Casino.com requesting notarised documents to be sent to Philippines

vinylweatherman said:
Playtech do the same with the British, they say we are a much higher risk simply because we are British.
Can you show me where they've said this? :p That would be nice.

I think that a number of casinos block bonus players from the UK mainly because of the problems they've had in the past with a number of fraud rings that came out of the UK. There have been a lot, and I'm guessing some operators just got fed up with is and said the hell with them. Just my extrapolation.

But it has nothing to do with being British. :rolleyes:
 
So, even LESS justification for making players send documents to the Philipines then. Exactly WHO is going to be processing these SENSITIVE documents if this is NOT Playtech central (verification). Why can the CASINO not receive these documents from this player at their OWN offices in Gibraltar?

I am not the only one "going out on a limb" here, only PLAYTECH (and the rogue operators) have given players this kind of run-around.

It's not SOME Playtech casinos that are "anti-Brit", but most of them, and this is based on advice given to them BY PLAYTECH to do this, NOT something they have thought up all by themselves.

Sorry, mate, that is utter bollocks. I challenge you to prove it.

If the Philipines are so very anti about online gambling, why are online casinos permitted to host part of their operations there.

You don't read very well, do you? I said that there is ONE permitted operation in the Philippines - ie. a monopoly.

Every few months when no one taps you on the shoulder, you start to go way the hell overboard with your unfounded claims and unsubstantiated "facts". Though I am not a moderator here any more, I can still complain about having to listen to nonsense - and I am doing so and challenging you to put your money where your mouth is.
 
Can you show me where they've said this? :p That would be nice.

I think that a number of casinos block bonus players from the UK mainly because of the problems they've had in the past with a number of fraud rings that came out of the UK. There have been a lot, and I'm guessing some operators just got fed up with is and said the hell with them. Just my extrapolation.

But it has nothing to do with being British. :rolleyes:

Its not just that, UK has a high number of bonushunters and APs. From akas site, not really players that casinos want:
 
Its not just that, UK has a high number of bonushunters and APs. From akas site, not really players that casinos want:

LOL, that's kinda interesting... but that's a pretty shitty excuse to use for increasing the playthrough requirements. I can't see how a Brit would necessarily play "smarter" than someone from say Singapore - and thus it is silly to impose additional playthrough on a particular geographical location.

That said, vwm's assertion that Playtech advises operators to increase the playthrough for the UK is still utter nonsense and he has absolutely no way to substantiate that claim.

If anything, it's more like lemmings... one operator has a bright idea and others blindly follow...
 
LOL, that's kinda interesting... but that's a pretty shitty excuse to use for increasing the playthrough requirements. I can't see how a Brit would necessarily play "smarter" than someone from say Singapore - and thus it is silly to impose additional playthrough on a particular geographical location.

That said, vwm's assertion that Playtech advises operators to increase the playthrough for the UK is still utter nonsense and he has absolutely no way to substantiate that claim.

If anything, it's more like lemmings... one operator has a bright idea and others blindly follow...

More bonushunters also means more multiaccounters etc and if the number of them are high from a particular country I understand the casinos decision to imply higher WRs. The risk is higher that the new player is a bonus hunter or a gnome.

And most of the Playtechs that do this are the reputable bookies. So they probably havent made the decisions without weighing the pros and cons. They hardly have any complaints either.
 
LOL, that's kinda interesting... but that's a pretty shitty excuse to use for increasing the playthrough requirements. I can't see how a Brit would necessarily play "smarter" than someone from say Singapore - and thus it is silly to impose additional playthrough on a particular geographical location.

That said, vwm's assertion that Playtech advises operators to increase the playthrough for the UK is still utter nonsense and he has absolutely no way to substantiate that claim.

If anything, it's more like lemmings... one operator has a bright idea and others blindly follow...


Perhaps the operators need to be told this. When this has come up before, operators have used the excuse "Playtech advice" to justify the imposition of extra WR.
Since this did NOT come as advice from Playtech, operators who use this as an excuse are LYING to players, and therefore cannot be trusted.

This is the kind of thing you will ONLY get them to say "off the record", just as you will only get operators to admit to bonus banning a player simply for being abnormally lucky.

CWC have now broken cover, and admitted this in the forum during a heated exchange over the bonus banning of a player who had "won thousands" from the group.

The position taken by the Philipines is pure hypocracy; they license casinos for the REST of us to play, yet do NOT believe it fitting for their own citizens to play there. The UK seems to be one of a very small number of countries that both license online casinos, AND let their own citizens play there too.

Perhaps there would be less confusion about Playtech if the operators stopped giving bogus excuses for some of their actions.

Casino.com has STILL not justified why documents have to be sent to the Philipines, rather than to their REGISTERED offices in Gibraltar.

If Playtech don't have offices in the Philipines, and Casino.com is based in Gibraltar, who the HELL are these documents being sent to! It's neither Playtech, nor Casino.com - is it.
 
Perhaps the operators need to be told this. When this has come up before, operators have used the excuse "Playtech advice" to justify the imposition of extra WR.
Since this did NOT come as advice from Playtech, operators who use this as an excuse are LYING to players, and therefore cannot be trusted.

How many times have you heard operators say something just to deflect the blame? And how many times have you talked to customer support who don't actually have a clue what they are talking about?

You of all people should know better than to go waving something like that "fact".

The position taken by the Philipines is pure hypocracy; they license casinos for the REST of us to play, yet do NOT believe it fitting for their own citizens to play there. The UK seems to be one of a very small number of countries that both license online casinos, AND let their own citizens play there too.

I repeat again. There is a MONOPOLY held by ONE operator for online gaming in the Philippines. Furthermore, the license is NOT the same as the ones issued for online gaming operators targeting players outside the Philippines as it is handled by a separate governmental organization.

I'm sure they would appreciate it if you stop putting words in their mouths and discovering the true facts before throwing your uninformed moral judgments around.

Casino.com has STILL not justified why documents have to be sent to the Philipines, rather than to their REGISTERED offices in Gibraltar.

If Playtech don't have offices in the Philipines, and Casino.com is based in Gibraltar, who the HELL are these documents being sent to! It's neither Playtech, nor Casino.com - is it.

Just because Casino.com is based in Gib doesn't mean their support center, or fraud team needs to be present in Gib. I suggest you read up on Gib's regulations for operators there.

Just because William Hill is a UK company doesn't mean it has to operate out of the UK - and conversely, just because Will Hill is licensed in Gib, doesn't mean that they can't receive mail or documents in the UK.

Oh... and that applies to Ladbrokes too...

... and another hmm... Will Hill have asked for documents to be sent to the Philippines in the past as well. But they're a UK company with operations based out of Gib... what's up with that?

Do your research before you make claims. One of these days you will find yourself the target of a lawsuit if you continue to make these unsubstantiated claims.
 
More bonushunters also means more multiaccounters etc and if the number of them are high from a particular country I understand the casinos decision to imply higher WRs. The risk is higher that the new player is a bonus hunter or a gnome.

There are other ways to deal with bonus hunters. No one should be penalized simply because they live in a country which has a high percentage of bonus hunters.

Even multiaccounters, gnomes, whatever - there are ways to deal with them too. Just because a person with multiple accounts has more cracks at the cherry doesn't mean he's actually going to GET the cherry.

In my personal, tiny opinion, if raising playthrough is the only means a casino has to defend itself against bonus abuse, they've hired the wrong people to manage it.
 
If you don't want to send the documents, then it sounds like you are screwed.

My suggestions...

#1. Get preapproved so you don't have to run into surprises when go to withdraw your money.

#2. Send the requested docs. The Philippines isn't that bad. I have lived here for two years, opened a bank account, get lots of utility bills and show my passport to lots of people. I'm still okay.

#3. Have a laugh, forget about it, and enjoy your day.

#4. Next casino you try, get preapproved.
 
How many times have you heard operators say something just to deflect the blame? And how many times have you talked to customer support who don't actually have a clue what they are talking about?

You of all people should know better than to go waving something like that "fact".



I repeat again. There is a MONOPOLY held by ONE operator for online gaming in the Philippines. Furthermore, the license is NOT the same as the ones issued for online gaming operators targeting players outside the Philippines as it is handled by a separate governmental organization.

I'm sure they would appreciate it if you stop putting words in their mouths and discovering the true facts before throwing your uninformed moral judgments around.



Just because Casino.com is based in Gib doesn't mean their support center, or fraud team needs to be present in Gib. I suggest you read up on Gib's regulations for operators there.

Just because William Hill is a UK company doesn't mean it has to operate out of the UK - and conversely, just because Will Hill is licensed in Gib, doesn't mean that they can't receive mail or documents in the UK.
Oh... and that applies to Ladbrokes too...

... and another hmm... Will Hill have asked for documents to be sent to the Philippines in the past as well. But they're a UK company with operations based out of Gib... what's up with that?

Do your research before you make claims. One of these days you will find yourself the target of a lawsuit if you continue to make these unsubstantiated claims.

Maybe, but they CAN receive mail in Gib. This case is about a casino that is based in Gib, yet claims it CANNOT receive mail in Gib, and that it has to be received in the Philipines only. Since they are based in Gib, and Playtech themselves do NOT have offices in the Philipines, what's up with so many Playtech powered casinos asking players to send documents to the Philipines, irrespective of the discussions about relative risks.

As for CS not knowing what they are talking about, the forum is littered with clear cut cases of this from various operators. I have experienced this myself, and I sometimes KNOW the answers from a technical standpoint, so know when CS are completely out of their depth, but trying to look as though they know what they are talking about.

Take the recent fiasco surrounding SEGA casino. They are informing players that they are no longer accepting players from their jurisdiction, and are now telling AFFILIATES the same thing, yet they say they are not closing down, just restricting access to fewer jurisdictions.

Are they lying? We think so, and time will tell.

This is an example of operators being deliberately misleading to cover for something more serious. If they are closing down, why not say so. They seem unable to say which jurisdictions they ARE still accepting players from, and no forum member so far has come forward to say that they can still play there.

I know more than you think, but this has been via PM. I have been told things that contradict the "company line" on a number of contentious issues. In a few cases, I (and others) have been able to show the allegations were TRUE, and that there has been a cover up by operators.

We have had the big scandals too, such as Absolute Poker, where deliberate attempts to cover up major wrongdoing have been exposed. Who is to say that other operators have not done the same kind of thing, but have not been caught out (yet).

If we don't speculate and discuss these things, there is no way operators are going to volunteer the information. It usually has to be dragged out of them.

Lawsuits don't seem a major concern, since casinos think themselves outside the laws of any one jurisdiction. They would not get away with some of the things they put players through were they likely to have legal action taken against them. Some operators even snub their noses at the US authorities, thinking it's just a game of cat & mouse, and believe there is nothing the US can do to them that will finish them off for good. Their response to making the transactions illegal is to find a way around the system, sometimes to the point of fraudulently miscoding the transactions, and using "front" organisations and "runners" to receive the deposits. There is evidence to support this, and the US authorities know it is going on, and try to trap them and shut down each loophole as it is discovered.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top