Curaçao license, Chargeback possible?

[ABCD12345]

I have a family member whom has a gambling problem.

They are registered on Gamstop in the UK. They have since joined up to one of the Curacao online casino's with 1668/JAZ license.

In the past month they have deposited between £70,000-£85,000 on said site and lost everything.

During the month the casino has been allowing withdrawals but all the money was eventually lost, £40,000 in one night at one point.

Does anyone know if Curacao has any duty of care to protect players suffering a gambling addiction? £40,000 in one night seems crazy and I'm sure a UK site would have flashed that up.

With the casino only having a Curacao license have they taken the money from a UK customer illegally?

Is there a case for a bank chargeback?

On first attempt Barclays have already pushed back on the prospect of a chargeback as they were verified by my family member.

I know the root of the problem is the addiction and not getting the money back, but this is someone who has sold everything they have, house car and now have nothing. This impossible to comprehend for me as someone who doesn't gamble!

 

[maxd]

Hello,

I can't answer the chargeback question because I've never gone through that process personally.

As to the duty of care at a Curaçao-licensed casino the answer is relatively simple but not straight-foreward:

• I'm pretty sure the official answer would be "no". Most Curaçao licensees -- and 1668 licensees in particular -- can pretty much do what they like. That is changing, or will change somewhat in the near future, but for now the old rules are still in effect and that means there pretty much are no rules.
• Many Curaçao casinos are voluntarily putting "duty of care" procedures into effect, some are just paying it lip service and doing nothing in practice, and others are ignoring the issue entirely. 1668 licensees are not leaders in this and generally fall into the "ignore it entirely" group. FWIW 8048 (Antillephone) licensees are doing much, much better in this regard. The bottom line it that it's really a case-by-case situation, at least for now, meaning you have to try to find out what Casino X is actually willing to do.

Hope that helps.

Regards,
Max Drayman
Player Arbitration (PAB) Manager, Casinomeister.com

 

[Casinomeister]

Hiya ABCD...

Here are a couple of other threads where chargebacks are mentioned by people in your same predicament. You can check those out and search some more. Banks are notoriously stubborn on this. Best of luck.

Goldenlion.bet not paying out withdrawal - Casinomeister Forum

Ares Casino (arescasino.com) is BAD news for players - Page 4 - Casinomeister Forum

I am sure there are more. Another warning for those UK players not playing at UKGC casinos. You are basically stuffed.

 

[jasonuk]

To add to the advice of Max and Bryan, find out how the money was sent from the bank to the casino.

If the deposit was made directly then that should be a prohibited transaction - rogue casinos in Curacao will attempt to launder money through other businesses (e.g. the "deposits" are charged to a Flower Shop in Turkey) and in that case you may have more of an argument.

Unfortunately, most transactions are done via a crypto platform - and in that case there's going to be more of a battle, because the bank has executed the transaction (between the bank and the crypto platform) successfully, and what the customer does beyond that is not their responsibility or concern. Similarly the crypto platform will wash their hands of it, which leaves the casino - and as Max mentions many Curacao casinos only pay lip service to responsible gambling (although that is slowly - very slowly - starting to change).

 

[dunover]

To add to the advice of Max and Bryan, find out how the money was sent from the bank to the casino.

If the deposit was made directly then that should be a prohibited transaction - rogue casinos in Curacao will attempt to launder money through other businesses (e.g. the "deposits" are charged to a Flower Shop in Turkey) and in that case you may have more of an argument.

Unfortunately, most transactions are done via a crypto platform - and in that case there's going to be more of a battle, because the bank has executed the transaction (between the bank and the crypto platform) successfully, and what the customer does beyond that is not their responsibility or concern. Similarly the crypto platform will wash their hands of it, which leaves the casino - and as Max mentions many Curacao casinos only pay lip service to responsible gambling (although that is slowly - very slowly - starting to change).

Deposits to the fraudulent rogue 1668/JAZ sites are never made directly from people in the UK, always through a disguised merchant, that's how they can take credit cards in some instances. The fact they seem to have allowed some withdrawals in this case (assuming they were ever received) is a perfect demonstration of the micro management these scammers use on each account. In this case, the account was a lottery win for them, a PG who had tens of thousands available and so would be paid along the way to losing it all to elicit confidence thus to bust said PG.

I will happily bet when the player was 'paid' that at no stage were they ahead and secondly had exhibited deposit patterns that were indicative of a PG with a large bankroll. When the scammers checked the following morning after the 40k loss by the PG, or at the moment their monitoring flagged it up in real time, I bet they were frenziedly abusing themselves with joy before doing high fives in whichever rathole they live in.

If anyone here, @maxd or otherwise, believes that the Cup-o-cocoa eGaming 'Authority' will ever act now or in the future to prevent this type of shithousery or get anywhere near the level of protection, anti-criminality and control used by ethical or reputable licensing jurisdictions then they are living in Shangri La or too far down the yellow spliff road. For to do so would forfeit the very foundation of their income, kill the golden goose and eliminate the whole reason for their existence. Not gonna happen. Ever.

I mean, sacrifice corrupt and easy money or bribes, then spend (big) money on research, imposition of proper investigative procedures, financial controls, applicant checks, lawyers and creating new and comprehensive eGaming rules? Smell the coffee!

For pity's sake, the UKGC has nearly unlimited funds, QUANGO powers to fine and/or remove licenses and has (eventually) availed itself of a few of the right personnel needed to be effective. Even then, a complaint or case about a licensee's conduct takes 2-4 years to be properly reviewed and resolved.

If we use the UKGC as a benchmark, then to think Cure-a-cow would even come close to MGA as a kind of second-tier objective would be fanciful.

You will see from Curacao a bit of pointless window dressing, much procrastination, obfuscation and 'reviewing' in order to give the appearance something is being done. This will ensure the things people think are being done never get done whilst maintaining the pretence they intend to clean things up; result being same old, same old....

 

[Eliot85]

To add to the advice of Max and Bryan, find out how the money was sent from the bank to the casino.

If the deposit was made directly then that should be a prohibited transaction - rogue casinos in Curacao will attempt to launder money through other businesses (e.g. the "deposits" are charged to a Flower Shop in Turkey) and in that case you may have more of an argument.

Unfortunately, most transactions are done via a crypto platform - and in that case there's going to be more of a battle, because the bank has executed the transaction (between the bank and the crypto platform) successfully, and what the customer does beyond that is not their responsibility or concern. Similarly the crypto platform will wash their hands of it, which leaves the casino - and as Max mentions many Curacao casinos only pay lip service to responsible gambling (although that is slowly - very slowly - starting to change).

Even Mga casino does that. Also casino with estoanian licens. The money goes to Kenya, uganada….

 

[maxd]

... If anyone here, @maxd or otherwise, believes that the Cup-o-cocoa eGaming 'Authority' will ever act now or in the future to prevent this type of shithousery ...

Yes I do believe it is possible, it's happened before (elsewhere obviously). Am I holding my breath in anticipation of that happy day? Not likely. We'll have more to say about Curaçao and the recent goings on in this year's Awards.

As a side note I'd ask you to kindly refrain from insulting me or anyone else because they happen to hold a different opinion from you. You're welcome to your opinion, obviously, but do try to be grown-up enough about it to express yourself without having to resort to belittling those who disagree.

And please do spare me the "it's just a good bit of fun" excuse. If you can't have your fun without cack-handed put-downs then you're just another blow-hard bully that needs to find a better way to entertain themselves.

- Max

 

[ABCD12345]

The gambling site used was: goldenbet.com/eng/

The bank depots went to: Santeda International LTD, headquarters in Cyprus.

Withdrawals were processed and did come back to the bank account. Barclays said another reason for not processing a chargeback was the fact there had been deposits and withdrawals not just one way.

You are probably right dunover if they trickle some back it covers themselves and gives the gambler confidence!

Does anyone know if there would be a case for a chargeback if giving proper evidence? I'm afraid its such a niche subject and the caller at Barclays probably has no knowledge on this situation so its easy just to say no as its a problem gambler it's their own fault (which it is).

If the bank did do a chargeback i don't see how the company in question could ever fight it anyway they would probably be happy to just take it on the chin and not draw attention to their operation.

*delinked url*

 

[maxd]

FWIW we have had some success getting player issues resolved with Goldenbet. If you'd like us to look into this for you you're welcome to use our complimentary Player Arbitration (PAB) service. Here's a guide to getting started with that: How to submit a Player Arbitration (PAB) Ticket - Casinomeister Forum

If you do proceed please ensure that you have read and will comply with the Player Arbitration Policies and Procedures . Failure to comply with the rules could slow, damage or even cancel your PAB.

- Max

 

[dunover]

Yes I do believe it is possible, it's happened before (elsewhere obviously). Am I holding my breath in anticipation of that happy day? Not likely. We'll have more to say about Curaçao and the recent goings on in this year's Awards.

As a side note I'd ask you to kindly refrain from insulting me or anyone else because they happen to hold a different opinion from you. You're welcome to your opinion, obviously, but do try to be grown-up enough about it to express yourself without having to resort to belittling those who disagree.

And please do spare me the "it's just a good bit of fun" excuse. If you can't have your fun without cack-handed put-downs then you're just another blow-hard bully that needs to find a better way to entertain themselves.

- Max

Sorry @maxd

When I see persons of stature in the community (or anybody for that matter!) project a belief or even hope that the Curacao cesspit can be cleaned up at all, let alone to the extent it can be absolved from past sins it does raise my hackles and put me in defensive mode. That emotion doesn't just come from the ourageous cases we've witnessed here over the years but also my own work outside CM - it really does have a history even worse than is apparent by the testimonies on this site.

For that reason, I see redemption as almost impossible; that doesn't mean though I'd not welcome it if it were to happen.

 

[maxd]

Sounds to me like we're pretty much in the same boat, with the possible exception of what redemption might look like to each of us.

The example I look to is Kahnawake, as you well know, as a jurisdiction that can (if they really put their shoulders into it) turn things around and step into the light. My belief has always been that the door should always be open for those that want to improve and that there is no benefit in chaining someone to the dark pit if they really want to do better.

That's my approach to pretty much all casino issues and because "Curaçao licensed" covers such a massive amount of ground I think it's especially important to welcome any positive changes they are willing to make and give credit when they actually follow-through.

As to redemption? At this point I think that's a very individual thing. I'd say we'll have to see what we see and make our own decisions when we feel there's sufficient proof that real changes have been made.

- Max

 

[helenxo66]

Hey, do you know guys with these Curacao casinos operating under same license and same umbrella like Santeda, by eg I had an account with Mystake where I requested to be self excluded for 5 years and this is still in place, but sister site Goldenbet operating under Santeda allowed me to open an account and gamble a huge amount in one day without any duty of care for responsabile gaming on their side. Is this normal? Usually in UK when you self exclude from a casino operating under same umbrella you will be unable to open an account with a sister site.