.

What players need is a way to be 100% certain of being accepted as genuine before they start placing their bets. It may involve players having to wait, rather than being able to play straight away, but the choice should at least be given to them.

What is REALLY irksome is that whilst there is this draconian attitude towards players, not just frauds, but players who make genuine mistakes, it seems rogue affiliates are largely left alone to get on with it, and even if caught, often get the "slap on the wrist" rather than the kind of confiscation based punishments meted out to erring players. The industry as a whole is also geared to providing safe havens for rogue operators, with most operators mumbling their disapproval and hoping it won't affect their business, rather than speaking out and trying to drive change.

The LGA have failed miserably for years to regulate and protect the players, yet fine upstanding operations still go there, yet they are the ones with the real power to force the Maltese authorities to change their ways and provide proper regulation and player protection. All it would take is the threat of a mass migration to, say, Alderney. If it is Alderney that has let things slide, a migration to yet another jurisdiction. This would inspire licensing authorities to market themselves on who can best win the trust of players, rather than who can do it most cheaply for the operator.

Will it take the intervention of the UK government to make the LGA realise that it will soon find it's licensees realising it is pointless having a cheap LGA license yet still have to pay the tax to the UK despite not having the ability to declare "Licensed by the UK gambling commission" as a way of winning trust among players.

 

[appl3pye]

I finally received at least my deposits back, I received a suggestion to complain to their licensor which I will be doing shortly.

As for the reliability of this casino, you've heard both sides, I'd submit no casino that refuses to talk to you for six months or tell you there's a problem with your account until you involve a third party is worth a go.

With that said, I'll thank Max, CM for at least getting involved enough for my deposits to be refunded, I'm only shorted about $5000 now.

Thanks for that much help, I'll only update this if the licensor does something more than has been so far.

 

[Nifty29]

I finally received at least my deposits back, I received a suggestion to complain to their licensor which I will be doing shortly.

As for the reliability of this casino, you've heard both sides, I'd submit no casino that refuses to talk to you for six months or tell you there's a problem with your account until you involve a third party is worth a go.

With that said, I'll thank Max, CM for at least getting involved enough for my deposits to be refunded, I'm only shorted about $5000 now.

Thanks for that much help, I'll only update this if the licensor does something more than has been so far.

What a polite reply, said with the delightful aplomb of the fraudster who had already written this one off as a cost of doing business.

I've seen your type here enough times to know.

No genuine player having their genuine winnings confiscated would just shrug their shoulders as you have pretty much done the whole time, after doing nothing about it for six months, and then say "Oh well. I'll try the licensor. Cheers everyone".

I would like to thank YOU for making it more difficult for genuine players to receive their genuine winnings, for the ridiculous and draconian terms and requirements on bonuses and play these days, and for further damaging the already shaky trust of players by operators.

Fraudsters make me sick, and you are no exception.

 

[skiny]

$2000 in deposits?

Is this the first time he's made a withdrawal?

 

[LHofsdal]

You know my first blog ever was here on CM about fraudsters. And they do make me sick to my stomach.

As a member here, I do TRUST Bryan, Max, Simmo and the rest of the mods/administrators. I do believe they do a good job in being fair to both PLAYERS and CASINOS. I mean if they didn't would this site be here for so long. And it is quite obvious to me anyway, that many members, and people in the industry do TRUST this site as well.

Now, if I were a crook, and I came here and told all my secrets, like how I pick someone to steal from, what I am looking to steal, when the best time to steal from them is, do you really think I would have a chance in hell to make my next big heist? I do see why the mods/administrators do keep some things private. If they didn't they would be opening the doors for more fraudsters.

While it truly does stink for the OP, lets see what the outcome is when they go through the licensing organization. The worst they can say is that they are siding with the casino right?

LH

 

[P.V.]

Will it take the intervention of the UK government to make the LGA realise that it will soon find it's licensees realising it is pointless having a cheap LGA license yet still have to pay the tax to the UK despite not having the ability to declare "Licensed by the UK gambling commission" as a way of winning trust among players.

The gambling commission is located in Birmingham, same as the OP. If in fact I had never committed fraud and was being accused, I'd whip over there and have a talk with them. Seems like a no brainer.

If I had committed gambling fraud, well, I wouldn't waste my time.

 

[EdieD]

To OP...if you really were honest player, I'm sorry to hear you lost your 5,000. That's alot of money and personally, I'd feel very bad about not getting that if I made multiple deposits trusting that casino would pay me if I won.

 

[Nifty29]

To OP...if you really were honest player, I'm sorry to hear you lost your 5,000. That's alot of money and personally, I'd feel very bad about not getting that if I made multiple deposits trusting that casino would pay me if I won.

The player is a FRAUDSTER.

It's not the first time you've suggested they're innocent and CWC are wrong. I wonder why? Do you know something we don't, or do you think that fraud is OK?

Have you been a member here before by any chance?

 

[EdieD]

To Nifty29 - I've seen you ask alot of people in this forum if they were members here before.

Are you on the membership committee and if so, is there a quota for new monthly members?

 

[Nifty29]

To Nifty29 - I've seen you ask alot of people in this forum if they were members here before.

Are you on the membership committee and if so, is there a quota for new monthly members?

Interesting comment since you've only been a few weeks, and i don't remember asking anyone in the past few months, let alone "alot of people". Thanks for answering my question, albeit indirectly.

Now, how about my other questions that you conveniently ignored?

 

[maxd]

... I'd submit no casino that refuses to talk to you for six months or tell you there's a problem with your account until you involve a third party is worth a go.

And I'd submit that a player who repeatedly fails basic casino security checks can't expect to be treated as a regular, average player might be. In no small part your difficulties were of your own making.

To quote a great philosopher of our time "speak bullshit, expect pain". ⁂




⁂ that would be Arnold Rimmer (Technician, Second Class, Red Dwarf).

 

[P.V.]

So the player is a fraud, it's been investigated. I get it by following the thread but my only problem is why doesn't the player know why they're a fraud or do they?

I understand the whole thing that OC's can't divulge their investigation process and sources but when someone has been identified as a fraud they should at least be told why, or again have they?

If this player can be called a fraud online, I don't see any security risks advising this 12 page thread why they're a fraud. All it shows is that the system works!

To the OP, if you've been told then what's the problem?

 

[Nifty29]

So the player is a fraud, it's been investigated. I get it by following the thread but my only problem is why doesn't the player know why they're a fraud or do they?

I understand the whole thing that OC's can't divulge their investigation process and sources but when someone has been identified as a fraud they should at least be told why, or again have they?

If this player can be called a fraud online, I don't see any security risks advising this 12 page thread why they're a fraud. All it shows is that the system works!

To the OP, if you've been told then what's the problem?

Bryan stated that it was a case of multi-account gnoming.

I'm absolutely certain that the OP knows...it is why they are so calm about it. Being caught is an occupational risk and they factor it in to their schemes. Most likely they have done this at other casinos with less stringent security and pulled it off without being caught.

So, I believe the forum has been given adequate information regarding the type of fraud. Publishing the specifics will only assist the fraudster and his buddies (who are most likely reading this thread closely) to do their thing better next time, as saying specifically what information the casino based their decision on would most likely give away the method of detection used and prompt these scumbags to devise ways around it.

 

[P.V.]

Bryan stated that it was a case of multi-account gnoming.

I'm absolutely certain that the OP knows...

I missed that, thanks Nifty. Looks like it's up to the OP why they're being accused of multiple accounts.

You must admit it's odd any fraudster would be returned their initial deposit for multiple accounts.

This doesn't accomplish anything for the OC, open multiple accounts, comment fraud, get caught and get your deposit of $2,000.00 back.

What am I missing? Broke terms and conditions for multiple accounts, get your deposit back, this isn't protocol.

Odd dispute but interesting, hopefully more facts will avail.

 

[chuchu59]

Bryan stated that it was a case of multi-account gnoming.

I'm absolutely certain that the OP knows...it is why they are so calm about it. Being caught is an occupational risk and they factor it in to their schemes. Most likely they have done this at other casinos with less stringent security and pulled it off without being caught.

So, I believe the forum has been given adequate information regarding the type of fraud. Publishing the specifics will only assist the fraudster and his buddies (who are most likely reading this thread closely) to do their thing better next time, as saying specifically what information the casino based their decision on would most likely give away the method of detection used and prompt these scumbags to devise ways around it.

Its not necessary to publish the specifics especially on how they are caught but the reasons eg multi-account gnoming as in this case must be made known to the player and in an open forum the public otherwise speculations will arise. I cannot see how broadly classifying what type of fraud was committed by fraudsters can lead them to get smarter and devise ways to escape detection. Of course the method of detection should still be kept secret but I think we should not remain at a stage where a player is simply told he committed fraud 'end of story'.

 

[Nifty29]

I missed that, thanks Nifty. Looks like it's up to the OP why they're being accused of multiple accounts.

You must admit it's odd any fraudster would be returned their initial deposit for multiple accounts.

This doesn't accomplish anything for the OC, open multiple accounts, comment fraud, get caught and get your deposit of $2,000.00 back.

What am I missing? Broke terms and conditions for multiple accounts, get your deposit back, this isn't protocol.

Odd dispute but interesting, hopefully more facts will avail.

Yes, it is an oddity IMO that fraudsters like this get a "free hit". If I were a fraudster, I might see a casino with this policy as a soft target and feel more inclined to hit them, given it is essentially risk free.

If an online casino really wanted to deter these scumbags, they would confiscate their deposits as well. Maybe they could be donated to a charity? Although, I think that CW has always taken what they perceive to be the high road, and kudos to them for it, but it just seems to encourage fraudsters rather than scare them away.

I will say that I don't think CW is totally blameless in all of this. It should have been settled 6 months ago and handled much better. Why could they not have told the player they had 7/14 days to respond with whatever was required, and advised them that failure to comply would result in account closure and removal of winnings? I would have thought that the logical thing to do.

I would respect them more if they admitted dropping the ball, rather than stating that they did everything possible to settle the issue.....because they did not IMO.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Yes, it is an oddity IMO that fraudsters like this get a "free hit". If I were a fraudster, I might see a casino with this policy as a soft target and feel more inclined to hit them, given it is essentially risk free.

If an online casino really wanted to deter these scumbags, they would confiscate their deposits as well. Maybe they could be donated to a charity? Although, I think that CW has always taken what they perceive to be the high road, and kudos to them for it, but it just seems to encourage fraudsters rather than scare them away.

I will say that I don't think CW is totally blameless in all of this. It should have been settled 6 months ago and handled much better. Why could they not have told the player they had 7/14 days to respond with whatever was required, and advised them that failure to comply would result in account closure and removal of winnings? I would have thought that the logical thing to do.

I would respect them more if they admitted dropping the ball, rather than stating that they did everything possible to settle the issue.....because they did not IMO.

This is more problematic, as it could have serious repercussions if they get it wrong. Voiding winnings is really about saying all wagers made are void, so rewinding the clock back to when the player made the deposit. Confiscating deposits goes beyond this, and is the arbitrary imposition of a fine by a private business, which is illegal under UK law, and the basis for the recent challenges of bank "penalty charges".

To justify confiscation of a deposit, and keep within the law, they would have to produce an invoice setting out what it cost to detect the fraud, and deal with the consequences. This is now how banks and card issuers have to quantify their charges for missed payments, letters reminding customers to pay, etc.

A genuine fraudster is much less likely to make a big fuss over getting a deposit back, as the process would draw even more attention to them, and what they are accused of, which would make it harder to stay "under the radar".

Returning deposits is therefore a case of balancing risk. Whilst the genuine fraudster does not suffer so much, it removes the chance of the casino being hit with things like chargebacks. A fraudster prepared to do one thing is also likely to try other tricks in order to maximise profit. Where ID is in question, such as gnoming, there is every chance a chargeback will not have too much impact on a fraudster as it will cause the identity they used to get blacklisted, which in the case of multi-accounters is "disposable" once tarnished.

If the player turns out to be innocent, returning deposits removes the danger of chargebacks or legal challenges. It then just becomes a civil dispute where the casino has refused to honour the contract, and retuned everyone back to the position they were in before the contract was made. It would not be possible (legally) to charge back deposits that have been voluntarily returned by a merchant. The charge back process itself was only ever designed to enable card holders to get their money back when a merchant failed to deliver; it was not designed to allow for winnings from gambling to be forceably retrieved in the event of a dispute. For this, a claim in the small claims court would be necessary for the additional $5000 in this case. If the action failed, it would only serve to strengthen the validity of the fraud charge, and so a fraudster would not want to take it this far.

There are other avenues to pursue, and it may be possible to get advice on what might have gone wrong were the player to be innocent, and the security checks failing because of bad data. This advice can be found by looking under topics related to finding it hard to get credit even though you have a good record of paying bills and debts. The most common cause is duff data in the datasets used by credit reference agencies, and not being registered on the electoral roll, which is a legal requirement for anyone 18 or over, whether or not they wish to vote.

One "basic check" often used by many companies is to check the name and address they are given by a customer against the electoral roll. It is possible to fail this check for innocent reasons, such as moving house frequently, or having moved in recently. Repair is in the customers hands, and is done by registering as soon as they move in, rather than waiting for the annual form that comes every October.

If the OP is sure they are innocent, they should make sure they appear on the electoral roll. The next step would be to check their full credit files at the three agencies, which is a fixed charge of £2 each, making £6 in total. This would expose any bad data, as well as evidence of ID fraud attempts made against them (which if then used at a casino could leave an innocent player accused of already having an account).

Despite never having PABd, I have TWICE been a victim of such duff data on these kinds of datasets, and had casino accounts placed under investigation. When I was cleared, I was told that it was duff data that had initially caused my account to be flagged as it looked like I had tried to open another account and get away with it. I could not find anything obvious on my credit file, nor have I suffered any oddities like companies I don't know telling me I owe them money.

 

[Nifty29]

Vinyl, we aren't talking about the law, in your country or any other.

Cases where genuine players get caught in the net are usually resolved quite quickly, as the player can show evidence of their innocence. Hence, confiscating of deposits is only going to affect the fraudsters at the end of they day.

I've no wish to address every sentence of a 2000 word essay which basically says "Deposits shouldn't be confiscated because it is illegal and it might mean someone innocent might be affected", other than to say that operators should not shy away from imposing severe penalties, such as keeping deposits, just because one or two players MIGHT get caught accidentally (and then only initially anyway). If this was a consideration when enacting laws, there wouldn't BE any laws as they just about all have the capacity to affect the innocent....as I'm sure your professional legal background and experience would tell you.

 

[skiny]

Anyone remember this?

(This conversation took place 30 seconds after creating my account.)

Please wait for a site operator to respond.

You are now chatting with 'Thomas'

Thomas: Hello and welcome to our live chat service. How may I help you today?

skiny: Hello Thomas.

skiny: I clicked the cashier button and it says "An error occurred while loading the cashier. Please contact customer support"

skiny: Ok, now I closed the casino and reopened it and it says "You are not allowed to log in."

Thomas: I'm seeing that you didn't pas the security checks of our Risk Team, therefore you would not be able to hold an account with any of our casino products.

That was Jackpot Capital. I failed to pass security checks at one casino in my entire life. Before and after that I've made deposits and withdrawals at dozens of casinos including 3Dice, microgaming, playtech and RTG. So when I'm simply told a player didn't pass a security check, I take it with a grain of salt.

No, I'm not saying the OP is innocent. I still have no idea what happened in this particular case but there are reasons I refuse to jump down a player's throat just because a casino says there was a problem.

The only difference in my case is they didn't wait until I deposited 2000 dollars and then tried to withdraw. It took 30 seconds, not 6 months.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Anyone remember this?



That was Jackpot Capital. I failed to pass security checks at one casino in my entire life. Before and after that I've made deposits and withdrawals at dozens of casinos including 3Dice, microgaming, playtech and RTG. So when I'm simply told a player didn't pass a security check, I take it with a grain of salt.

No, I'm not saying the OP is innocent. I still have no idea what happened in this particular case but there are reasons I refuse to jump down a player's throat just because a casino says there was a problem.

The only difference in my case is they didn't wait until I deposited 2000 dollars and then tried to withdraw. It took 30 seconds, not 6 months.

Either you are a damn good fraudster, or this shows that these checks are unreliable, and should not be used to brand players a fraud.

I also wonder why the OP has not been treated like any other fraud who comes here to exploit the forum, their name turning red and "banned - fraudulent player" listed under it. Max is satisfied that the casino has got it right, and it is now case closed both here and at the casino.

It suggests that there is sufficient doubt to allow the case to be reopened at some stage, and thus doubt exists as to whether this player has been treated fairly.

I see so many posts that say "the law doesn't apply, it's the internet". This may be the case due to the inabilty to enforce the laws, but it does not make it RIGHT, any more than it is "right" for fraudsters to say "anything goes, and good luck to us if we can get away with it".

The internet is a great place for fraudsters BECAUSE of this problem of enforcing laws, and they do it because there is less danger of punishment. Whilst the same applies to operators, the reputable ones should not be taking advantage of this "lawlessness" on the internet to do things that would never fly in a B & M environment.

The law IS catching up though, and the internet can no longer be relied upon to be a haven where "anything goes". It is mostly big businesses with well oiled lobby groups that are bringing the law into the internet, as they are losing out on a fortune. The most vociferous proponents of bringing the rule of law into the internet are the big movie and music companies, and they have made significant advances and held many to account over their actions over the internet. Governments are also starting to take the lead, and often use in their arguments those cases where internet based companies have acted outside the law because they claim no individual country laws apply to them.

The current situation cannot last forever, as big business and other vested interests are not going to give up, they are just going to keep trying other routes.

It is this "laws don't apply to us" attitude among UK facing whitelisted casinos that initially got the momentum going for a new review, which as well as better protecting players, looked for ways to close the taxation exploits that quickly became apparent under the whitelisting arrangements.

Rather than accept that more and more innocent players can be considered "collateral damage" in the war on fraud, casinos should change the way the service is structured so that it no longer invites fraud. The most obvious way would be to remove any advantage that might be gained by "gnoming", which usually targets the welcome bonus. Make it so that a player that joins and plays the welcome bonus gets a BETTER subsequent offer than they would if they tried to open multiple accounts. This would also render multi-accounting pointless, and with no advantage being gained, casinos need not worry that players open duplicate accounts.

If there is no money to be made, fraudsters will start to forget about online casinos, and try their luck with a different industry.

It is a shame that the current business model is to lay down the red carpet for potential new players, but treat their existing loyal players like crap, and offer them crumbs.

 

[skiny]

Both RTG and MGS have casinos that offer ridiculous welcome bonus which invite bonus abusers and multiple account players. It would be so much simpler if the licensors of the software would put restrictions on these offers rather than leave it up to the casinos to fight over who can figure out how to give out the biggest bonuses by tacking on the most terms and conditions or highest wage requirements.

Offering returning players higher vip levels according to not only the amount of money they can afford to lose but the amount of time they've been active members (active meaning making deposits daily, weekly, monthly) and possibly the amount of deposits they've made instead of huge bonuses just for signing up would entice players to return to the same casinos and as VWM says, make multiple accounts pointless.

There have been countless suggestions in this forum about how to thwart the bonus abusers and the fraudsters ranging from making (fairly simple) changes to the software to changing the bonus systems but after all these years we still have thread after thread about players having winnings confiscated because of suspected fraud, bonus abuse or breaking some silly term or condition.

And YES some players do deserve to have accounts closed and winnings confiscated but a large number of these problems wouldn't exist if the software companies and the casinos themselves would just get together and implement the changes that would make most of this illegal activity either a lot more difficult or out right impossible.

Then we go back to the other idea... maybe the casinos prefer it this way.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Both RTG and MGS have casinos that offer ridiculous welcome bonus which invite bonus abusers and multiple account players. It would be so much simpler if the licensors of the software would put restrictions on these offers rather than leave it up to the casinos to fight over who can figure out how to give out the biggest bonuses by tacking on the most terms and conditions or highest wage requirements.

Offering returning players higher vip levels according to not only the amount of money they can afford to lose but the amount of time they've been active members (active meaning making deposits daily, weekly, monthly) and possibly the amount of deposits they've made instead of huge bonuses just for signing up would entice players to return to the same casinos and as VWM says, make multiple accounts pointless.

There have been countless suggestions in this forum about how to thwart the bonus abusers and the fraudsters ranging from making (fairly simple) changes to the software to changing the bonus systems but after all these years we still have thread after thread about players having winnings confiscated because of suspected fraud, bonus abuse or breaking some silly term or condition.

And YES some players do deserve to have accounts closed and winnings confiscated but a large number of these problems wouldn't exist if the software companies and the casinos themselves would just get together and implement the changes that would make most of this illegal activity either a lot more difficult or out right impossible.

Then we go back to the other idea... maybe the casinos prefer it this way.

Such casinos DO exist, and they have taken up permanent residence on my hard drive.

Once you reach Platinum loyalty status, and are made VIP, you are miles better off continuing to play your account at GNUF (and presumably other casinos owned or run by the Palace Group) than you would be by trying to multi account your way to several welcome bonuses.

On the other hand, there are casinos that forget you exist after the first few deposits, yet offer ever grander welcome bonuses to new players. These casinos would attract multi accounters.

What I find odd is that this case is about an RTG casino, and they DO tend to offer ongoing bonuses to existing players that are similar in nature to the welcome bonus. Where CWC have erred is this "unlimited" 7 day offer where you can just keep depositing and claiming the welcome bonus until you hit something. This WOULD attract a multi-accounter because unlike existing players, they do not have to wait for the next offer, but can take them as fast as they can manage, and have the money for.

I suspect this is how the OP started out, repeatedly depositing for the first 7 days, and eventually hitting once they had deposited $2000. Having won $7000, they would no longer be eligible for further cracks at this offer, even if there was time left on their 7 days. This might encourage the opening of a second account via gnoming in order to carry on until the hit again. The case suggests this is what CWC believed the OP was up to, and this is the account they finally caught him on. This account being deemed connected to an account that had already had a crack at this offer and beat it, even though different ID's, backed with valid documents, had been used.

Playing on another person's PC can be the cause of the connection being made, but as well as an indicator of multi account fraud, can also be completely innocent.

 

[The Dude]

Turns out this member has multiple accounts elsewhere besides CWC.

Bye, bye Mr. Appl3pye!

Edited to add:

The thing is, we are able to nail fraudsters pretty easily. These guys make mistakes, they leave a trail, they have certain characteristics that are easy to spot, and we have records of these guys going back years. So we welcome fraudulent PABs; they only make our knowledge-base stronger

 

[maphesto]

I agree with Nifty about the fact that fraudsters make him sick. I really hate the fact that fraudsters are making honest players gambling more difficult.:sniper:

CW should have given the fraudsters deposits and winnings to charity. That's my opinion.
Why should casinos earn money on fraudsters? In this case, the casino don't have to pay winnings.

 

[Nifty29]

To Nifty29 - I've seen you ask alot of people in this forum if they were members here before.

Are you on the membership committee and if so, is there a quota for new monthly members?

(Just wanted to answer this quickly)

Actually, yes there is:

QUOTAS

Genuine new members = Unlimited

Former members pathetically masquerading as new members = 0


Anyone can apply to be on the committee, except those in the second category above.

FWIW, I might actually respect a former member who didn't play childish games to be heard again, but rather asked Bryan to be reinstated like an adult. (Not saying this applies to you its just a general comment)


Carry on.

 

[The Dude]

...
FWIW, I might actually respect a former member who didn't play childish games to be heard again, but rather asked Bryan to be reinstated like an adult. (Not saying this applies to you its just a general comment)...

I just wanted to mention - we do have an amnesty program in the forum. If you find yourself banned or suspended, sometimes a simple apology is all it takes to get back in. It doesn't apply to fraudsters though. We have a zero tolerancy on player fraud.

There are a handful of members that keep on coming back - I should be flattered I guess But they usually get caught out when I set aside the time to do a little digging.

I guess I have something to do tomorrow

I agree with Nifty about the fact that fraudsters make him sick. I really hate the fact that fraudsters are making honest players gambling more difficult.:sniper:

CW should have given the fraudsters deposits and winnings to charity. That's my opinion.
Why should casinos earn money on fraudsters? In this case, the casino don't have to pay winnings.

Excellent point here. I think that if fraudsters know that if they get caught, their deposits will go to a charity. It's a win win for everyone. The casino isn't chastised for keeping dodgy deposits, starving kids get a bowl of rice, and the fraudster knows he indirectly caused a bit of good in the world. Greedy bastards.

 

[skiny]

Turns out this member has multiple accounts elsewhere besides CWC.

Bye, bye Mr. Appl3pye!

Edited to add:

The thing is, we are able to nail fraudsters pretty easily. These guys make mistakes, they leave a trail, they have certain characteristics that are easy to spot, and we have records of these guys going back years. So we welcome fraudulent PABs; they only make our knowledge-base stronger

Which is fine for fraudsters who get bitchy because they got caught and turn up at a forum looking for someone to support their illegal activities but what about all the other players who might make minor mistakes filling out forms or maybe have changed addresses since the last time they voted or used their maiden name on something else a year ago only to find out they now have no idea why they failed to pass a security check? Specially the ones who might not even be a member of a forum?

What if JPC waited until I won 7k to tell me I didn't pass a security check and I'm not allowed to know why?

If Playtech, Microgaming and 3Dice can make payments without fax back forms, photocopies of ID, copies of utility bills, passports and maybe a urine sample I don't understand why RTG casinos make proving who you are such a bloody nightmare.

And if the ridiculous welcome bonuses didn't outweigh any reason you might have to become a returning player multiple accounts would be a waste of time.

 

[maxd]

I also wonder why the OP has not been treated like any other fraud who comes here to exploit the forum, their name turning red and "banned - fraudulent player" listed under it. ... It suggests that there is sufficient doubt to allow the case to be reopened at some stage, and thus doubt exists as to whether this player has been treated fairly.

I'm thinking maybe you are doing too much of the typing and too little of the reading here. The "why?" has long since been answered, as you well know (see post #75).

Your line of logic seems to be "there is (was) a margin for error SO the conclusion is (was) not 100% certain SO the player may have been mistreated". Yes there is (was) a slim chance of that. A very slim chance. But decisions when dealing with fraudsters are seldom based on certainties, they are based on probabilities. Again, you know this. Trying to make a "player abused" case out of this is disingenuous. Or maybe you just like doing all that typing. Your business, of course, but posting for the sake of typing exercise isn't much use to anyone. Being intentionally disingenuous is even less so.

... but what about all the other players who might make minor mistakes ... only to find out they now have no idea why they failed to pass a security check?

When you find out how to make all of the people happy all of the time you let us know. Until then -- and until we can add "clairvoyance" to our skill set -- we do what we can when people come to us. Wringing our hands over the troubles of unknown and unseen persons with unspecified problems would be unproductive.

 

[The Dude]

Which is fine for fraudsters who get bitchy because they got caught and turn up at a forum looking for someone to support their illegal activities but what about all the other players who might make minor mistakes filling out forms or maybe have changed addresses since the last time they voted or used their maiden name on something else a year ago only to find out they now have no idea why they failed to pass a security check? Specially the ones who might not even be a member of a forum?

What if JPC waited until I won 7k to tell me I didn't pass a security check and I'm not allowed to know why?

In your situation, possibly a red flag was raised and the support person needed your account to be perused over before given the thumbs up. It is rare that a person accused of fraud is found to be legit - I don't think you were accused, you may have had some identifiers that needed to be checked out to make sure you are legit.

And if you had had a major issue (like non-payment), you would have probably turned to Google and typed in "jackpot capital casino problems" - it would have brought you straight to here. Most people who have casino issues find this place - type in just about any casino name along with "problems" and voila - you're here.

If Playtech, Microgaming and 3Dice can make payments without fax back forms, photocopies of ID, copies of utility bills, passports and maybe a urine sample I don't understand why RTG casinos make proving who you are such a bloody nightmare...

But most if not all require these (sans the urine sample).

You can thank all of the douchebag fraudsters for making this a bloody nightmare.

 

[maxd]

You can thank all of the douchebag fraudsters for making this a bloody nightmare.

Ain't that the technicolour truth!

 

[skiny]

In your situation, possibly a red flag was raised and the support person needed your account to be perused over before given the thumbs up. It is rare that a person accused of fraud is found to be legit - I don't think you were accused, you may have had some identifiers that needed to be checked out to make sure you are legit.

Actually, this is what the rep said "Thomas: I'm seeing that you didn't pas the security checks of our Risk Team, therefore you would not be able to hold an account with any of our casino products."

That doesn't sound much like they wanted to peruse my account.

And if you had had a major issue (like non-payment), you would have probably turned to Google and typed in "jackpot capital casino problems" - it would have brought you straight to here. Most people who have casino issues find this place - type in just about any casino name along with "problems" and voila - you're here.

Not everyone googles when they don't get paid. There are times when people just end up getting screwed.

But most if not all require these (sans the urine sample).

You can thank all of the douchebag fraudsters for making this a bloody nightmare.

I made withdrawals at Bet365 and 3Dice in the recent past. Neither asked me for any of this. RTG casinos are the only ones that I know of that ask you for 3 or 4 different forms of proof and if you're lucky accept them all the first time. In fact, I sent in a faxback to Desert Nights, then my driver's license and a utility bill and even then they had to call my house and ask me what my last deposit was, what the CC was I used to make the deposit, repeat my home address and other info... I know at least 2 legitimate players who can't be bothered opening an RTG account because the hassle isn't worth it.

But like I said, if they didn't make it lucrative for the fraudsters to be opening multiple accounts the problem wouldn't exist. And in the end it IS the legitimate players that pay for it. And if the system requires this much security and the problem is still exists, ridiculous security measures is obviously not the answer.

 

[The Dude]

Actually, this is what the rep said "Thomas: I'm seeing that you didn't pas the security checks of our Risk Team, therefore you would not be able to hold an account with any of our casino products."

That doesn't sound much like they wanted to peruse my account.

But I take it your account was reopened and it's good to go, right? If not, please let me know.

Not everyone googles when they don't get paid. There are times when people just end up getting screwed.

I would extrapolate that if it doesn't matter to people, then it doesn't matter. If it does, then people try to do something about it. Google searches take a matter of seconds. Joining a forum or popping off an email takes a matter of minutes. If people can't be bothered with it then that's a moot issue as far as I am concerned.

I made withdrawals at Bet365 and 3Dice in the recent past. Neither asked me for any of this.

I said most - Betsson wants me to provide them with ID docs...and I'm not even a player, it's for an affy account!

RTG casinos are the only ones that I know of that ask you for 3 or 4 different forms of proof and if you're lucky accept them all the first time. In fact, I sent in a faxback to Desert Nights, then my driver's license and a utility bill and even then they had to call my house and ask me what my last deposit was, what the CC was I used to make the deposit, repeat my home address and other info... I know at least 2 legitimate players who can't be bothered opening an RTG account because the hassle isn't worth it.

And if they called your house, and you had no idea what they were talking about, you'd realize that your ID had been swiped somehow. ID theft is a huge problem for everyone - it's rampant in the online gaming industry. If you think about it, they are actually doing you a favor by doing this.

But like I said, if they didn't make it lucrative for the fraudsters to be opening multiple accounts the problem wouldn't exist. And in the end it IS the legitimate players that pay for it. And if the system requires this much security and the problem is still exists, ridiculous security measures is obviously not the answer.

I think some of these casinos are more of a target since they are not under the wings of true regulation. Commit fraud at a casino licensed in Alderney, Gib, or the Isle of Man, and you will probably find yourself prosecuted in a criminal court. The vast majority of RTG casinos don't have this protection (in most cases), and are sometimes overly meticulous about protecting their casino properties from fraud. Thus we have ridiculous security measures - and yes, this turns a lot of people off and they won't bother with playing.

Which is sad really - we're supposed to be having fun, aren't we?

 

[skiny]

But I take it your account was reopened and it's good to go, right? If not, please let me know.

I wouldn't worry about it. I have one RTG casino installed and all docs approved. That's all I need. I figure it's their loss.

I would extrapolate that if it doesn't matter to people, then it doesn't matter. If it does, then people try to do something about it. Google searches take a matter of seconds. Joining a forum or popping off an email takes a matter of minutes. If people can't be bothered with it then that's a moot issue as far as I am concerned.

I think it depends on how much they've won and what their mind set is. If they're new to online gaming and/or it wasn't a very big withdrawal they might just figure it's not worth chasing or assume that online gambling is a scam and just not play online.

I said most - Betsson wants me to provide them with ID docs...and I'm not even a player, it's for an affy account!

That's funny. lol

And if they called your house, and you had no idea what they were talking about, you'd realize that your ID had been swiped somehow. ID theft is a huge problem for everyone - it's rampant in the online gaming industry. If you think about it, they are actually doing you a favor by doing this.

And I'd probably appreciate it if I figured they were doing it for my benifit. They're not. They might also call someone's house and have a family member or someone sharing the house not know what they're talking about... And then say, Really? He gambles online? He still owes me 40 bucks or he told me we can't afford a new bedskirt/sheet set... I want a divorce.

I think some of these casinos are more of a target since they are not under the wings of true regulation. Commit fraud at a casino licensed in Alderney, Gib, or the Isle of Man, and you will probably find yourself prosecuted in a criminal court. The vast majority of RTG casinos don't have this protection (in most cases), and are sometimes overly meticulous about protecting their casino properties from fraud. Thus we have ridiculous security measures - and yes, this turns a lot of people off and they won't bother with playing.

I don't think people in other countries are really worried about being taken to court in Alderney even if it is a threat. Most of them probably wouldn't know enough about the law to even know they could be convicted. They probably figure they'll just get the boot and maybe lose their deposits if they get caught. Maybe their should be obvious warnings about convictions on the websites and clearly stated during set up.

I really have no idea what the reality is but it seems to me that RTG casinos have more problems with multiple account type fraud. Is this the case or do I just see more of their problems and less of others?

 

[krissyistormy]

I just read the entire thread. Interesting but OMG what a headache! I actually now have a headache. Ive also learned what "gnoming" is though it took me a while to catch on lol.

Im sitting here scratching my head though, I can understand security checks, covering ones arse etc but credit checks? I dont know how it works elsewhere, but here in Australia you can not do a credit check on anyone without a signed privacy consent form as it is against the privacy law to do so.

Still, if i were the OP <---see im catching on and i was getting screwed out of 7k i would not have waited 6 months to even PAB <--ha ha there I go again! My head would have been spinning and i would have been throwing up green crap a week after they recieved and accepted my documents if they had not paid me. I remember when i started gambling online about 2/3 years ago and i made my first ever WD, i done a google search on the company and had seen some people had problems getting paid and there were opinions for and against the casino, which, because im overly paranoid, had me in a panic...am I going to get paid, is this casino a rip off. So day 1 they asked for docos which i provided, day 2 i go to live chat and ask about my cashout, docos verified, comes day 8 and the withdrawal is no longer in my account and had apparently been paid but me being me went into top gear... i emailed, i phoned i went to live chat, was told it would take 3-5 days to be in my bank account, I felt like a complete moron come Monday morning and heres the 13k sitting in my account..I never took into account it was 3-5 Business days DUH

Everyone reacts differently to situations, and from what I read I cant determine if this guy was a fraud or not BUT what I do know is that if hes in the same area as the company that regulates casinos his butt would have been down in that office lodging an official complaint and he would be chasing his winnings, which is the case for most people, I would not be cool with getting my name trashed as a fraudster and only getting my deposits back, I would have went all Denny Crane Boston Legal style on the casino.

Was a very interesting read though and im glad to see that everyone here is entitled to their own opinions without childish backlash, kudos to all.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I'm thinking maybe you are doing too much of the typing and too little of the reading here. The "why?" has long since been answered, as you well know (see post #75).

Your line of logic seems to be "there is (was) a margin for error SO the conclusion is (was) not 100% certain SO the player may have been mistreated". Yes there is (was) a slim chance of that. A very slim chance. But decisions when dealing with fraudsters are seldom based on certainties, they are based on probabilities. Again, you know this. Trying to make a "player abused" case out of this is disingenuous. Or maybe you just like doing all that typing. Your business, of course, but posting for the sake of typing exercise isn't much use to anyone. Being intentionally disingenuous is even less so.



When you find out how to make all of the people happy all of the time you let us know. Until then -- and until we can add "clairvoyance" to our skill set -- we do what we can when people come to us. Wringing our hands over the troubles of unknown and unseen persons with unspecified problems would be unproductive.

This "probability" is the main problem, along with the wide differences in what casinos label as "fraud", with some screaming "fraud" just because you bet big and had a lucky run when using a large bonus.

It doesn't look fair to confiscate a deposit on the grounds of fraud when the "fraud" was nothing more than aggressive betting of large chunks of the initial bankroll and getting far enough ahead to make the WR and still be in profit.

Sending confiscated deposits to charity would be better than keeping the money for themselves, as often seems the case, but in REAL fraud, those deposits themselves may be from an illegitimate funding source, and the casino confiscating them could lead to someone other than the fraudster suffering.

Although players accused outright of serious fraud are seldom cleared after review, the same cannot be said in those cases of "innocent mistakes" or blunders and misunderstandings by risk departments when verifying players from different countries with their own internal systems of ID validation.

How often do players from the UK and Canada hit the brick wall of being required to send in their "National ID card", and then face an uphill struggle explaining that such a document does not exist in these countries, and that other documents are used instead, many of which are not acceptable substitutes to the casinos, yet are under local guidelines. This leads to confiscated winnings purely on the grounds that the "fraud" is being too ill to be allowed to hold a driving license, and the casino not accepting the standard UK substitute documents that underly the production of a photo document such as a driving license.

If there was more transparency, like we have when fraud is prosecuted in a criminal court, players would be more understanding when casinos claim they are taking the moral high ground in confiscating deposits for the greater good of the innocent customers.

In the case of the man convicted of "bonus abuse" in a criminal court, it became clear just how BIG a fraud a single player can be, with his case revealing several thousand identities at his disposal for multi accounting.

To find out how they got caught, fraudsters merely need to closely examine the court documents after such a case has been tried, no need therefore to badger casino reps for information as to how they got caught this time so that next time they can do better.

The lack of transparency also means we don't have a picture of the scale of genuine player fraud, which from the forum seems more about "advantage play" and exploiting loopholes, nothing that most big companies would not be happy doing to the detriment of their customers. I think it is hypocracy for casinos to cry foul over advantage players exploiting the loopholes when casinos themselves exploit plenty of loopholes in their efforts to sweat a few more dollars (or Euros/Pounds) from every player. The most obvious "sweating" is the sheer scale of the BS over why payments that used to take 24 hours to process now take 48 or 72, and that even electronic transfers take "a minimum of 3 working days".

If casinos cut the BS and REALLY did their best in terms of fast payments etc, maybe players would be more understanding of the problems they face fighting the fraudsters when occasionally an innocent player is asked for extra documents to clarify something on their account.

 

[chuchu59]

This "probability" is the main problem, along with the wide differences in what casinos label as "fraud", with some screaming "fraud" just because you bet big and had a lucky run when using a large bonus.

It doesn't look fair to confiscate a deposit on the grounds of fraud when the "fraud" was nothing more than aggressive betting of large chunks of the initial bankroll and getting far enough ahead to make the WR and still be in profit.
Sending confiscated deposits to charity would be better than keeping the money for themselves, as often seems the case, but in REAL fraud, those deposits themselves may be from an illegitimate funding source, and the casino confiscating them could lead to someone other than the fraudster suffering.

Although players accused outright of serious fraud are seldom cleared after review, the same cannot be said in those cases of "innocent mistakes" or blunders and misunderstandings by risk departments when verifying players from different countries with their own internal systems of ID validation.

How often do players from the UK and Canada hit the brick wall of being required to send in their "National ID card", and then face an uphill struggle explaining that such a document does not exist in these countries, and that other documents are used instead, many of which are not acceptable substitutes to the casinos, yet are under local guidelines. This leads to confiscated winnings purely on the grounds that the "fraud" is being too ill to be allowed to hold a driving license, and the casino not accepting the standard UK substitute documents that underly the production of a photo document such as a driving license.

If there was more transparency, like we have when fraud is prosecuted in a criminal court, players would be more understanding when casinos claim they are taking the moral high ground in confiscating deposits for the greater good of the innocent customers.

In the case of the man convicted of "bonus abuse" in a criminal court, it became clear just how BIG a fraud a single player can be, with his case revealing several thousand identities at his disposal for multi accounting.

To find out how they got caught, fraudsters merely need to closely examine the court documents after such a case has been tried, no need therefore to badger casino reps for information as to how they got caught this time so that next time they can do better.

The lack of transparency also means we don't have a picture of the scale of genuine player fraud, which from the forum seems more about "advantage play" and exploiting loopholes, nothing that most big companies would not be happy doing to the detriment of their customers. I think it is hypocracy for casinos to cry foul over advantage players exploiting the loopholes when casinos themselves exploit plenty of loopholes in their efforts to sweat a few more dollars (or Euros/Pounds) from every player. The most obvious "sweating" is the sheer scale of the BS over why payments that used to take 24 hours to process now take 48 or 72, and that even electronic transfers take "a minimum of 3 working days".

If casinos cut the BS and REALLY did their best in terms of fast payments etc, maybe players would be more understanding of the problems they face fighting the fraudsters when occasionally an innocent player is asked for extra documents to clarify something on their account.

This is the reason why I advocate for more transparency in what constitutes fraud. If the reason for suspecting this is fraud simply because a player used a bonus and bet big whilst playing within the rules this cannot be counted as fraud. On the otherhand, if there is enough evidence to show the player had used multiple accounts to obtain the same bonus and bet big in hopes of a lucky streak its another matter and definitely fraud. In any case, the industry must come up with a clearer definition of fraud. At the very least they must outline what type of fraud the accused player is guilty of. Hiding behind an excuse 'it will make the fraudsters smart and let them know how they were caught' doesnt wash with me. The casino should at least state in general terms what offence was committed.

 

[krissyistormy]

The whole bet big thing associated with fraud worries me. I for one, when i hit a streak I up that bet, i usually play no less than $1 but when im on a run i can and have bet anywhere up to max credits IE: $1 a line max credits on the slot machines, I have screens of wins to prove that one. So if I decide to play at a new casino and do hit a streak and start with my bet big adventure will I be classed as someone commiting casino fraud? And therein lies the problem, when playing at a new casino they dont know your betting habbits because you are a new customer. Whats next? getting references off previous casinos where you have played at to show your pattern of play? The stress of wondering if you are going to be labelled a fraud or not is more trouble than its worth.

 

[Nifty29]

The whole bet big thing associated with fraud worries me. I for one, when i hit a streak I up that bet, i usually play no less than $1 but when im on a run i can and have bet anywhere up to max credits IE: $1 a line max credits on the slot machines, I have screens of wins to prove that one. So if I decide to play at a new casino and do hit a streak and start with my bet big adventure will I be classed as someone commiting casino fraud? And therein lies the problem, when playing at a new casino they dont know your betting habbits because you are a new customer. Whats next? getting references off previous casinos where you have played at to show your pattern of play? The stress of wondering if you are going to be labelled a fraud or not is more trouble than its worth.

If you play at accredited casinos, and read and comply with the terms and conditions, then you will have no problems.

The issue in this thread is NOT about betting too big or "bonus abuse", however much VWM insists that it is. The player was found to be committing identity fraud.

The only players that have issues with "bonus abuse" are those who don't read the terms properly, or do read them and deliberately try to get around them. I can count on one hand how many genuine cases of accidental confiscation of an innocent player's winnings involving accredited casinos there has been over my years at CM.

 

[vinylweatherman]

If you play at accredited casinos, and read and comply with the terms and conditions, then you will have no problems.

The issue in this thread is NOT about betting too big or "bonus abuse", however much VWM insists that it is. The player was found to be committing identity fraud.
The only players that have issues with "bonus abuse" are those who don't read the terms properly, or do read them and deliberately try to get around them. I can count on one hand how many genuine cases of accidental confiscation of an innocent player's winnings involving accredited casinos there has been over my years at CM.

......eventually, but only after 6 months of dithering. It was still "very probable" rather than "100% certain" that he was guilty, and he did get his deposit back.

The problem with this is that a VICTIM of identity theft could also be accused and found "very probably guilty" of fraud just because a fraudster got there first, and got clean away with ripping off the casino with a fake ID. With all the secrecy, it is impossible for a victim such as this to prove that they are the innocent player, and it is the previous player that the casino paid that was the fraudster. This happens a great deal in the banking industry when it comes to ID theft and the details used to obtain credit. The fraudsters get there first, and manage to get the loans. The innocent owner of the ID doesn't know anything is happening till the effects feed through, which usually starts by them suddenly finding their credit rating has been trashed when trying to get a new product or service, or when debt collectors start pestering them for missed payments on a loan they never had. Just like casinos, these companies often just don't listen, and consider that if the loan was in your name, it could only have been you that took it out because their security procedures would have blocked a fraudster.

This almost happened to ME a while back at Palace group, and eventually the rep said (after finding me innocent) that someone had signed up with what appeared to be my identity, but which on closer inspection proved not to be the case. A couple of years later, this happened AGAIN, this time at their Prime casino. I was instantly cleared when I told them I had read the full eGap on which they had based their stock excuse for having to investigate, and that I would wait out the allowed 14 days before approaching eCogra.

The fact that I have almost been a "dolphin in the tuna net" TWICE in only 5 years (at the time) made me think these checks were not sufficiently robust to ensure that ONLY the fraudsters got targetted. The secrecy also means I am not allowed to know WHY this happened, which means I can't check to see if there is a data error somewhere that has caused it, or worse still, a fraudster HAS got enough of my details to make attempts at fraud worth a try. I never found anything on my credit file that indicated I had been compromised, such as footprints for loans I never asked about, or cards and accounts I don't have.

 

[Nifty29]

......eventually, but only after 6 months of dithering. It was still "very probable" rather than "100% certain" that he was guilty, and he did get his deposit back.

The problem with this is that a VICTIM of identity theft could also be accused and found "very probably guilty" of fraud just because a fraudster got there first, and got clean away with ripping off the casino with a fake ID. With all the secrecy, it is impossible for a victim such as this to prove that they are the innocent player, and it is the previous player that the casino paid that was the fraudster. This happens a great deal in the banking industry when it comes to ID theft and the details used to obtain credit. The fraudsters get there first, and manage to get the loans. The innocent owner of the ID doesn't know anything is happening till the effects feed through, which usually starts by them suddenly finding their credit rating has been trashed when trying to get a new product or service, or when debt collectors start pestering them for missed payments on a loan they never had. Just like casinos, these companies often just don't listen, and consider that if the loan was in your name, it could only have been you that took it out because their security procedures would have blocked a fraudster.

This almost happened to ME a while back at Palace group, and eventually the rep said (after finding me innocent) that someone had signed up with what appeared to be my identity, but which on closer inspection proved not to be the case. A couple of years later, this happened AGAIN, this time at their Prime casino. I was instantly cleared when I told them I had read the full eGap on which they had based their stock excuse for having to investigate, and that I would wait out the allowed 14 days before approaching eCogra.

The fact that I have almost been a "dolphin in the tuna net" TWICE in only 5 years (at the time) made me think these checks were not sufficiently robust to ensure that ONLY the fraudsters got targetted. The secrecy also means I am not allowed to know WHY this happened, which means I can't check to see if there is a data error somewhere that has caused it, or worse still, a fraudster HAS got enough of my details to make attempts at fraud worth a try. I never found anything on my credit file that indicated I had been compromised, such as footprints for loans I never asked about, or cards and accounts I don't have.

I won't address the majority of what you said as its irrelevant to this situation, but I will say that the OP was 99.9% a fraudster rather than "very probably".

It's no point reiterating any other facts as Bryan and Max have already done it ad nauseum, but why you keep painting the OP as hard-done-by I don't know.

 

[new.age.doc00]

my solution was

I registered with this casino in October. I've read these forums for a long time and used a number of their recommendations for casinos, so when I was reading the casino pages and saw they had an opening offer (which they still do) where you can get unlimited bonuses for the first week you register, I hopped on and played. I deposited four or five times during the week, and the last time I deposited I played Blackjack, Texas Hold em, an Aladdin slot, I think some Paigow, all of which I checked to make sure were okay and finished with a balance of $7000. I requested a withdrawal for $2000 to start and that's where the problems began.

First, I was asked for my identification and proof of address. Okay, I sent that in. Next, I was asked to send in a faxback form..... Okay, I completed that as well. Next...... well nothing came next, there was just silence and my withdrawals were reversed everytime I requested them. So I contacted support via their live chat and was told that all my documents as well as my faxback had received and been in order and approved. I cashed out again... reversed. This time, I was told my account "was with a manager" and I'd hear back soon.

It's now been nearly six months of me calling, emailing and using their live chat an average of once a week or so. Everytime I call when its not during business hours, I am told to call during business hours to talk to a manager. Everytime I call during business hours and request to talk to a manager, I am told "Oh, I'm sorry they are all in meetings". I am convinced this is intentional, I actually copied a live chat conversation with them and pasted the exact thing to a representative that he had told me the week before. I have been told numerous times they would call or email the manager for me. I have had them forward the email that they send to the manager with me. I finally pm'ed the representative on here and asked them to look into the situation for me. Nothing, nothing, nothing. I'm about to rip my hair out at this point. Between all of my emails, phone calls and live chats, I've probably talked to them 20 to 25 times and still nothing.

I still login and look at my account balance, here I am as we speak, looking at a beautiful balance of $7,038.35 that is worth less than a toy prize in a cereal box since this site refuses to return my calls, emails and live chats. This was a truly horrible place to play, and I do not recommend them by any means. Do not play here as they will not pay your withdrawal, and refuse to put you in touch with a manager or escalate your concerns when you have a problem.

I remember I played Aladdin's Gold , almost the same situation , I was able to withdraw after I contacted customer support by phone to verify my identity. I hope you'll get the same or I was extremly lucky .

 

[The Dude]

I remember I played Aladdin's Gold , almost the same situation , I was able to withdraw after I contacted customer support by phone to verify my identity. I hope you'll get the same or I was extremly lucky .

Umm - the guy was a fraudster and was booted from the casino AND the forum. Why hope he gets paid? He didn't and shouldn't.

 

[new.age.doc00]

Umm - the guy was a fraudster and was booted from the casino AND the forum. Why hope he gets paid? He didn't and shouldn't.

It was a reply with quote not a reply to the whole thread . I wasn't reading the entire thread , my fault