is this fraud?

[gaydave]

If me and about 10 friends all were to join a casino this month and all took a signup bonus but did not take bonuses after that and all played video poker and all played at different times/days then would this be fraud?

 

[Cleveland]

If me and about 10 friends all were to join a casino this month and all took a signup bonus but did not take bonuses after that and all played video poker and all played at different times/days then would this be fraud?

It's pretty clear that 11 different players all signing up legally at a casino, from different computers/homes wouldn't be fraud. I suspect your question is hinting at something else or baiting. I'm kind of curious to see where this thread is about to go. :eat:

 

[rockycatt]

why not just use the casino's refer a friend and get a finders fee or get comped and all is above board

 

[LaHutti]

Well if you and your friends are actually 11 individuals, signing up from your own homes, and your own computers, I see no fraud, but 11 people, that happen to know each other signing up to a casino, and playing vp. However, if just 2 of you sign up from the same IP or computer (Mac addy) there might very well be a problem.
But the way you ask, and the fact that you find it needed to be asked, tells me, there is more to it, than you're telling, so ...pass the popcorn Cleve

 

[Cleveland]

...pass the popcorn Cleve

/passes popcorn

I need some good food similes. I searched for a popcorn passing one but that's the best I could find .

 

[cpdnd31]

AWSDT7 GYIJP][;.|

As my father use to say "If you have to ask- Then something wrong". I'll take my popcorn with extra butter please!

 

[Silencio]

Sounds like a lot of fun though. Make it a competition: Who can cash out most
If so count me in

 

[Cleveland]

As my father use to say "If you have to ask- Then something wrong". I'll take my popcorn with extra butter please!

Here ya go.

That will be an additional $5.00 charge for the extra butter.

 

[cpdnd31]

 

[Casinomeister]

Maybe not fraud, but probably collusion. It all depends on the circumstances.

Why not play it safe and ask the casino beforehand?

 

[cpdnd31]

After you ask casino can you please post the live chat in here.... I'm dying to read it.

 

[vinylweatherman]

11 new players signing up all at once, and all playing the same game, whether or not simultaneously, is going to get their attention. If there is evidence of shared computers, they will call this fraud. Even if each player uses their own PC, the casino will also stipulate that the play must be for "personal entertainment", and may consider this to be a "ring" of players colluding and sharing funds. Even though not fraud, it will contravene the terms and conditions for play in a "personal capacity".

If you try to "hide" this arrangement, and the casino figures it out, they will also consider that you "tried something on" with them. The best way is to be open about it, such as using any "refer a friend" promotion, or asking beforehand whether it is OK to open an account after having the casino recommended to you by your friend.

ONLY playing the SUB will also look suspicious, as it will look like collusion with the profits being shared. Normally, 11 signups will lead to different patterns, such as different gameplay, and some players coming back for more.

 

[gaydave]

Right, you all bring up good points. I am just looking for some definitions of fraud without stirring up a bunch of BS and arguements. I have no interest in an ugly thread and I am not involved in anything like this as I have not played online in a few months due to being American.

It was mentioned that the scenario I laid out could be collusion. How so? I can understand it if all were to only use a SUB then disappear with profits while playing the exact same way but if there are multiple deposits and everyone is playing without bonuses and such I just cannot see how anything is wrong. If you all paid with your own accounts (eco card/neteller/QT/moneybooker/payspark/cc/wire....etc) and use your own computer from your own home then how is anything collusion or fraud? That is what I don't understand but that has come up a few times (seemingly) here. If a casino claims fraud ring in this scenario then I am confused and would like to know how anyone can think it is fraud.

This is all assuming that the players can send in supporting documents and used their own PC from their own home and nothing is shared AND bonuses were not used exclusively on the deposits.

What is the fraud? What is the collusion? There cannot be a benefit to the players or an advantage to the players if this is the scenario. The casino is not getting cheated. Correct?

 

[Cleveland]

Even if each player uses their own PC, the casino will also stipulate that the play must be for "personal entertainment", and may consider this to be a "ring" of players colluding and sharing funds. Even though not fraud, it will contravene the terms and conditions for play in a "personal capacity".

If you try to "hide" this arrangement, and the casino figures it out, they will also consider that you "tried something on" with them.

In that given scenario I would have to say the casino would be out right wrong. In my mind it is no different than a group of friends/family traveling to a land based casino to have a good time. If they are using their own computers, from their own home, with their own money, and not even taking a bonus then I can't see how or why this would present any problems. Unless the casino is being dishonest and trying to get out of paying a player.

Even sharing funds. How could that be a problem? If someone gives me 10 dollars because I'm short on funds, that doesn't change my odds of winning. Yes I will have a few more chances, as I wouldn't have been able to continue playing but nothing is wrong/illegal with that.

 

[luarod]

I agree with Cleveland. If players act the same way as if they didn't know each other, there is no fraud in it.

 

[chayton]

I've wondered about that too - I understand that one table games or multiplayer games there's a benefit, but with slot games and VP if the games are truly random, then no matter who you're 'colluding' with, there shouldn't be any advantage.

 

[Mousey]

There are still online casinos out there that allow VP on a SUB?

Whether right or wrong, if the casino spots a dozen sign ups from the same general geographical area (even if not same house) through the same link (like a bonus hunting board) there might be problems if more than one of the players makes a withdrawal.

As the OP lays out the scenario, I see no fraud. But that doesn't mean suspicions wouldn't surface.

Best advice has been given already. Contact the casino. Even take advantage of any referal bonuses....

 

[Jasminebed]

If there's a VP progressive you and your friends are going to try to chase because it's currently EV+, you may very well find yourselves branded as a syndicate or in collusion. While this is not fraud in a criminal sense, it might just see you with a battle on your hands to claim winnings. Especially if your play is identical, or very strongly similar. If, for instance, you play a strategy to increase your chance of a Royal and deviate from what autohold suggests.

I'd go with an earlier suggestion to use the Refer-a-friend bonuses, that way they can't claim you were hiding your association with your friends. I'd wait until I had a win and a withdrawal first, then contact CS to tell them your friends now want to play.

 

[IanO]

A bunch of friends signing up from the same area at the same time and playing similar games might not technically constitute fraud, but as people have rightly pointed out it would certainly get the casinos atention. At the very least, you should expect every player linked to need to provide docs and pass a full audit.

The best advice has already been given... clear it with the casino in question first.

 

[vinylweatherman]

In that given scenario I would have to say the casino would be out right wrong. In my mind it is no different than a group of friends/family traveling to a land based casino to have a good time. If they are using their own computers, from their own home, with their own money, and not even taking a bonus then I can't see how or why this would present any problems. Unless the casino is being dishonest and trying to get out of paying a player.

Even sharing funds. How could that be a problem? If someone gives me 10 dollars because I'm short on funds, that doesn't change my odds of winning. Yes I will have a few more chances, as I wouldn't have been able to continue playing but nothing is wrong/illegal with that.

Casinos look for peer to peer passing of funds in eWallets such as Neteller and Moneybookers, and if this is found alongside advantage play, will consider this a "syndicate". eWallets freely share this information with casinos, it has come up in the past. No-one really knows at what level such transfers between friends constitutes a "syndicate", but winnings have been voided on the strength of a group of players taking bonuses and using P2P to move funds between them in an eWallet.

 

[LaHutti]

Casinos look for peer to peer passing of funds in eWallets such as Neteller and Moneybookers, and if this is found alongside advantage play, will consider this a "syndicate". eWallets freely share this information with casinos, it has come up in the past. No-one really knows at what level such transfers between friends constitutes a "syndicate", but winnings have been voided on the strength of a group of players taking bonuses and using P2P to move funds between them in an eWallet.

Seriously ??
E-wallets let casinos in on peoples private transactions ?
What's the world comming to ?

 

[vinylweatherman]

Seriously ??
E-wallets let casinos in on peoples private transactions ?
What's the world comming to ?

I don't know exactly what is shared, but casinos that suspect players are acting as a syndicate can ask Neteller or Moneybookers whether they are making P2P exchanges between them, and the eWallet will at least confirm or deny this.

It is also possible for a casino to "chargeback" a withdrawal already paid if subsequent investigation by the casino reveals the play was deemed "abusive" in order to gain those winnings. One notable case was when Prime casino took back a withdrawal from a player some 2 weeks after having paid it because they decided upon review that it was "bonus abuse". They got a right bollocking from me (and others) on the forum at the time, and gave the money back. Since then, there have been further instances of casinos taking money back from players' eWallet accounts, but earlier in the year Betfair stunned everybody by taking back money already paid from a players' BANK account!!

It is clear that the eWallets are NOT independent, and will often do the bidding of operators (merchants) with no right on the part of players to challenge the decision to reverse a payment. In contrast, PLAYERS are told that a transaction made by an eWallet is "final", and cannot be reversed under any circumstances other than outright fraud, such as hacking Neteller accounts.

 

[gaydave]

Can we just get clarification on some things? I think it would end a lot of bickering on threads.

I will ask this again. Can we get specific answers please?

1). If you are accused of fraud by a casino then how can you prove otherwise? You can prove your identity and residency. What else can be done?

2). If you are playing at a casino without a bonus and you are only playing single player games. Can this possibly be fraud? How in the world would you be at an advantage on the casino by pretending to be someone else then playing with your own money?
Furthermore, what right would a casino possibly have to suspect fraud or affiliation of a fraud group on players who are not seeking an advantage then keeping all of the players money including deposits and winnings?

These are questions that I really need answered as it is becoming extremely frustrating watching this happen to so many players with no recourse.

In my opinion, confiscating players money based on an unprovable fraud allegation when the players were not trying to use this alleged "fraud" to benefit from the casino must be stopped or we are getting deeper and deeper into an unplayable online environment in which the casinos have an open license to steal while still gaining affiliate backing and promotion.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Can we just get clarification on some things? I think it would end a lot of bickering on threads.

I will ask this again. Can we get specific answers please?

1). If you are accused of fraud by a casino then how can you prove otherwise? You can prove your identity and residency. What else can be done?

2). If you are playing at a casino without a bonus and you are only playing single player games. Can this possibly be fraud? How in the world would you be at an advantage on the casino by pretending to be someone else then playing with your own money?
Furthermore, what right would a casino possibly have to suspect fraud or affiliation of a fraud group on players who are not seeking an advantage then keeping all of the players money including deposits and winnings?

These are questions that I really need answered as it is becoming extremely frustrating watching this happen to so many players with no recourse.

In my opinion, confiscating players money based on an unprovable fraud allegation when the players were not trying to use this alleged "fraud" to benefit from the casino must be stopped or we are getting deeper and deeper into an unplayable online environment in which the casinos have an open license to steal while still gaining affiliate backing and promotion.

It can still be seen as "going equiped" by using false details and/or fake ID, even though no advantage is obvious. It is illegal to possess a fake ID, you don't have to get caught trying to use it before they can bring charges.

It may not be fraud, but a breach of terms, if 10 friends all signed up and played on fewer than 10 separate PCs at 10 separate addresses. If they play the exact same pattern, it will appear that they are members of a group being run by one person, and are playing by rote from a script they have been given, rather than for their own enjoyment. It doesn't matter what times they play, and from which PC. This can be a doubtful situation, since such "scripts" or "strategies" for playing a particular bonus are freely shared over the internet, and do not necessarily prove that the 10 players are part of a "ring".

 

[Casinomeister]

Can we just get clarification on some things? I think it would end a lot of bickering on threads.

I will ask this again. Can we get specific answers please?

1). If you are accused of fraud by a casino then how can you prove otherwise? You can prove your identity and residency. What else can be done?

As mentioned before, "fraud" deals with anything from multiple accounts to collusion with other players. Fraud can be anything that has to do with deceptive practice by the player (submitting bogus info, lying about anything, etc.). So it depends on what the circumstances are, to figure out what can be done.

2). If you are playing at a casino without a bonus and you are only playing single player games. Can this possibly be fraud? How in the world would you be at an advantage on the casino by pretending to be someone else then playing with your own money?

Fraud is fraud. If you are using bogus personal info, shared money accounts, or whatever it is that the casino defines as fraud - it's fraud. Bonuses have nothing to do with it. Casinos have to answer to their auditors and a majority have to prove that their players are in fact real. There is no room for bullshit players.

Furthermore, what right would a casino possibly have to suspect fraud or affiliation of a fraud group on players who are not seeking an advantage then keeping all of the players money including deposits and winnings?

Because it is their business, and they have every right to block out players that violate their terms. As far as I know in most instances, players' deposits are returned. But many have clauses in their terms and conditions that allow them to confiscated the funds from fraudulent players. Caveat Emptor.

These are questions that I really need answered as it is becoming extremely frustrating watching this happen to so many players with no recourse.

In my opinion, confiscating players money based on an unprovable fraud allegation when the players were not trying to use this alleged "fraud" to benefit from the casino must be stopped or we are getting deeper and deeper into an unplayable online environment in which the casinos have an open license to steal while still gaining affiliate backing and promotion.

Again I need to emphasize that what you are complaining about refers to only a handful of players. It's slightly less than a storm in a tea cup.

And from my own experience observing the fraud "phenomena", most operators won't bother with dealing with fraudsters since it's an incredible waste of man-hours. They would rather have their support serve their regular players than answering questions from fraudsters. That's why players who get caught out get the "speak to the hand" treatment.