vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Hi there Dirk Diggler,
Hope you are well.
Dirk we totally agree with you in that this is a bit of a drag and if it was up to us we would have let this slide.
However unfortunately this is out of our hands.
We are not able to comment on which irregularities been found on your documentation due to a security reasons and we do hope that you understand this.
However it will really be appreciated if you can get that documentation certified at your earliest convenience and we will get your winnings posted to you as soon as the documentation has been approved.
Yet again we would like to thank you for your patients and understanding in this matter.
Best Regards
Mario
PlayShare Group Representative
Err..
How can you refuse to comment on something that does not exist?
Since these irregularities don't actually exist, commenting on them will serve to show how the external company HAVE GOT IT WRONG, and will inform us all how these mistakes are made. To hide a mistake is a COVER UP, and does nothing to give confidence to players whose casinos still use this company.
So far, we seem to have an admission that the security provider are making mistakes, but players are not being allowed to correct them.
Likely these mistakes are being made due to the staff reviewing the documents not understanding the different ways in which different countries present the personal details. This can be evident where the address is a bit odd, perhaps in a small village or one of the "new towns" such as Milton Keynes or Bracknell. This can cause small differences in address presentation between drivers licence and utility bills. Names can also differ, depending on whether a middle name(s) is used. Microgaming casinos do not allow middle names to be registered, however formal ID documents require either the whole middle name or the initial. Credit cards can have many formats, as some card companies allow users to choose how their name will be displayed. This can be whether or not to use the prefix "Mr" or "Mrs/Ms", whether to have full name, or just initials or surname.
I rather suspect this is what may have happened here.
One way would be to have an independent person look at these documents with a view to seeing if there is a potential problem that is being misinterpreted by the security company.
If the same documents have been passed before, there is no reason for them to fail now, and someone should have the power at the casino to make the security company see sense!
Surely the money belongs to the CASINO, so why can't casino management overrule the security comopany. If someone like eCogra ruled the player should be paid because there was nothing wrong with the documents, whould the casino risk it's seal by telling eCogra "our security company says no, so we can't folow your ruling".
A full and open review of this may even show that players are being routinely "screwed" by having documents wrongfully rejected. There has been another case where a player was asked to certify the documents, only to have the security company still reject them. If the security company have convinced themselves this is fraud, certified documents will not really help, as the underlying documents will still contain the same "irregularities". The only way to investigate would be to seek an explanation of the irregularities that can rule out the presence of fraud.
Surely, it is about time we had a system where players presented their documents ONCE, and had them centrally cleared and their ID verified for whatever casino they play at in the future. This would be easy where there is a common link, such as all MG casinos, or all eCogra casinos. There may be a need to separately verify for "all Playtech", but even this will only require twice the processing.