Roguish Betspin Casino not honoring e-wallet withdrawals

bruinsdude

Senior Member
PABaccred
mm1
Joined
Nov 24, 2013
Location
Canada
Last Thursday I deposited at Betspin casino. I always deposit using one of two methods, either my E-wallet (Ecopayz) or Paysafe.

All previous deposits have been by these methods, and 100% of my withdrawals have been via my e-wallet. Last Thursday I was lucky enough to hit a nice win, tried to w/d to ecopayz.

This method was refused repeatedly, as they said I deposited by Paysafe this time, I would have to come up with another w/d method. I tried to contest this fact via the rep on here, whom I emailed one week ago, no reply.

I then asked Betspin for my transaction history to show that I use Ecopayz to withdraw, via chat and via email. To date this request has not even been replied to either and has certainly not been honored.

In the week since, I have gone full tilt and used up the $750 I was going to withdraw, but I don't feel that excuses the roguish behavior displayed by the casino.

Ecopayz is still even available as a w/d option to me, but they simply cancel the request when I submit it. Surely they shouldn't be allowed to deny a w/d method used previously, on several occasions.

All email communication with this casino is being ignored. The rep is non-responsive. The casino is non-responsive. Their actions are deplorable. It seems so many casinos these days will find any excuse to not pay or delay payment.

How can a casino act in this way and remain at 9.5 rating here?
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
Its law that a player withdraws via the last used deposit method.

As you cannot w/d via Paysafe, the only alternative is bank transfer / wire.

Happens to the wife all the time, frustrating as hell but little that can be done.

Feel your pain but not rogue IMO.
 

lockinlove

Staring into the sun
PABaccred
Joined
Jan 17, 2014
Location
Canada
Its law that a player withdraws via the last used deposit method.

As you cannot w/d via Paysafe, the only alternative is bank transfer / wire.

Happens to the wife all the time, frustrating as hell but little that can be done.

Feel your pain but not rogue IMO.

Is this true? I find that strange if so.

You have your ecopayz account verified at the casino, you deposit with paysafe but then they want you to cashout via bankwire? Why exactly? I get if you deposit paysafe and never used an ewallet before but this isnt the case. Sounds like crap to me.
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
Is this true? I find that strange if so.

You have your ecopayz account verified at the casino, you deposit with paysafe but then they want you to cashout via bankwire? Why exactly? I get if you deposit paysafe and never used an ewallet before but this isnt the case. Sounds like crap to me.


AFAIK!

Not 100% sure about laws / rules in your Country...

Here, lets say I deposit 100 times with Skrill and withdraw 50 times with the same Skrill wallet.

My account is 100% verified, all ID, blood, urine, stool sample, the works sent in....

I today decide to deposit with a Paysafe voucher (reason could be I just went shopping with Skrill master card and balance is empty so I go to shop and buy Paysafe)

My luck is in and I managed a withdrawal, despite all those Skrill transaction, I would STILL be asked to withdraw via wire transfer due to the most recent / latest deposit method used.

Bullshit agreed but yes its what casinos have to do, main reasons I believe (or they say) is anti-money laundering.
 

Betspin-Magnus

Dormant account
Joined
May 21, 2015
Location
Malta
Last Thursday I deposited at Betspin casino. I always deposit using one of two methods, either my E-wallet (Ecopayz) or Paysafe.

All previous deposits have been by these methods, and 100% of my withdrawals have been via my e-wallet. Last Thursday I was lucky enough to hit a nice win, tried to w/d to ecopayz.

This method was refused repeatedly, as they said I deposited by Paysafe this time, I would have to come up with another w/d method. I tried to contest this fact via the rep on here, whom I emailed one week ago, no reply.

I then asked Betspin for my transaction history to show that I use Ecopayz to withdraw, via chat and via email. To date this request has not even been replied to either and has certainly not been honored.

In the week since, I have gone full tilt and used up the $750 I was going to withdraw, but I don't feel that excuses the roguish behavior displayed by the casino.

Ecopayz is still even available as a w/d option to me, but they simply cancel the request when I submit it. Surely they shouldn't be allowed to deny a w/d method used previously, on several occasions.

All email communication with this casino is being ignored. The rep is non-responsive. The casino is non-responsive. Their actions are deplorable. It seems so many casinos these days will find any excuse to not pay or delay payment.

How can a casino act in this way and remain at 9.5 rating here?

Hi bruinsdude,

you have PM.

I can honestly say I missed the email notification regarding the PM you sent and I will not make any excuses regarding that, it was my bad.

However, I am afraid regarding withdrawals that it is as stated above. If you had any other questions you feel you never got an answer to when contacting support, please PM me and I will answer.

/Kind regards
 

Tirilej

Still a Lady
CAG
MM
Joined
Apr 18, 2009
Location
Sweden
AFAIK!

Not 100% sure about laws / rules in your Country...

Here, lets say I deposit 100 times with Skrill and withdraw 50 times with the same Skrill wallet.

My account is 100% verified, all ID, blood, urine, stool sample, the works sent in....

I today decide to deposit with a Paysafe voucher (reason could be I just went shopping with Skrill master card and balance is empty so I go to shop and buy Paysafe)

My luck is in and I managed a withdrawal, despite all those Skrill transaction, I would STILL be asked to withdraw via wire transfer due to the most recent / latest deposit method used.

Bullshit agreed but yes its what casinos have to do, main reasons I believe (or they say) is anti-money laundering.

That depends totally how the casinos are reading the rules.

For example at VS you should withdraw to the method you have used the most, not the last one.
At Guts I earlier had the same but that changed when they changed the processor. It's totally depending on which casino is reading the rules, so there you go :)
They maybe believe they are following regulations but then it's strange that so many reads them differently.
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
That depends totally how the casinos are reading the rules.

For example at VS you should withdraw to the method you have used the most, not the last one.
At Guts I earlier had the same but that changed when they changed the processor. It's totally depending on which casino is reading the rules, so there you go :)
They maybe believe they are following regulations but then it's strange that so many reads them differently.

Couldn't agree more Sara, try explaining that to a live support agent, I wish the most persistent among us the best of luck with that one which is why I "gave In" and settled for what I originally posted lol :thumbsup:

32 Red seemed to have grasped it no problem but the others you mention along with other MT Secure Trade, Leo Vegas, Casumo, insist on the last payment/deposit method used.

To be fair it doesn't bother me in the slightest whether its instant to Skrill or 3-5 days via bank transfer, as long as I know its "on its way" then that's all good for me :D
 

lockinlove

Staring into the sun
PABaccred
Joined
Jan 17, 2014
Location
Canada
Hi bruinsdude,

you have PM.

I can honestly say I missed the email notification regarding the PM you sent and I will not make any excuses regarding that, it was my bad.

However, I am afraid regarding withdrawals that it is as stated above. If you had any other questions you feel you never got an answer to when contacting support, please PM me and I will answer.

/Kind regards

If this is regulation, I would like to see the term. The person has a verified ewallet and deposited in a way it cannot be paid back to that method. Since the player has deposited and withdrawn with ecopayz in your casino, there should be no issue and the player shouldnt be forced to provide a pile of new documents.

I think what I got from Sarah's post is, you guys may be reading into it wrong. If so, I agree.
 

paul7388

Ueber Meister
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Location
glasgow scotland
Had the same last year at guts.Nearly always deposited by neteller and withdrew to it but occasionally used paysafe.

Because i had had 2 deposits in a row from paysafe one time my withdrawal was cancelled and had to do bank transfer.

So because of that only ever deposited by neteller after that. Apart from UK bookies i no longer deposit to casinos using paysafe. If ive money in neteller fine if not the bookies get my deposits nowas will not use my debit card at any casino either except uk bookies.
 

Captain Rizk

Experienced Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Location
Malta
If this is regulation, I would like to see the term. The person has a verified ewallet and deposited in a way it cannot be paid back to that method. Since the player has deposited and withdrawn with ecopayz in your casino, there should be no issue and the player shouldnt be forced to provide a pile of new documents.

I think what I got from Sarah's post is, you guys may be reading into it wrong. If so, I agree.

Unfortunately, it is very complex and the gaming regulations also refer to EU Money Laundering law in some situations but in essence the main regulation covering this is as follows

Section 37 of the Remote Gaming Regulations: Remission of Funds:

37. (1) A licensee must, at the request of the registered player
in whose name a player’s account is established, remit the funds
standing to the credit of the account to the player by no later than
five working days, if practicable, after receipt of the request.
(2) An amount may only be remitted by the licensee to the
player, to the same account from which the funds paid into the
player’s account originated.


Obviously in a situation where this cant happen then Money Laundering directives and legal interpretations come into play.

If anyone has serious insomnia then you can find the full set of regs here:

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

Tirilej

Still a Lady
CAG
MM
Joined
Apr 18, 2009
Location
Sweden
Unfortunately, it is very complex and the gaming regulations also refer to EU Money Laundering law in some situations but in essence the main regulation covering this is as follows

Section 37 of the Remote Gaming Regulations: Remission of Funds:

37. (1) A licensee must, at the request of the registered player
in whose name a player’s account is established, remit the funds
standing to the credit of the account to the player by no later than
five working days, if practicable, after receipt of the request.
(2) An amount may only be remitted by the licensee to the
player, to the same account from which the funds paid into the
player’s account originated.


Obviously in a situation where this cant happen then Money Laundering directives and legal interpretations come into play.

If anyone has serious insomnia then you can find the full set of regs here:

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

Which to me clearly says that if you have made deposits from two different places then each one will be fine to pay out to...and lucky me some casinos see it the same way.
 

lockinlove

Staring into the sun
PABaccred
Joined
Jan 17, 2014
Location
Canada
Unfortunately, it is very complex and the gaming regulations also refer to EU Money Laundering law in some situations but in essence the main regulation covering this is as follows

Section 37 of the Remote Gaming Regulations: Remission of Funds:

37. (1) A licensee must, at the request of the registered player
in whose name a player’s account is established, remit the funds
standing to the credit of the account to the player by no later than
five working days, if practicable, after receipt of the request.
(2) An amount may only be remitted by the licensee to the
player, to the same account from which the funds paid into the
player’s account originated.


Obviously in a situation where this cant happen then Money Laundering directives and legal interpretations come into play.

If anyone has serious insomnia then you can find the full set of regs here:

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

Which in this case is ecopayz. Not some new method the player has never used before
 

bruinsdude

Senior Member
PABaccred
mm1
Joined
Nov 24, 2013
Location
Canada
Since you cannot pay me back to Paysafe in Canada, you and other casinos have all paid me to my e-wallet, til now, yourselves included.

This "Must pay to a bank account" nonsense is clearly simply an attempt to delay the w/d and hope that the player spends the money, which in this case you won! Bravo!

So are you saying had I simply topped the account up with a few dollars from my Eco account by depositing, I would have been "Good to go"?

Cmon guys, common sense has to prevail at some point
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
Cmon guys, common sense has to prevail at some point

You would have thought so!

Unfortunately this seems to be lacking across the board in general these days (not just rules n regs) last time I cam across "Common Sense" was sometime back in the early 80's!
 

Captain Rizk

Experienced Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Location
Malta
Which to me clearly says that if you have made deposits from two different places then each one will be fine to pay out to...and lucky me some casinos see it the same way.

But that is exactly the point. I couldnt disagree with you more. What this says to me is that the funds have to go back to the method from which the deposit that generated the withdrawal was made.

And that is where legal and individual companies interpretation of regulations and EU law come into play.

Since you cannot pay me back to Paysafe in Canada, you and other casinos have all paid me to my e-wallet, til now, yourselves included.

This "Must pay to a bank account" nonsense is clearly simply an attempt to delay the w/d and hope that the player spends the money, which in this case you won! Bravo!

So are you saying had I simply topped the account up with a few dollars from my Eco account by depositing, I would have been "Good to go"?

Cmon guys, common sense has to prevail at some point

No idea - i dont have any detail on your individual case and so i cannot comment. What i was aiming to do was to try to shed a little more light on why these differences happen between different operators
 

paul7388

Ueber Meister
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Location
glasgow scotland
But that is exactly the point. I couldnt disagree with you more. What this says to me is that the funds have to go back to the method from which the deposit that generated the withdrawal was made.

And that is where legal and individual companies interpretation of regulations and EU law come into play.



No idea - i dont have any detail on your individual case and so i cannot comment. What i was aiming to do was to try to shed a little more light on why these differences happen between different operators

What i do not get is why i can deposit as much as i like by paysafe at Coral and as i also deposit by Neteller all withdrawals are paid to Neteller without a hassle as its the only registered withdrawal method on my account.

Being a fully licensed UK bookie they would be first to follow guidelines. Never get told you have used 5 paysafe vouchers you need to withdraw by a bank transfer.
 

Tirilej

Still a Lady
CAG
MM
Joined
Apr 18, 2009
Location
Sweden
But that is exactly the point. I couldnt disagree with you more. What this says to me is that the funds have to go back to the method from which the deposit that generated the withdrawal was made.

And that is where legal and individual companies interpretation of regulations and EU law come into play.

It doesn't really say that for me. Besides, if it would be so then why are we even able to use different ways to deposit in to the same account?
That is where it's getting ridiculous.

At several places I use both Neteller and Trustly. At some they can't pay me back in usd if I have used Trustly so I can withdraw using Neteller instead. Why?
Well, because I have made enough deposits through Neteller to cover that.

Your friend Yits looked at it the same way at Guts so I was allowed to do the same there before. Not after the changes though. Now they are waiting days to pay back to Trustly.
 

brianmon

Ueber Meister
webby
mm4
Joined
May 22, 2013
Location
Cumbria
I made a withdrawal today at Betat of £890. Tried to withdraw back to the Visa card that I'd used for the deposit.

But got a message saying that £590 would be going to that Visa card, £140 would be going to another, previously used Visa card, and £160 would be going to Neteller.
Ok, I thought, I'm used to them splitting withdrawals up.

But then, a few hour later, I got the usual email from Neteller, saying I'd received money. But it was for the full £890. Nothing at all went back to the Visa card, I had used to deposit with.

Go figure.....
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
It shows the regulator doesn't really have a clue of how things work in practice. They assume that ALL methods are two-way, so when there is a one way method it can cause an inconsistent mess for the player with each operator coming up with a different interpretation of the rules.

The EU regulators are no better, as they seem to think money laundering is best tackled by having a situation where the player who deposits via a one way method MUST be paid out via a method that they have never used before in preference to a fully verified method that has been used numerous times. This is an obvious loophole that the unscrupulous criminal will seek to exploit in order to launder cash via paysafe vouchers bought in some store to a bank account they have just set up purely to receive said funds. If they can take over a player's account, this would be a goldmine as the criminal money would end up exiting via this new bank account rather than back to the players' existing eWallet account, where the criminal will not be able to get hold of it unless they can hack that on top of the casino account.

They could of course ban the use of one way deposit methods altogether.

It is also interesting to note that there have been numerous complaints in the past about players who deposit via a 2 way system (neteller for example), only to be told by the casino that they CANNOT withdraw back to the Neteller account, and must accept a new method. Now, if this was laid down by law, these casinos would not be able to do this, and would have no choice but to repay back to Neteller, which is what the complainants in these cases wanted anyway.
 
Top