Bonus Complaint Goldwin (west casino) voided 9000 euro on “Bonus seeker” term.

Only1Conor

Newbie member
Joined
Mar 7, 2022
Location
Waterford
Greetings!

During my first game play I get very lucky.
I won 9000 euro. I wagered over 26000 euro to win this amount. After I withdrew 2000 euro, 5 days later I was informed by the account manager that my account was inactive and should start to play again!

I quote " I am dropping by today to inform you that due to lack of activity on your account, our system has detected it as inactive, therefore it is pretty unlikely for your future withdrawals to be prioritized and paid at a faster rate. I will try to pull some strings for you to have them paid faster, however, I will also need your help so I can increase my chances of receiving a positive response from our financial department. All you have to do is restart your activity so your stats can increase, and your account can benefit of more advantages from our side. "

I start to play intimidatingly and in the middle of my game activity with my OWN money which non bonus related I get another email that my funds are confiscated. I quote "Please be informed that the winnings on your account have been voided on initiation of Withdrawal, according to our Terms and conditions " I read the terms they deem as a bonus seeker and not specify what I have done wrong I quote "Goldwin reserves the right to label a player as a "Bonus Seeker" if Goldwin , at its absolute discretion, believes that the player has abused the promotion " This a freehold for the casino to basically say "we can do what we want" In the court of law this would be a "illusory promise " I feel victimized by this casino and these action gives online casinos a bad name.

I was hoping for some advice from this casino forum any advice is appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • Goldwin.JPG
    Goldwin.JPG
    30.6 KB · Views: 50

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
I've read some crappy terms in my time - and theirs are right up they with the very worst of them :eek:

Isn't 1668/JAZ the notorious licence number of the worst rogues on the planet? @dunover will know for sure.

Good luck - you're gonna need it.
KK
Yep - it's an alternative code for 'shithouse'. Stooopid terms, targeting problem gamblers, fake slots, disguised payment authorization/processors etc.

So you see the scam here - tempt you with a bonus and you lose, fine. Have the audacity or temerity to win, and then the Catch-22 term is applied, that you're a 'bonus seeker' so you lose anyway. Their real name should be 'holdwin' as that's what they'll do. I'd go straight to your payment provider and chargeback for unlicensed gambling. At least you could get that back, unlike your winnings.

The classic confidence trick - hold cash-outs (that you'll never receive anyway) over you like the Sword of Damocles, 'activity' meaning their first scam tactic is to try and get you to spunk the balance before you get to your next won't-be-paid-under-any-circumstances withdrawal. If that fails, and you happen to increase the balance, either some other special 'term' will be used to thwart your w/d or an arbitrary excuse will be created like they think you're a problem gambler etc. Complain about that, then your account will be blocked and they will ignore further e-mails.

There's more chance of Putin waking up tomorrow, declaring world peace and his intention to seek EU membership that there is of you getting that 9k, or any significant portion of it. Sorry mate.
 
Last edited:

Crazy7

Newbie member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Location
finland
This is exactly the same text I had with West casino which is licensed in Malta.

" I am dropping by today to inform you that due to lack of activity on your account, our system has detected it as inactive, therefore it is pretty unlikely for your future withdrawals to be prioritized and paid at a faster rate. I will try to pull some strings for you to have them paid faster, however, I will also need your help so I can increase my chances of receiving a positive response from our financial department. All you have to do is restart your activity so your stats can increase, and your account can benefit of more advantages from our side."

For sensitive players this is a big problem, forcing them to play if else not get paid or somewhere within our timeline. This should be disturbing for every license holder.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Just plain dodgy behaviour. Slot providers should take more responsibility of who they licence their products too.
That's just it - most of the games they have (aside from dodgy providers like Betsoft) will be supplied by an aggregator of fake slots.
 

Only1Conor

Newbie member
Joined
Mar 7, 2022
Location
Waterford
A little update: I filed a complaint with their license provider Goldwin RETROSPECTIVLY added 2 terms. License provider sided with goldwin over these terms.

7.32
GoldWin reserves the right to label a player as a "Bonus Seeker" if GoldWin Casino, at its absolute discretion, believes that the player has abused the promotions. Instances include, but are not limited to the following:
* A player only uses bonuses to play on the account;
* The bonus amount is greater than the total amount deposited by the player;
* A player plays with, or attempts to play with, more than one bonus in 24 hours;
* A player plays with bonuses while withdrawing amounts from the deposits that have given access to those bonuses; or
* A player repeatedly used a promotion;
* A player deposits specifically the same amount as the maximum bonus cap, for the sole purpose of claiming the maximum value of the bonus;
* A player completely stops his gaming activity after completing the exact wagering requirements of a bonus.



I did acknowledged the terms from a link to the way back machines shows that the term is retrospectively added. February the 25th this rule wasn't in place. See the below link
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

(see attached original term)

So clearly provided evidence for the public post. Players can make their own judgement before they play at GOLDWIN or WESTcasino. As it is the same group only a different license.

If there is anything else I can do than the license provider I take any advise at the moment.
 

Attachments

  • Goldwin.JPG
    Goldwin.JPG
    30.3 KB · Views: 4

ultra100

Full Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Location
Europe
A little update: I filed a complaint with their license provider Goldwin RETROSPECTIVLY added 2 terms. License provider sided with goldwin over these terms.


* A player deposits specifically the same amount as the maximum bonus cap, for the sole purpose of claiming the maximum value of the bonus;
* A player completely stops his gaming activity after completing the exact wagering requirements of a bonus.

Even with the added Terms it's a complete nonsense. Wish you luck here, you will definitely need it.
 

Eduard Blake

Official West Casino rep
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Location
Malta
Greetings!

During my first game play I get very lucky.
I won 9000 euro. I wagered over 26000 euro to win this amount. After I withdrew 2000 euro, 5 days later I was informed by the account manager that my account was inactive and should start to play again!

I quote " I am dropping by today to inform you that due to lack of activity on your account, our system has detected it as inactive, therefore it is pretty unlikely for your future withdrawals to be prioritized and paid at a faster rate. I will try to pull some strings for you to have them paid faster, however, I will also need your help so I can increase my chances of receiving a positive response from our financial department. All you have to do is restart your activity so your stats can increase, and your account can benefit of more advantages from our side. "

I start to play intimidatingly and in the middle of my game activity with my OWN money which non bonus related I get another email that my funds are confiscated. I quote "Please be informed that the winnings on your account have been voided on initiation of Withdrawal, according to our Terms and conditions " I read the terms they deem as a bonus seeker and not specify what I have done wrong I quote "Goldwin reserves the right to label a player as a "Bonus Seeker" if Goldwin , at its absolute discretion, believes that the player has abused the promotion " This a freehold for the casino to basically say "we can do what we want" In the court of law this would be a "illusory promise " I feel victimized by this casino and these action gives online casinos a bad name.

I was hoping for some advice from this casino forum any advice is appreciated.
Hello Conor,

I understand that the decision in your case wasn't the most favorable.

In order to ensure a fair and equitable environment for all players in the casino we need to uphold the accepted terms and conditions.

Our casino has a zero tolerance policy towards any kind of abuse of any kind.

As you have chosen to file a complaint with our regulator, all the evidence that stood behind the decision in your case as well as all the articles relevant for this were provided both to you and the regular.

Following their investigation they have closed the case ruling in favor of the casino.

As for the link you have posted earlier, it is a record from a third party site showing an older version of our website from 2021.

You have joined our casino in February 2022 and therefore has no relevance in your case.

I advise that you take the time to review the terms and conditions of the site. If anything is unclear you can always reach out to our 24/7 customer support team.

I hope this clarifies things!

All the best,
Eduard
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Hello Conor,

I understand that the decision in your case wasn't the most favorable.

In order to ensure a fair and equitable environment for all players in the casino we need to uphold the accepted terms and conditions.

Our casino has a zero tolerance policy towards any kind of abuse of any kind.

As you have chosen to file a complaint with our regulator, all the evidence that stood behind the decision in your case as well as all the articles relevant for this were provided both to you and the regular.

Following their investigation they have closed the case ruling in favor of the casino.

As for the link you have posted earlier, it is a record from a third party site showing an older version of our website from 2021.

You have joined our casino in February 2022 and therefore has no relevance in your case.

I advise that you take the time to review the terms and conditions of the site. If anything is unclear you can always reach out to our 24/7 customer support team.

I hope this clarifies things!

All the best,
Eduard
1. A player deposits specifically the same amount as the maximum bonus cap, for the sole purpose of claiming the maximum value of the bonus;

2. A player completely stops his gaming activity after completing the exact wagering requirements of a bonus.


Sorry pal, if you have, support or believe in terms like those you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an online casino business. A craphole jurisdiction is a must as no proper regulator would permit this nonsensical crap.

1. So you offer a bonus say max 200. The player, tempted by this, deposits 200 which at any normal casino would be fine. Only in your case, a player claiming your offer advertised in full is in breach of the terms as soon as he takes it. What utter BS. Catch-22. Of course maybe we should add what you really mean to 'term' 1 - ......."if the player then proceeds to win. If he loses, no-one will be the wiser and we'll say fuck-all about it.

2. Upon meeting the wagering requirements on your fake game server, an EV- proposition, after probably taking hours to do so, if the player then stops while feeling quite pleased he has won using the bonus offer we won't pay him on the grounds of bonus abuse anyway. Catch-22.

So what does your rogue casino conside acceptable if a player wins after converting a bonus? Carry on playing for half an hour after conversion? Losing 20% of his balance after conversion? How would the player know these mythical and unspecified criteria?

The fact that this cowboy third-world so-called 'licensing jurisdiction' can actually consider these terms acceptable shows they aren't capable or fit for 'licensing' a public shithouse let alone a gambling operation. I want to puke when I read shite like this. :mad::mad:
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
Their Grey review status and review on here hasn’t aged well: Trustworthy with terms like that? :laugh:

You may as well have one term

If you win a little, we may pay you to sucker you in.

But if you win a decent amount and we don’t want to: we won’t.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Their Grey review status and review on here hasn’t aged well: Trustworthy with terms like that? :laugh:

You may as well have one term

If you win a little, we may pay you to sucker you in.

But if you win a decent amount and we don’t want to: we won’t.
That's why these vague and prejudicial terms exist - when all's said and done, they are not compelled, taking their terms literally, to pay any player at all.
 

Only1Conor

Newbie member
Joined
Mar 7, 2022
Location
Waterford
Hello Conor,

I understand that the decision in your case wasn't the most favorable.

In order to ensure a fair and equitable environment for all players in the casino we need to uphold the accepted terms and conditions.

Our casino has a zero tolerance policy towards any kind of abuse of any kind.

As you have chosen to file a complaint with our regulator, all the evidence that stood behind the decision in your case as well as all the articles relevant for this were provided both to you and the regular.

Following their investigation they have closed the case ruling in favor of the casino.

As for the link you have posted earlier, it is a record from a third party site showing an older version of our website from 2021.

You have joined our casino in February 2022 and therefore has no relevance in your case.

I advise that you take the time to review the terms and conditions of the site. If anything is unclear you can always reach out to our 24/7 customer support team.

I hope this clarifies things!

All the best,
Eduard
Hello Eduard

I will go through your points.
1. "Our casino has a zero tolerance policy towards any kind of abuse of any kind."
This is completely subjective. In English common law, this kind of term is called an 'illusory promise' - It would not hold up in court. It's like saying 'we will pay you if we feel like it'
Any potential 'Abuse' should be clearly detailed in the terms and conditions.

Regarding the specific terms you say I have broken;
3. “A player deposits specifically the same amount as the maximum bonus cap, for the sole purpose of claiming the maximum value of the bonus;”
We all know you added in this term after I won. I read the terms before I played, and that wasn't there.
You never mentioned this term to me in your initial reasons for confiscating my winnings. Here is your email;
"Goldwin reserves the right to label a player as a "Bonus Seeker" if Goldwin , at its absolute discretion, believes that the player has abused the promotions. Instances include, but are not limited to the following:
A player only uses bonuses to play on the account;
The bonus amount is greater than the total amount deposited by the player;
A player plays with, or attempts to play with, more than one bonus in 24 hours;
A player plays with bonuses while withdrawing amounts from the deposits that have given access to those bonuses; or
A player repeatedly used a promotion."

Regardless of that, this is a completely unfair term. Again, this term would never hold up in court.
You are actively advertising a bonus value and encouraging your players to sign up and deposit a certain amount, then you are burying terms on your site which says that depositing that amount is not allowed.
The term is unfair, bizarre, sneaky, and dishonest.

2. “ A player completely stops his gaming activity after completing the exact wagering requirements of a bonus.”
This term wasn't there before either.
Regardless of that, I never broke this term. I played more than the EXACT wagering requirement, as you can see from my gameplay history.

Regarding the complaint with Curaçao eGaming, the whole thing was pointless, as they have an obvious conflict of interest, and will always side with the operators that pay their fees. This is why we have mediation websites like the one we are on now.

Hopefully this thread will give enough exposure to your business methods and unfair terms, and you will do the right thing and pay me my money.
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
Point 2 is a joke:

If I'm lucky to take a bonus, win, i mostly always stop after wagering for the principle. What they're saying is 35x isn't enough, they want 45, 60, 600x wagering then (but don't want to tell you) Never had a problem with any casinos i play at regarding this but then again, they're semi -reputable: not like here.

Doesn't even matter if they rarely invoke these terms, the fact they have them should be enough to tell people to stay away.
 

TheAddict

Ueber Meister
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Location
Kent
I imagine they make more profit with that humdinger of a no.2 being on that list too, without even having to enforce it. I expect it forces some people to consider gambling a little bit more after wagering, just to make sure a big win isn't voided, and for some then going on to blowing the lot.
 

Eduard Blake

Official West Casino rep
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Location
Malta
Greetings!

During my first game play I get very lucky.
I won 9000 euro. I wagered over 26000 euro to win this amount. After I withdrew 2000 euro, 5 days later I was informed by the account manager that my account was inactive and should start to play again!

I quote " I am dropping by today to inform you that due to lack of activity on your account, our system has detected it as inactive, therefore it is pretty unlikely for your future withdrawals to be prioritized and paid at a faster rate. I will try to pull some strings for you to have them paid faster, however, I will also need your help so I can increase my chances of receiving a positive response from our financial department. All you have to do is restart your activity so your stats can increase, and your account can benefit of more advantages from our side. "

I start to play intimidatingly and in the middle of my game activity with my OWN money which non bonus related I get another email that my funds are confiscated. I quote "Please be informed that the winnings on your account have been voided on initiation of Withdrawal, according to our Terms and conditions " I read the terms they deem as a bonus seeker and not specify what I have done wrong I quote "Goldwin reserves the right to label a player as a "Bonus Seeker" if Goldwin , at its absolute discretion, believes that the player has abused the promotion " This a freehold for the casino to basically say "we can do what we want" In the court of law this would be a "illusory promise " I feel victimized by this casino and these action gives online casinos a bad name.

I was hoping for some advice from this casino forum any advice is appreciated.
Hello Conor,

First of all you need to understand that casino's have such terms and conditions to ensure a fair an equitable environment for all players.

As for cases of abuse these are not judged solely on a single term or from the perspective of a single violation of such an article. Multiple different violations and checks are corroborated in order to reach such a decision and it is vetted by different auditors to ensure a correct decision.

In practice it is extremely rare that a player will be tagged as a bonus abuser.

As for Conor's case, it was thoroughly analyzed by the regulator and their decision was based strictly on the evidence provided - evidence which the player wasn't able to refute. As part of the investigation he was provided with the full evidence that backed up the finding, which is more complex than the snippets posted here.

As much as I would like to offer him a different resolution, as confirmed by the regulator the decision in his case will remain final.

All the best,
Eduard
 

Only1Conor

Newbie member
Joined
Mar 7, 2022
Location
Waterford
As in talks with the regulator they gave me this reason for my voiding of funds!

"• Player registered his account directly, without coming from a trusted affiliate source.

"• Player deposited the same amount as the maximum bonus cap for the deposit bonus offer, he claimed the offer with “100% Up To $/€300” by depositing 300.

"• Player placed right from the start only bets of the maximum value of the bet he was allowed while wagering the bonus.

"• Player played a single game in the casino, rated as High Volatility: Books & Bulls (Gamomat)

"• Player completely stopped playing immediately after completing the wagering requirements of the claimed bonus. And by completely, we refer to the fact that he didn't place a single bet after the wagering requirement was fulfilled (gameplay provided to player and regulator)".

I appealed the decision :eek2:
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
As in talks with the regulator they gave me this reason for my voiding of funds!

"• Player registered his account directly, without coming from a trusted affiliate source.

"• Player deposited the same amount as the maximum bonus cap for the deposit bonus offer, he claimed the offer with “100% Up To $/€300” by depositing 300.

"• Player placed right from the start only bets of the maximum value of the bet he was allowed while wagering the bonus.

"• Player played a single game in the casino, rated as High Volatility: Books & Bulls (Gamomat)

"• Player completely stopped playing immediately after completing the wagering requirements of the claimed bonus. And by completely, we refer to the fact that he didn't place a single bet after the wagering requirement was fulfilled (gameplay provided to player and regulator)".

I appealed the decision :eek2:
This shows what a bunch of corrupt inadequate BS that regulator is. In normal, properly-regulated market not one single problem with any of those points.

1. Registered account directly - most casinos would love this, no affiliate to pay!
2. Deposited max bonus - well the casino puts up a 300 max bonus, people take it, what's the fucking problem??
3. Max bets - well, again the casino sets the max bet, player stakes it, what's the fucking problem??
4. Played single game - so what? Casino never said he couldn't, the rules never excluded that slot.
5. Player stopped playing after beating wagering - well, isn't that normal for someone playing against the overall odds and maths, then for once beating the casino in an EV- proposition?

I'm sorry mate, you've played at a corrupt, dishonest shithole casino 'licensed' by a corrupt, bent, inept, inadequate money-grubbing mafia-state so-called 'regulator'.
What amazes me is that these people are so detached from properly-run gambling and lacking in integrity that they even try and justify their rogue behaviour on this forum, then seem to think because a useless licensor endorses their actions and allows them to have these perjorative arbitary terms in the first place that somehow all is cool.

@Eduard Blake in my view (regardless of any alleged 'bonus abuse') if you are trying to justify the rogue, arbitrary and catastrophically unfair terms your so-called casino has, then you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an online gambling business.

So according to the litany of BS you've posted here and quoted from your prejudicial terms, you would have paid this player IF:

1. He had deposited $295 and not $300?
2. He had played $4 spins instead of $5 spins (or whatever your latest rule states)?
3. He had played 2 or 3 more spins after meeting wagering?
4. He had chosen a different slot?
5. He had played the same slot but had 50 spins on a different one in between?

So if any one or more of the above is correct, you'd have paid the 9k? According to your excuses, you would have but we all know (as you do) you simply did not want to shell out 9k and would have found any reason not to. That much is pretty obvious reading this thread.

Any honest, properly regulated casino would have said "Fair play, he beat the offer and the odds, pay him but maybe bonus-ban him."
 

orion

Experienced Member
PABnononaccred2
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
deep south of Eu
I also had a case with this casino, about 1 year ago, (I am talking about a issue during the account closing procedure - I wanted to close my account, they didn't allow it, and in the meantime they were hammering me to deposit again), and their breaking of the terms was so evident and so ridicolous that I contacted the regulator to have some justice and to report them what was going on.

To my big surprise, the regulator replied almost immediately, and to my even bigger surprise, they replied that:

Kindly note that we escalated your case with the respective gaming operator. Based on the details and evidence submitted, we can conclude that the gaming operator acted accordingly in such situation and did not breach any laws or regulations.

Useless to say I felt 100% gutted with the casino and with the regulator.

I had the feeling that the regulator was saying: hey they are our friends, so that they are right, whatever they do.

At that time I totally lost my trust on this regulator, and still nowadays, when I see their logo I feel sad and upset (euphemisms).

As about my personal opinion about this casino, here on CM it is listed in the wrong section. But of course this is just my humble opinion.

to the OP: if I was you, I'd avoid wasting my time with this regulator. Rather, I'd open a PAB and I think Maxd is the right person to have some help.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
I also had a case with this casino, about 1 year ago, (I am talking about a issue during the account closing procedure - I wanted to close my account, they didn't allow it, and in the meantime they were hammering me to deposit again), and their breaking of the terms was so evident and so ridicolous that I contacted the regulator to have some justice and to report them what was going on.

To my big surprise, the regulator replied almost immediately, and to my even bigger surprise, they replied that:

Kindly note that we escalated your case with the respective gaming operator. Based on the details and evidence submitted, we can conclude that the gaming operator acted accordingly in such situation and did not breach any laws or regulations.

Useless to say I felt 100% gutted with the casino and with the regulator.

I had the feeling that the regulator was saying: hey they are our friends, so that they are right, whatever they do.

At that time I totally lost my trust on this regulator, and still nowadays, when I see their logo I feel sad and upset (euphemisms).

As about my personal opinion about this casino, here on CM it is listed in the wrong section. But of course this is just my humble opinion.

to the OP: if I was you, I'd avoid wasting my time with this regulator. Rather, I'd open a PAB and I think Maxd is the right person to have some help.
I am not sure what scope @maxd would have here given the casino in question and the fact that apparently a decision has already been made by the licensor in another arbitration. Maybe he could add to the warnings here concerning the arbitrary and grossly unfair terms the casino themselves have admitted to using, but at a guess that's all?
 

orion

Experienced Member
PABnononaccred2
Joined
Nov 22, 2013
Location
deep south of Eu
Good point Dunover. You are right.

I was simply thinking that here on CM there is a Rep for this casino, and -even if he already stated the decision is final- when facing a PAB he may re-evaluate the things at least to find out a compromise.

To my pokets, 9k are a lot of money.

IF the player is telling us the truth and nothing has been omitted, I really can't see where he did something wrong. Those terms are simply ridicolous.

And finally yes, a warning could be useful.
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
I am not sure what scope @maxd would have here ...
Not much TBH. Once the regulator rules on something that's pretty much the end of the line because the casino has little or no incentive to do anything other than what the regulator says.

A Warning -- or updates thereto -- is another matter. That's entirely up to us. I'd have to look into this issue further -- I'm only doing a quick drive-by just now -- and decide what would be appropriate.
 

curremon

Senior Member
PABnononaccred
MM
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Location
finland
Hello Conor,

First of all you need to understand that casino's have such terms and conditions to ensure a fair an equitable environment for all players.

As for cases of abuse these are not judged solely on a single term or from the perspective of a single violation of such an article. Multiple different violations and checks are corroborated in order to reach such a decision and it is vetted by different auditors to ensure a correct decision.

In practice it is extremely rare that a player will be tagged as a bonus abuser.

As for Conor's case, it was thoroughly analyzed by the regulator and their decision was based strictly on the evidence provided - evidence which the player wasn't able to refute. As part of the investigation he was provided with the full evidence that backed up the finding, which is more complex than the snippets posted here.

As much as I would like to offer him a different resolution, as confirmed by the regulator the decision in his case will remain final.

All the best,
Eduard
From Grey zone to rogue pit and banhammer to this "Rep" of shit would be only right move here. Too bad its not up to me...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top