General increase in complaints?

[Jhonson90]

Maybe I'm wrong, but lately it seems to me that the complaints about the difficulties in making a withdrawal on accredited or not accredited casinos have increased, maybe for different reasons.
Certainly the kyc is much more selective, probably for the new anti-money laundering regulations, however when this happens it always creeps
in the player the doubt that this happens to delay the withdrawal.
For the first time I myself have had several difficulties in obtaining two withdrawals, one on an accredited casino the other on a non-casino
accredited.
I patiently managed to solve it myself in both cases but I was one step away from asking Max for help with a PAB.
I think that for the player it is always a difficult situation to accept simply because when you deposit on the account nothing is required but everything happens when you withdraw.
In my opinion, especially when large amounts are deposited into the account, the casino should, if they are really concerned about complying with anti-money laundering regulations, immediately start the KYC by blocking deposits above a certain threshold because I do not believe that the casino can replace government bodies by confiscating large sums for money laundering.
Max's opinion on what the law provides in case of casino confiscation for money laundering would also be interesting,
in my opinion, however, he could not keep that money.
Greetings.

 

[brizman]

Maybe I'm wrong, but lately it seems to me that the complaints about the difficulties in making a withdrawal on accredited or not accredited casinos have increased, maybe for different reasons.
Certainly the kyc is much more selective, probably for the new anti-money laundering regulations, however when this happens it always creeps
in the player the doubt that this happens to delay the withdrawal.
For the first time I myself have had several difficulties in obtaining two withdrawals, one on an accredited casino the other on a non-casino
accredited.
I patiently managed to solve it myself in both cases but I was one step away from asking Max for help with a PAB.
I think that for the player it is always a difficult situation to accept simply because when you deposit on the account nothing is required but everything happens when you withdraw.
In my opinion, especially when large amounts are deposited into the account, the casino should, if they are really concerned about complying with anti-money laundering regulations, immediately start the KYC by blocking deposits above a certain threshold because I do not believe that the casino can replace government bodies by confiscating large sums for money laundering.
Max's opinion on what the law provides in case of casino confiscation for money laundering would also be interesting,
in my opinion, however, he could not keep that money.
Greetings.

I think casinos now have to start kyc when deposits hit a limit. Thing is...i think the figure is different depending what casino group you use, and often casinos will keep quiet if a player is a heavy depositer, to keep the money rolling in.

 

[EkJR]

They should be doing KYC and verification before deposit. If they feel a SOW is required they should not hold up a withdrawal because of that whilst still allowing deposits. Different interpretations of the rules is the problem. If there isnt a defined point for this then Casinos will make their own judgement and some will use this to delay paying you out.

 

[shadow123]

Wish the UKGC would just issue firm regulations on the procedures to be undertaken when carrying out the SOW and AML requirements,this has gone on far too long with casinos taking the piss and misusing the existing guidelines to screw the players.
Customers have no idea where they stand when joining a new casino,at what deposit level things might
get triggered and if any withdrawals will blocked.
Had 3 months from hell with all this shit,hopefully mostly resolved now but I still have limits which cant be
increased without triggering further doc demands and have to be careful how much and how often I deposit
to avoid problems, its a real balancing act which really restricts my play style and takes away most of the fun.

 

[Mr_Slot5]

I think there would be FAR less complaints if they just froze the deposit that would lead to the cashout rather than the cashout itself. Lock the account at deposit stage, job done. Everything else in the mind of a player is just delaying the cashout or the casino hoping to have to not pay out.

Also, I would guess that your average money launderer wants to deposit, turn over once and get the money out. What they won't want to do is get into a 3 hr session faffing about trying to chase a bonus on Book of Dead or Bonanza. So I think a fraudster would be easy to spot without the need for all these draconian measures from SOME casinos.

It has little to do with arbitrary thresholds and more about play style and player behaviour.

 

[EkJR]

Look at the mess Casumo are in with this. Losing players right left and centre, all because someone in their Compliance team(signed off by management) has interpreted the UKGC rules differently from a competitor. Are they protecting themselves? Yes. Are they completely alienating customers? Yes. Are they deliberately delaying payments to customers? Perhaps. Just raises too many questions in the realms of integrity and ethics.

 

[Slottery]

Also, I would guess that your average money launderer wants to deposit, turn over once and get the money out. What they won't want to do is get into a 3 hr session faffing about trying to chase a bonus on Book of Dead or Bonanza. So I think a fraudster would be easy to spot without the need for all these draconian measures from SOME casinos.

Average money launderer are usually smart enough not to behave like an average money launderer but exactly fit to profile who shouldn't ring any bells anywhere. No big deposits, no too high amounts in short time etc.... You just split your activity to XXX places and get XX people to help in it when needed.

That's also one reason there never going to be exact thresholds like there were for KYC, if it's common knowledge you trigger SOW if XYZ, it's too easy to prevent doing it (like you use your bank account and never make transactions which reach well known international trigger for single transaction).

In these days when Google is everybody good friend, you don't also play roulette red&black or other obvious things which shows that you don't gamble but just wager your deposit. If you really have loads of money, you probably would do some research to avoid all checks and everything which is counted as suspicious. You also lose sometimes all your deposits to make some real gameplay etc.

Most of people casinos do report to authorities have really common patterns in their transactions. SOW checks might help to find something when you request bank statements and proofs of transactions etc... That's why it's not something what any casino like to see that you receive money from private person and deposit it right away, especially if same happen more than once.

Casino operatos are categorized to be quite high risk and financial institutions and required to be responsible about monitoring customers and finding things. UKGC, MGA, SGA or any other regulator can't do much as long EU AML directives exist and have to be followed. Best to keep your finances simple and keep sending everything you don't have proof through some other account but one you use for gambling can help a bit, better to have some neo bank accounts or cryptos to make transfers between friends etc..

 

[goatwack]

Who knew there were so many stealth money launderers about!

I take it for decades prior, casinos weren't able to tell a money launderer from an elbow, so it's only right and fair that the EU (in their infinite wisdom) have opted to cast the eye of suspicion on.....every single player imaginable!! Try getting out of THAT ya bunch of crooks!

So well done all-round. I'm loving the 'prove you're innocent, punk' mantra being utilized. It really is what I'd call Progress (note the capital 'P')

 

[Slottery]

Who knew there were so many stealth money launderers about!

I take it for decades prior, casinos weren't able to tell a money launderer from an elbow, so it's only right and fair that the EU (in their infinite wisdom) have opted to cast the eye of suspicion on.....every single player imaginable!! Try getting out of THAT ya bunch of crooks!

So well done all-round. I'm loving the 'prove you're innocent, punk' mantra being utilized. It really is what I'd call Progress (note the capital 'P')

That's how it's going more and more atm... Hopefully somebody figure out some bit more innovative way to monitor that quite big amount of money which is wagered through online casinos these days. Maybe some gambling and AML specified payment provider who would provide gambling accounts and monitor all your deposits there and judge them legal before you get the opportunity to deposit and play in casino

Currently is just horrible for both parts (casino and player), also casinos can't provide too much information about "How to complete SOW easily" as it would be tipping for all possible people who could wager illegal funds through them. At the moment way how it's tried to prevent is just make risk big enough to get in really random check that risk vs reward is not good enough anymore, is not innocent slot player who benefit about this approach.

Banks and other real finance institutions are quite much different in their business, there are not many industries where money is wagered so fast pace in and out, you can't really just follow somebody doing something suspicious and take action when you are almost sure about it as it's too late.

 

[EkJR]

Average money launderer are usually smart enough not to behave like an average money launderer but exactly fit to profile who shouldn't ring any bells anywhere. No big deposits, no too high amounts in short time etc.... You just split your activity to XXX places and get XX people to help in it when needed.

That's also one reason there never going to be exact thresholds like there were for KYC, if it's common knowledge you trigger SOW if XYZ, it's too easy to prevent doing it (like you use your bank account and never make transactions which reach well known international trigger for single transaction).

In these days when Google is everybody good friend, you don't also play roulette red&black or other obvious things which shows that you don't gamble but just wager your deposit. If you really have loads of money, you probably would do some research to avoid all checks and everything which is counted as suspicious. You also lose sometimes all your deposits to make some real gameplay etc.

Most of people casinos do report to authorities have really common patterns in their transactions. SOW checks might help to find something when you request bank statements and proofs of transactions etc... That's why it's not something what any casino like to see that you receive money from private person and deposit it right away, especially if same happen more than once.

Casino operatos are categorized to be quite high risk and financial institutions and required to be responsible about monitoring customers and finding things. UKGC, MGA, SGA or any other regulator can't do much as long EU AML directives exist and have to be followed. Best to keep your finances simple and keep sending everything you don't have proof through some other account but one you use for gambling can help a bit, better to have some neo bank accounts or cryptos to make transfers between friends etc..

I get what your saying mate and in general I agree. However, its very clear that some operators are using excessively. There are numerous examples on here of it where they are requesting SOW before paying a small withdrawal, but still allowing the customer to deposit. A balance is required here.

 

[Jhonson90]

As you have already mentioned, it would be much better for me to check the documents as soon as they are available and not at the time of withdrawal.
The first thing I do after registering at a casino is to upload all documents in the hope that my account will come immediately checked and may feel comfortable for a possible withdrawal,
but it never happens.
As for recycling, I did not understand if the casino
can confiscate deposits or not.

 

[slot_zombie]

Yet I can walk into Ladbrokes on the high street, load up a FOBT with £1000 cash, play a few spins of roulette, take the cashout ship to the desk and have the money on any debit card I choose to present, no questions asked.

I've actually done this a few times when needing to deposit money in the bank, but the branch was closed due to COVID-19. Disclaimer: not a money launderer.

 

[brianmon]

I still don't see how it should be easy to launder money.

Apart from the obvious... deposit by voucher and withdraw to a bank account.
Edit: (or as Slot Zombie mentioned above, while I was writing this post)

If casinos only took deposits from methods that can accept withdrawals, ie no prepaid cards, paysafe etc.
So all withdrawals always go back to the same place the deposit came from. Then there'd be a clear trail for the banks to pick up on (if necessary), rather than the casinos having to do it.

They could even make it compulsory to nominate a payment method at registration, which could only be changed by contacting the finance department of said casino.

If I was to deposit £10k from my bank to a particular casino and withdraw £10k. My bank statement would show £10,000 to 'payment processor x' and £10,000 from 'payment processor x'
Even if someone transferred 10k to my bank account, I deposited, withdrew and transferred it back, or even on to a different account. There'd still be a clear trail

I still say these AML regulations were intended to make it harder for the casinos, themselves, to launder money, on behalf of their own companies, or by special arrangement with other individuals.
I'm pretty sure there was, and probably still is, a lot of it happening. And because of this the genuine, legitimate players have been caught up in the regulations now

 

[Wondah]

I’ve found this from the MGA, if I understand it right if you reach the €2000 in deposits, they can ask you everything.

Correct me if I’m wrong, English is not my first language.

 

[Slottery]

I’ve found this from the MGA, if I understand it right if you reach the €2000 in deposits, they can ask you everything.

Correct me if I’m wrong, English is not my first language.

View attachment 137012

Anything can and should be asked at the moment there are any concerns. That 2000eur is kind of guideline when you have to complete risk assessment. That's MGA implementation guideline from 2018, but there's coming that KYC limit when it have to latest be requested.

 

[Hereforthemusic]

I think the reason for a lot of casinos to ask for too much is because if the person handling the SOW request might get fined and get jail time. Not only the casino, but the actual person approving a document. Same goes for acknowledging a player it's a AML investigation, since that is considered as tipping off
If I would've worked with that shit I'd make sure that if I'm unsure I'd make myself reaaaal sure before approving players SOW documents or stating any information about those cases

 

[Slottery]

I still don't see how it should be easy to launder money.

Apart from the obvious... deposit by voucher and withdraw to a bank account.
Edit: (or as Slot Zombie mentioned above, while I was writing this post)

If casinos only took deposits from methods that can accept withdrawals, ie no prepaid cards, paysafe etc.
So all withdrawals always go back to the same place the deposit came from. Then there'd be a clear trail for the banks to pick up on (if necessary), rather than the casinos having to do it.

They could even make it compulsory to nominate a payment method at registration, which could only be changed by contacting the finance department of said casino.

If I was to deposit £10k from my bank to a particular casino and withdraw £10k. My bank statement would show £10,000 to 'payment processor x' and £10,000 from 'payment processor x'
Even if someone transferred 10k to my bank account, I deposited, withdrew and transferred it back, or even on to a different account. There'd still be a clear trail

I still say these AML regulations were intended to make it harder for the casinos, themselves, to launder money, on behalf of their own companies, or by special arrangement with other individuals.
I'm pretty sure there was, and probably still is, a lot of it happening. And because of this the genuine, legitimate players have been caught up in the regulations now

There are ways casinos are used, maybe not direct money laundering as it's understood but one more legitimate step for funds etc... These often are nothing cool and exciting like drug millions but quite simple misuse of company funds without declaring taxes and other such things, not posting any step by step instructions what can be done but that cashflow wagered in and out online casinos in a day is so big in volumes that there always is some tempting opportunities people with flexible honesty.

In jurisdictions like UK where from UKGC:s demand casinos now verified players electronically, it's not rocket science to create account with other persons details you ever have met, you just have to get DOB and address right, UK people receive these SOW or additional ID requests much faster than jurisdictions where you can verify people with Trustly (which is taken as quite strong verification and also many countries who can use Trustly and/or BankID, can't use other payment methods which make it still more simple).

I'm pretty sure that most of people in this forum could figure out some ways to wager money through casino which could be beneficial for some kind of people, if you get yourself enough specified to different ways to transfer money, which is how much traced and verified etc... you can do several things and if you have been studied it bit more, you will find loop holes from almost everything.

Not sure about casinos themselves to commit criminal activities, can for sure happen but would assume it could be made between many companies without wagering them in slots or other games at all, that would add unnecessary trace in all payment providers, casinos back offices etc... when you already have online casino and multiple companies for different operations, wagering money between them with good imagination in invoices etc... would feel much easier. Would imagine that current regulations are making it much harder what it was years ago when money was wagered through slots as well by some organized people, which of course don't mean it can't been done or it doesn't happen, just have to be more creative and avoid to get busted. Haven't seen anywhere casinos busted about committing crimes in last quite many years (except failing their responsibilities in player monitoring and fined by regulators).

 

[Robert Rabbit]

I don't understand this £2,000 threshold limit. I have just watched a guy called Craig Slots deposit £2k, do £600 roulette spins, so theoretically he has reached his limit in one 50 minute video. But I never hear the guy complain about SOW, checks or anything. Are streamers given exemption from rules applied to normal mortals?

How is £2000 even a decent threshold - I could theoretically blow £1,000 a month and still have enough money to survive reasonably comfortably, but I am immediately a suspect money launderer?

 

[Slottery]

I don't understand this £2,000 threshold limit. I have just watched a guy called Craig Slots deposit £2k, do £600 roulette spins, so theoretically he has reached his limit in one 50 minute video. But I never hear the guy complain about SOW, checks or anything. Are streamers given exemption from rules applied to normal mortals?

How is £2000 even a decent threshold - I could theoretically blow £1,000 a month and still have enough money to survive reasonably comfortably, but I am immediately a suspect money launderer?

That's MGA threshold limit for KYC when you latest have to verify players identity. Would assume most of streamers get KYC done right away as they have to do it anyway very shortly. It's lifetime threshold for KYC, everything else can be risk based.

Here's that whole document this picture is taken, it's on page 21:

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

 

[dealer wins]

Nearly every single regular player will deposit enough to cover their level of play for an hour or their entire session, and will play at a level relative to their deposit.

For me I will deposit anything from £30-£100, and play stakes of 30-60p. If it lose quickly I might try one more deposit.

I bet only 1 in 1000 people deposit in a way that even remotely looks suspicious.

It must be really easy to spot a potential suspicious customer, as they would stick out like a sore thumb, but no they throw SOW and enhanced checks at normal players just wanting to enjoy an hour or 2 slots fun every so often.

Unregulated reliable casinos is the answer, the UKGC have gone too far IMO.

 

[Gaz237]

I think there would be FAR less complaints if they just froze the deposit that would lead to the cashout rather than the cashout itself. Lock the account at deposit stage, job done. Everything else in the mind of a player is just delaying the cashout or the casino hoping to have to not pay out.

Also, I would guess that your average money launderer wants to deposit, turn over once and get the money out. What they won't want to do is get into a 3 hr session faffing about trying to chase a bonus on Book of Dead or Bonanza. So I think a fraudster would be easy to spot without the need for all these draconian measures from SOME casinos.

It has little to do with arbitrary thresholds and more about play style and player behaviour.

Personally I would be more pissed off if I deposited at a Casino and could not play because they froze my deposit.

Would be like going to the supermarket paying for all your shopping, then not being allowed to take it home.

As much as a ball ache it is, at least you know your going to get your withdrawal eventually.

 

[Gaz237]

What should happen. Is when you reach the deposit threshold, it should not let you deposit until you supply documents.

But lets be honest, that would make zero business sense, as players will just move on to the next Casino.

Whilst the regulations are unclear I can understand why Casino's hit players on withdrawal, plus they know, once a player has gone through all the crap to get fully verified, they are less likely to move on to have to deal with all the crap again elsewhere.

So in reality, until the regulations become black and white, the Casino's are going to use the grey area to their full advantage.

 

[Kroffe]

Personally I would be more pissed off if I deposited at a Casino and could not play because they froze my deposit.

Would be like going to the supermarket paying for all your shopping, then not being allowed to take it home.

As much as a ball ache it is, at least you know your going to get your withdrawal eventually.

Half agree.
Some sites, Casumo in particluar seem to make demands that are almost impossible to comply with.
Id+documents from third parties etc.

But from what ive read these last couple days, they seem to have started to release peoples withdrawals even if sow is not finished, or documents are declined.

For me freezing a deposit or a withdrawal would be pretty much the same, because i recycle alot of the money i gamble with. So a sizeable withdrawal being held ransom would mean i wouldnt feel safe to deposit elsewhere before i got that sorted.
Wouldnt want to overshoot my budget because im expecting a withdrawal that then does not show up.

Like some people have mentioned already, a third party taking care of Sow:s would probably be for the best, both for casinos and players.
Then when a casino needs to do a check they just contact Kroffe-sow-enterprise© and ask me to do a check on Gaz. And wouldnt you know it, another site asked for that last week, so i already have a fresh sow-check ready for them.

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

 

[dealer wins]

Gaz that should absolutely be the regulation. Casinos should absolutely not accept any deposit if by doing so would necessitate a SOW from the punter. If they accept a deposit, then they need to pay any winnings from that deposit before asking for SOW.

That should be a cast iron rule for every regulated casino.

 

[Mr_Slot5]

Personally I would be more pissed off if I deposited at a Casino and could not play because they froze my deposit.

Would be like going to the supermarket paying for all your shopping, then not being allowed to take it home.

As much as a ball ache it is, at least you know your going to get your withdrawal eventually.

But you were close to not being able to get through an SOW without Jan's help.

There was no guarantee you'd have got that withdrawal if you couldn't pass it. Deposits are slightly more protected I think. In any case, I'd rather lose a £50 deposit than a 1k withdraw.