DaVinci's Gold requesting notarized docs

[bb28]

I agree that it would not be cost effective to request notarized docs from each and every player. However, while TIV and some others may have genuine concerns on whether some players are fraud there may be some rogues using this as a ploy to delay cashouts or not to pay at all. We should not trust the casino in this regard as we dont know whether they are the former or latter. If there was a system which requires for such documentation when we register/deposit we should have much less to worry about.

Maybe the casino could seek to reimburse the notarization fees or rather the portion of fees that exceed $5/10. Or they could give a match bonus for these fees with a 3x playthrough.. IMO the casinos may really require these docs for security purposes but havent given much thought to this issue to make it more palatable to the players. Simply stating that this occurs infrequently is not enough because of the fundamental question: Who knows?

That is a good point chuchu59, if the player does have to go to the expense and the trouble of getting documents notarized and the player is found to be in good standing then they should reimburse the player or maybe add a no deposit bonus.
As for the it occurring infrequently, this is the 1st time I've seen it come up in the forums and it's just a 2 times thing in the last week or so, so it doesn't seem to be a frequent occurrence judging by that.
As I said in another post....if it's used as a delaying payment tactic for no good reason then that is just wrong, but we have absolutely no proof of that in these two cases.

 

[pacers31]

I understand there is fine print on this, but if I go to my bank where I have an account, usually I swipe my debit card and then perform my transaction. There is no protection for the casino or the player, only another hurdle placed in front of players by an industry that is already filled with too many. I say again, if I am an identity thieve and have ID in someone elses name, the casino would not have a clue. ASK WHEN I SIGN UP and the issue is moot. Seems kind of underhanded to take money with no questions asked, then go gestapo on you when you win and want some back. This conversation is as pointless now as in past threads. Besides, the casinos have the nuclear option (i.e., the big FU clause that their decision is final) Come on regulation, then I will feel a whole lot better about this issue.

 

[LaurieJim]

what is the cost for having( per )doc notarized in other countries? i know what is ethical to charge in the u.s, but im wondering about the costs abroad, are we talking about a huge sum or the usuall 50. cent- 5.00 per stamp and signature for each doc presented ?......laurie

 

[bb28]

I understand there is fine print on this, but if I go to my bank where I have an account, usually I swipe my debit card and then perform my transaction.
Excuse me but didn't you have to provide some ID to get that debit card?

There is no protection for the casino or the player, only another hurdle placed in front of players by an industry that is already filled with too many. I say again, if I am an identity thieve and have ID in someone elses name, the casino would not have a clue.
They do have protection in place, perhaps that is why they are asking for the documents in the first place.

ASK WHEN I SIGN UP and the issue is moot.
They do warn you and why should they get everyone's documents when it's highly likely that the majority of players will never cash out?
Seems kind of underhanded to take money with no questions asked, then go gestapo on you when you win and want some back.
Oh come on........it's not a common practice, now is it?

This conversation is as pointless now as in past threads. Besides, the casinos have the nuclear option (i.e., the big FU clause that their decision is final) Come on regulation, then I will feel a whole lot better about this issue.

If you feel that strongly about it why do you play, assuming you do? Oh and doesn't almost every company that you do business with has a FU clause as you call it?
Agreed........regulation is needed, but even if there is some worldwide licensing agency there are still going to be rouges and players who choose to play at them, IMO. And if the conversation is pointless why are you participating??

 

[LaurieJim]

after giving this some thought, i have to agree that if fraud is what might be in question, whats the harm in having a few docs notarized, i mean (if )they(the casino) were stalling for time they could have one jumping thru hoops all day long, ie, this gas bill is to old, we need a newer statement ,ect and the list goes on. if i wanted my money bad enough and i knew i was in the right and had nothing to hide, give them the proof, have the docs notarized and be done with it...............just my few cents worth!! laurie

 

[kakata]

Its Rogue not rouge

 

[chuchu59]

Its Rogue not rouge

BB28's lips are red enough Kakata. They are rouge not rogue.

 

[lauram]

If this is what the casino wants and you want your money i dont think you have a choice but to go ahead and have them notarized. If other casinos follow with asking for notarized docs you will be a step ahead with your docs as you will already have them done before many of us others on here. I had a issue prob with another casino ,when they did contact me they did explain the reason behind this and trust me at their end there is a lot of issues they deal with much more then us just making a deposit that is done within seconds. Some of the issues deal with money laundering id theft and so on. And this one casino showed me just that someone had got hold of my account number and wanted it changed over and so on and so on till we got it fixed up.

 

[bb28]

Its Rogue not rouge

BB28's lips are red enough Kakata. They are rouge not rogue.

Oh geez........... leave it to me, to butcher a word and it just had to be that one! :sob:

 

[catrina m]

I think the only ones left discussing this would do whatever it took to clear thier winnings.

I would not have found this forum if (shudder) golden casino had not stalled me for 3 months.

The point is casino's have used this document tactic for years but only after you request a withdrawal.

If I am a pit boss and I see a peach fuzz kid winning thousands on my shift he will get his ID checked. Until then let him lose.

Same way with online. If your losing, no fraud worries, but try to WIN something.

Its all about money. The longer they keep your money, the more likely you are to reverse it.

If you don't believe that you are indeed a valued customer of the take take take.

Why do you think they call the days proceeds the TAKE. lol.

 

[pacers31]

Wow, kind of harsh bb. FYI, I only play at a couple of trusted places and I have never, EVER been asked for documents or ID. Perhaps it's because I play regularly and have made so many deposits, I don't know. I did in fact show ID for my debit card WHEN I OPENED MY ACCOUNT!! Thanks bb for making my point that these things should be done upfront. I'm sorry you feel the need to admonish me for suggesting that there is a better way to do things. I sure hope you never post on here about how so and so casino stole my identity, because really you will have just given it to them. Not saying it would happen, but who knows?

You are right about one thing though, it is pointless to discuss as so many players will just go along with whatever ridiculous requests the casino makes of them. So if I understand you correctly, the casinos shouldn't check you out ahead of time because chances are you will lose anyway?? You would prefer to be surprised after you win and want to be paid?? Strange attitude IMO.

This insurance company type attitude of taking the premiums no questions asked but stalling and stalling when it is time to pay up gives this industry a black eye IMO. This endeavor ultimately comes down to trust between the casino and the player. The casino can screw the player by not paying and disappearing and the player can screw the casino by charging back deposits. It is a kind of detente that makes the whole document thing ridiculous.

BTW, what are these "protections" you speak of that they have in place and how does it benefit the player in anyway? Care to elaborate on that one??

There, I'm through with my retort. Talk amongst yourselves......

 

[bb28]

Wow, kind of harsh bb. FYI, I only play at a couple of trusted places and I have never, EVER been asked for documents or ID. Perhaps it's because I play regularly and have made so many deposits, I don't know. I did in fact show ID for my debit card WHEN I OPENED MY ACCOUNT!! Thanks bb for making my point that these things should be done upfront. I'm sorry you feel the need to admonish me for suggesting that there is a better way to do things. I sure hope you never post on here about how so and so casino stole my identity, because really you will have just given it to them. Not saying it would happen, but who knows?

Harsh??? Admonish? Pretty strong words there and no I don't think I did either one of those. I didn't say that the points I were trying to make were a better way of doing things. I simply said that is the way it is. Stealing your identity....now how does that come into this discussion?

You are right about one thing though, it is pointless to discuss as so many players will just go along with whatever ridiculous requests the casino makes of them. So if I understand you correctly, the casinos shouldn't check you out ahead of time because chances are you will lose anyway?? You would prefer to be surprised after you win and want to be paid?? Strange attitude IMO.

You are taking my words and twisting them into a statement I did NOT make. NOT nice!

This insurance company type attitude of taking the premiums no questions asked but stalling and stalling when it is time to pay up gives this industry a black eye IMO. This endeavor ultimately comes down to trust between the casino and the player. The casino can screw the player by not paying and disappearing and the player can screw the casino by charging back deposits. It is a kind of detente that makes the whole document thing ridiculous.

Your comparison of insurance ripping people off vs casino's is just muddling up the issue. If you want to talk about insurance rip off's...how about posting that in the attic? And.....for the record once again, if it's used as a delaying payment tactic for no good reason then that is just wrong and there should be plenty of outrage, but do you see a lot of posts complaining of this?

BTW, what are these "protections" you speak of that they have in place and how does it benefit the player in anyway? Care to elaborate on that one??

Any legitimate business has protections in place to prevent fraud and theft but yet fraud and theft continue to happen every day. It's just the way it is.


There, I'm through with my retort. Talk amongst yourselves......

I'll just ignore your dismissive comment.

 

[chuchu59]

I think we have heard both sides of the story and maybe we should just leave it at that. The casinos have a right to ask for the notarized docs but they need to address 2 issues. One is that they should not be singling some players out for scrutiny just because they think there might be fraud involved. Who would like to be accused that way? So they should ask for docs accross the board. The other isse is the cost involved which may be peanuts to some and quite substantial to others. If the casinos are looking for long-term relationships they should bear at least part of the fees incurred. This is something extra on top of the usual ID/Address proof and they should address the players' concerns and make it easier for them to devour. A sweetener like a ND bonus which is equivalent to the fees should do the trick.

 

[Jasminebed]

IA sweetener like a ND bonus which is equivalent to the fees should do the trick.

It was $15.00 the last time I had something notarized. 20 years ago when I was a legal secretary, we used to charge $10.00 cash for non clients, freebie for clients.

 

[pacers31]

Just as I expected bb. You rant and rave and offer no logical response. Not sure what your problem is, but you certainly have one. Regardless, not going to fly with me. So, what are the protections bb? Are you just assuming that they exist? Until you can relate something other than slamming me for attempting to bring about change through discussion, I suggest you not humiliate yourself further with your opinions presented as fact. I will not entertain further discussion on this with you as you obviously cannot intelligently defend your position. Good luck!

 

[pacers31]

ChuChu, you can give them all the docs you want, but again, don't complain if something happens. Notarized documents now, whats next, a blood sample??

 

[pacers31]

One last thing bb, just because things are the way they are for you, doesn't make it that way for all. Sorry, but your opinion is not the only one on this forum and you should conduct yourself in such a manner as to respect others.

 

[bb28]

Just as I expected bb. You rant and rave and offer no logical response. Not sure what your problem is, but you certainly have one. Regardless, not going to fly with me. So, what are the protections bb? Are you just assuming that they exist? Until you can relate something other than slamming me for attempting to bring about change through discussion, I suggest you not humiliate yourself further with your opinions presented as fact. I will not entertain further discussion on this with you as you obviously cannot intelligently defend your position. Good luck!

Rant and rave uh? Slamming you? I was just stating my opinion and debating with you because I disagree with some of the points you have made.
You just took this to a personal level by being insulting and rude in what you said in the above post. So don't stress out, this is my last post in this thread.
Differences of opinion are fine and disagreement is fine but personal attacks are not.

Pacers...... I did not disrespect you nor did I stoop to personal attacks as you just did.

 

[catrina m]

after giving this some thought, i have to agree that if fraud is what might be in question, whats the harm in having a few docs notarized, i mean (if )they(the casino) were stalling for time they could have one jumping thru hoops all day long, ie, this gas bill is to old, we need a newer statement ,ect and the list goes on. if i wanted my money bad enough and i knew i was in the right and had nothing to hide, give them the proof, have the docs notarized and be done with it...............just my few cents worth!! laurie

If fraud is suspected the casino has a right to protect itself but what is fraud.

I guess it's playing while underage, under an assumed name that loans you thier debit/credit card

does this give you an advantage?

Is it a drug cartel that is trying to double the ill gotten money on achilles or mega moohlah?

are they more likely to win?

Anyone that deposits is taking a risk, so what kind of fraud are they looking for?

 

[pacers31]

Again bb, support your argument. What are these brilliant security features?? I don't give a rats ass about you disrespecting me, just present an intelligent arguement to the facts I've laid out. You speak in platitudes and ignore the logic in my statements. You are either very gullible or worse. Until you can back up your position with facts, have a coke and a smile and................

I'm sorry you don't seem to understand alliteration, as with my insurance comparison, but reread my post and if you still don't get it, let me know. By all means continue to do what the online casinos tell you. I'm sure you are just the personality type they love as a customer. BAHBAH BAHBAH BAHBAH (as in sheep)

 

[LaurieJim]

pacers and bb, you know i think the world of both of you and i hate to see two such fine people going at each other, you both have great points and i respect what both of you have posted, i just hate to see you two smart forum friends trading barbs with one another, your both above that, atleast to me anyways...........laurie

 

[Kenny Lingus]

I am still waiting for a good answer

This question - that seems to feed off of the pessimism that many players have - is a legitimate one, but it's easily answered.

I'm not sure if I'm just not getting it, or whatever, but I still feel that no one has provided a convincing answer to this question:

Why are docs needed for a casino to process a withdrawl, but are unnecessary for accepting a deposit?

Hi All,

The demand for ID verification is growing all the time. Most reputable casinos in reputable jurisdictions are required to adhere to specific anti money laundering codes and with the release of the latest directive the requirement for verification is only going to grow.

So a cashout is a possible money laundering situation, but a deposit is not? It seems to me that there is far, far, more potential for multiple deposits to be used to launder drug or terrorist money than for a relatively small cashout to be used as such. And, maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that any arguement for government compliance would apply to both deposits and cashouts equally, not only when a lucky player wants to actually posess some of his/her winnings.

Once again if you don't like these policies then don't play. I don't get why players have to try to trample on Rival casinos as if they exposed a big flaw, I don't see other managers on here fielding these questions when they have different software but the exact same policies.

First of all, John, I haven't seen anyone "picking" on Rival casinos in this thread; it has really been a discussion about any applicable casino or software. It was, however, Da Vinci's Gold that asked for the notarized docs that spurred the creation of this thread in the first place, and that is how Rival was brought into this.

More disturbing to me is your admonishment that "if you don't like these policies then don't play". John, this is a forum where players discuss issues that are important to them, including casino policies that are perceived as unfair. I don't see the need to get so heavy handed. I personally don't understand the need for documentation at all, let alone notarized docs.

Casinos have argued that asking for documents up front would deter players, and send them to other operators who would allow instant play. This argument, however, does NOT excuse letting a player play for weeks, maybe even YEARS, before asking for documents. As chuchu59 says, there is no reason not to request documents once the casino has received a deposit from a player, and they are playing. If they are unable to satisfy the casino, then they can be ejected before they have made more than a couple of deposits (which should be returned), rather than after a long history of believing they would be paid if they won, only to find they never could have been.

Yes, yes, yes!!! I couldn't agree more. If all this fraud, money laundering, and government directive stuff is as important as the casinos would like us all to believe, then why not have any necessary documentation cleared before a player deposits more than, say, $300.00 or so?

The answer, it seems to me, is one that is totally self-serving for the casino operators. Quite simply, they would stand to lose money if this practice were to be implemented. In other words, if the casinos benefit from an attempt at fraud because the depositor lost their deposit, so be it; but try and cashout and all sorts of documentation is required in the name of fraud prevention.

The EU directive requires that Customer Due Diligence needs to carried out after certain triggers have been activated:
Article 8
1. Customer Due Diligence measures shall compromise:
a) Identifying the customer and verifying the customer's identity on the basis of documents, data or information obtained from a reliable and independent source;
It goes on to list a few other identity requirements.
It further indicates in Section 3, Article 13 that Enhanced Due Diligence needs to be carried out when additional triggers are hit;
2. Where the customer has not been physically present for identification purposes, Member States shall require those institutions and persons to take specific and adequate measures to compensate for the higher risk, for example by applying one or more of the following measure:
a) ensuring the customer's identity is established by additional documents, data or information;
b) supplementary measures to verify or certify the documents supplied, or requiring confirmatory certification by a credit or financial institution etc.

Again, please don't consider a request for documents as a stalling tactic or as an accusation, in most cases it is part of an operators regulatory and legal obligation.

I don't see where this directive applies only to cashout requests; it certainly should apply to deposits as well, no?

The rule should be, if you take my deposit without any ID request, give me my withdrawl without any ID request. It couldn't be any simpler or fairer than that.

Well said. The casino operators should not get away with having it both ways.

Remember that little I agree button that you said yes to when you installed the software? Most casino's have a clause in their terms and conditions that advise you that you may be asked or you will be asked to provide documentation when you are cashing out.

.....Another example from 3Dice. "Before any winnings are paid out, 3DICE.COM reserves the right to require the user to provide information or documentation as to verify the users identity."

First of all, just because casinos put something in their T&Cs doesn't mean that it's fair or cannot be discussed.

Secondly, your quotation of 3dice's policy puts my point into the exact perspective to end this post. So, I'll ask one more time: Why does a casino only care about documentation when they are paying out funds? Isn't it a concern at all when they are receiving them?????????

 

[joeypbg]

Secondly, your quotation of 3dice's policy puts my point into the exact perspective to end this post. So, I'll ask one more time: Why does a casino only care about documentation when they are paying out funds? Isn't it a concern at all when they are receiving them?????????

The casino has no answer to this because you are absolutely right. If they want to ask for id for out , there should be id getting in. Then when everything is settled before game play, there should not be anymore questions when cashing out. It is like signing a one sided contract and the only way make it fair is to point out the deficiencies. This thread is pointing out the deficiencies and let's hope they do something about it.

If they don't there are other options out there.

 

[Casinomeister]

Admin Note - please be cool

Please check your emotions at the door. Some members here are letting their emotions get the best of them - think like a Vulcan please

I'm not sure if I'm just not getting it, or whatever, but I still feel that no one has provided a convincing answer to this question:

Why are docs needed for a casino to process a withdrawl, but are unnecessary for accepting a deposit?

Sorry, I thought I answered this question in that post. The thing is, I've answered this question so often, I begin to use telepathy. We'll be adding it to the FAQ since there are a number of threads that rehash this issue at least three times a year, and the answer is always the same.

Answer: Online casinos do not ask for IDs when signing up because they will lose customers. Players will move on to a casino that does not require ID checks because players need to gamble "now".

Online casinos do not ask for IDs when signing up because they are not required to. Why should they voluntarily throw an obstacle in the way of a newly signing up customer?

Online casinos give the player the benefit of the doubt when the player says who they are is who they are. Maybe this is wrong, and there should be a regulated ID check at the door, but as long as one casino group doesn't do this - all of them with fall into the same pattern. Competition is fierce in this industry.

They ask for it when cashing out (once) for a number of reasons: licensing requirements, banking regulations, company SOP, suspect fraud, stalling for payments (rogue ) list goes on, etc.

One thing we are missing when debating this argument is that they are just as many types of casinos as there are players. It's difficult to compare one casino with another since they have differing business ethics, management, licensing, software, etc. etc. Sure, there are rogue entities that require players to provide IDs when checking out because they see their non-rogue brethren asking for this. It's a good way to stall - for a rogue. Perhaps it's a frustration for a non-rogue, but they can be assured that the player is probably legit.

Bottom line is, there's not much you can do about it. You and I can come up with all of the analogies under the sun to explain this thing, but online casinos are pretty much a new frontier and this makes it difficult to compare them to land based operations. Providing IDs at cashing out is something you have to accept. Not sure you want to provide this info? This is why I have been hammering into players' heads for years "Do your due diligence."

FWIW I've been playing online for nearly ten years. I can count the times I've had to provide ID on one maybe two hands.

 

[chuchu59]

If we were to make the industry go forward players will have to play the ball game and provide the requisite docs. When there is an industry-wide consensus that this needs to be done, there should be no fear of losing out to competitors No one knows for sure whether the casinos are stalling payment when players cash out. For one thing, with the USA out of bounds for a range of casinos, there may be cashflow problems for some of them and though not entirely rogue, this can be used as a tactic to enhance liquidity just like paying progressives in instalments. Frankly, if this is entirely related to fraud, I woundnt counter it at all but you never know the true motives behind.

I believe it is high time for casinos to review this policy of theirs. If they feel it is necessary, ask for the docs on signing up or within a reasonable time frame after the first deposits. We should have a system working and this should not be left in the hands of the casino operators who may or may not be rogue or even somewhere between.