More SOW grief - is this a regulator or casino problem?

aceking123

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Location
uk
If anyone would run a casino.
My advice would be to demand all this before any deposits are taken.

Don't keep blaming the ukgc.

It's about time all these greedy corrupt casinos started to fall in line.

Not a single casino should allow any deposits made unless they've had proof of address & photo id.
SoW should be done within a month the account being opened or they suspend the account until its approved, you wouldn't get all this bullshit then.

Let's face it its a shit show & casino's are very very greedy.

Online casinos should not be able to hold any funds against a player, unless they suspect its aml stuff.

Casumo are jokers nothing is going to change that.
 

justdoit

Full Member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
I've not been through SOW at Casumo, my account is pending and not submitted docs. Prior to me finding other casinos, Casumo was one of my favs.

As we know, SOW and how its approached is largely dictated by the regulators. Although its a shame I dont play there anymore, you can hardly blame Casumo for dotting the i's and crossing the t's when it comes to regulations. The consequence is potentially millions in fines or stripping of a licence.

If I ran a casino, I would follow those trails until they could not be scrutinised in an audit because that's the only way to avoid a heavy financial penalty.

On the flip side, bamberfishcake casino would be max RTPs all the way baby! And I would advertise the shit out of that fact, watch me clean up the industry, I just need all forum members to donate a €1,000 each to get me us started :)

The reduced contribution for high RTP games term is at a few casinos. It's rare, but not reserved just for Casumo. Some list the games as bonus-excluded or under a reduced contribution list instead.
we should not blame UKGC at all, Casinos agreed for UKGC regulation when they got the license, and in that regulation clearly says casinos cant block players money , UKGC cleraly dont care what is happen to players they just want money from casinos, 98% of Casinos are using loop hole to block their own costumers money, if they dont care for their own costumers way should we care for Casumo Casino, for me Casumo is not safe Casino to play, I feel more safe to play in Crypto casino without licence than in Casumo
 

Guntis

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Location
United kingdom
we should not blame UKGC at all, Casinos agreed for UKGC regulation when they got the license, and in that regulation clearly says casinos cant block players money , UKGC cleraly dont care what is happen to players they just want money from casinos, 98% of Casinos are using loop hole to block their own costumers money, if they dont care for their own costumers way should we care for Casumo Casino, for me Casumo is not safe Casino to play, I feel more safe to play in Crypto casino without licence than in Casumo
Casumo crypto casino without a gambling licence sounds good, actually. I guess they have not long to become one as in Canada, the UK, and everywhere across Europe, their negative side is well-known. There is only Japan left, where they're quite active now.
 

bamberfishcake

Senior Member
PABinit
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Location
Essex
we should not blame UKGC at all, Casinos agreed for UKGC regulation when they got the license, and in that regulation clearly says casinos cant block players money , UKGC cleraly dont care what is happen to players they just want money from casinos, 98% of Casinos are using loop hole to block their own costumers money, if they dont care for their own costumers way should we care for Casumo Casino, for me Casumo is not safe Casino to play, I feel more safe to play in Crypto casino without licence than in Casumo

It's completely the fault of the UKGC. The landscape is created and governed by them. Saying they are not to blame is like saying the UK government are not to blame for the current state of the country.

There is no loophole, only a requirement under licencing to complete SOW and follow the trail until it ends.

Casumo is probably doing exactly what they are required under AML. Whether you wish to comply with their requests is another matter.
 

gonzo fonso

Experienced Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Location
lincolnshire
on another note of SOW/SOF does it mean come September any new players or old players need to all send in SOW/SOF documents ?? to UKGC casinos ? i know they are looking at the maximum stake but what about affordability ? and here is one for you,my friend is disabled and does not work so his days of gaming could be well over
 

justdoit

Full Member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
It's completely the fault of the UKGC. The landscape is created and governed by them. Saying they are not to blame is like saying the UK government are not to blame for the current state of the country.

There is no loophole, only a requirement under licencing to complete SOW and follow the trail until it ends.

Casumo is probably doing exactly what they are required under AML. Whether you wish to comply with their requests is another matter.
under UKGC licensing is no law it say you should hold (Block) costumers money, even if they dont submit ID, yes SOW is part of Licensing but not holding costumers money for 3-4 months or asking 3rd party payments.I did sow on many casinos only Casumo and Mr vegas block me from withdraw,Partycasino Pokerstars Rizk etc etc they never stop my withdraw, all they did block me from playing, I had 2 option close my account refuse submit doc, or agreed and send doc
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2022-07-18 at 09.17.10.png
    Screenshot 2022-07-18 at 09.17.10.png
    479.3 KB · Views: 13

justdoit

Full Member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
on another note of SOW/SOF does it mean come September any new players or old players need to all send in SOW/SOF documents ?? to UKGC casinos ? i know they are looking at the maximum stake but what about affordability ? and here is one for you,my friend is disabled and does not work so his days of gaming could be well over
no is not over, your friend still gets paid, he may get low limit to play, UKGC can control affordability each casino not all at same time, you can simple open 10-20-30-50 casino accounts in £100 limit still lose £1000s pm, my self gambling for over 15 years I just give up I play on crypto casino even deposit/ Cashout fees are very high like 3% 5%
 

bamberfishcake

Senior Member
PABinit
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Location
Essex
SOW is part of Licensing but not holding costumers money for 3-4 months or asking 3rd party payments.

I don't think there is a time limit on holding money. As for 3rd party payments they are obliged to follow the trail until the end, simple - 3rd, 4th, 5th party, or whatever doesn't come into it. Especially when you have people like Harry Redknapp opening offshore accounts under their dogs name :)

Money gets released or deposits returned after checks are complete. Nobody is breaking any rules and I think that is where the UKGC are at fault. They should put a reasonable time limit on requests and deal with complaints instead of ignoring the situations they create with their regulations.

I don't think many customers have payments held for so long. I don't think its a trend that's reserved just for Casumo. I just see a lot of people unhappy they dont play there anymore, me included because I have not complied with their SOW requests. They seem to have been done as a blanket request across its customer base. Quite sensible considering the potential fines, I think I would run a tight ship when it comes to customer ID and SOW.
 

aceking123

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Location
uk
I don't think there is a time limit on holding money. As for 3rd party payments they are obliged to follow the trail until the end, simple - 3rd, 4th, 5th party, or whatever doesn't come into it. Especially when you have people like Harry Redknapp opening offshore accounts under their dogs name :)

Money gets released or deposits returned after checks are complete. Nobody is breaking any rules and I think that is where the UKGC are at fault. They should put a reasonable time limit on requests and deal with complaints instead of ignoring the situations they create with their regulations.

I don't think many customers have payments held for so long. I don't think its a trend that's reserved just for Casumo. I just see a lot of people unhappy they dont play there anymore, me included because I have not complied with their SOW requests. They seem to have been done as a blanket request across its customer base. Quite sensible considering the potential fines, I think I would run a tight ship when it comes to customer ID and SOW.
If this in the case why don't we see a bombarded amount of bookies in uk here complaints about this.

It's the way the casinos in Malta seem to handle the issues, casumo is terrible at doing this sort of thing & tbh many are.
 

bamberfishcake

Senior Member
PABinit
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Location
Essex
If this in the case why don't we see a bombarded amount of bookies in uk here complaints about this.

It's the way the casinos in Malta seem to handle the issues, casumo is terrible at doing this sort of thing & tbh many are.
Not sure why the UK bookies don't get so much attention. A couple of guesses would be that they carry different weight within the UKGC, old boys club, land-based arms and all that, or perhaps the CM crowd tends to steer away from them so they get less mentions - I know I do.

You only need to search under SOW to find there are many companies, both UKGC and MGA. Just a guess again, but if it was a blanket SOW check for all accounts at Casumo, that could contribute towards the attention.

Screenshot (7940).png


MGA put a threshold of €2,000 for all SOW checks. Perhaps a better idea because it's more structured.

p.s. completely agree many casinos are terrible at handling SOW and being compliant.
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
Not sure why the UK bookies don't get so much attention. A couple of guesses would be that they carry different weight within the UKGC, old boys club, land-based arms and all that, or perhaps the CM crowd tends to steer away from them so they get less mentions - I know I do.

You only need to search under SOW to find there are many companies, both UKGC and MGA. Just a guess again, but if it was a blanket SOW check for all accounts at Casumo, that could contribute towards the attention.

View attachment 170114


MGA put a threshold of €2,000 for all SOW checks. Perhaps a better idea because it's more structured.

p.s. completely agree many casinos are terrible at handling SOW and being compliant.
Fair to say, you will not receive the level of SOW requests, for the same level of play/deposits, at a UK Based bookie than the rest. Reasons? Well, i know ColinS (rip) said a few times he thought it was because they knew the regulations better and how to apply.

Applying a 2k blanket threshold achieves nothing, other than letting players know they'll be asked for their Natwest Statements at that point. Certainly not conversant with a risk based approach in the Directives (in fact a blanket approach is anti such)

Whatever the reasons though, if you plan on playing a lot and in the UK, then pick a UK Bookie - no guarantee you'll not get sow'd etc but certainly less likely.
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
I think this is the problem - a lot of MGA's are applying this 2K threshold to SOW, which IMO, is wrong. I get why they kinda of do it - make it all nice and clean, but it's still wrong. And tbh a little bit lazy as you need to have a system to identify risk and obviously that's too much effort :p
 

justdoit

Full Member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
I don't think there is a time limit on holding money. As for 3rd party payments they are obliged to follow the trail until the end, simple - 3rd, 4th, 5th party, or whatever doesn't come into it. Especially when you have people like Harry Redknapp opening offshore accounts under their dogs name :)

Money gets released or deposits returned after checks are complete. Nobody is breaking any rules and I think that is where the UKGC are at fault. They should put a reasonable time limit on requests and deal with complaints instead of ignoring the situations they create with their regulations.

I don't think many customers have payments held for so long. I don't think its a trend that's reserved just for Casumo. I just see a lot of people unhappy they dont play there anymore, me included because I have not complied with their SOW requests. They seem to have been done as a blanket request across its customer base. Quite sensible considering the potential fines, I think I would run a tight ship when it comes to customer ID and SOW.
they are braking the rules by holding costumer money, UKGC clear says casino cant hold the money, last year they got fine by UKGC for 6m
Screenshot 2022-07-18 at 14.30.39.png
 

perunamies

Sad Little Troll
Joined
Jun 1, 2022
Location
At home
Casumo had the issue that they hadn't even appointed a MLRO into position so tbh i'd take any of their 'it's a regulatory requirement' with a rather large pinch of salt
Every "it's a regulatory requirement" should be taken with a pinch of salt if it involves a withdrawal that's being held hostage. I very much doubt there are any requirements that involve that.
 

DesiCasinosIndia

Newbie member
Joined
Feb 7, 2022
Location
Malta
we should not blame UKGC at all, Casinos agreed for UKGC regulation when they got the license, and in that regulation clearly says casinos cant block players money , UKGC cleraly dont care what is happen to players they just want money from casinos, 98% of Casinos are using loop hole to block their own costumers money, if they dont care for their own costumers way should we care for Casumo Casino, for me Casumo is not safe Casino to play, I feel more safe to play in Crypto casino without licence than in Casumo
Can you point out where in the regs it says casinos cant block money please?

I have a suspicion as to which one you are referring to here, but there are many regulatory variables at play here on a player by player basis which renders the phrase “casinos cant block money” as too simplistic and is slightly misleading for community members to read.

If casinos cant block money, criminals would have a field day laundering money. Not that anyone here is a criminal. I’m just pointing out the dangers of over-simplifying without having a full read of the compliance requirements on casinos. These AML requirements come from national legislation and not the UKGC itself.
 

DesiCasinosIndia

Newbie member
Joined
Feb 7, 2022
Location
Malta
on another note of SOW/SOF does it mean come September any new players or old players need to all send in SOW/SOF documents ?? to UKGC casinos ? i know they are looking at the maximum stake but what about affordability ? and here is one for you,my friend is disabled and does not work so his days of gaming could be well over
No. The new rules dont require players to send SOW docs. Its still done on a risk based approach. No change in that regard.
 

DesiCasinosIndia

Newbie member
Joined
Feb 7, 2022
Location
Malta
Not sure why the UK bookies don't get so much attention. A couple of guesses would be that they carry different weight within the UKGC, old boys club, land-based arms and all that, or perhaps the CM crowd tends to steer away from them so they get less mentions - I know I do.

You only need to search under SOW to find there are many companies, both UKGC and MGA. Just a guess again, but if it was a blanket SOW check for all accounts at Casumo, that could contribute towards the attention.

View attachment 170114


MGA put a threshold of €2,000 for all SOW checks. Perhaps a better idea because it's more structured.

p.s. completely agree many casinos are terrible at handling SOW and being compliant.
There is no such MGA requirement for casinos to conduct SOW at 2k.

Update. I see you corrected.
 

justdoit

Full Member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Can you point out where in the regs it says casinos cant block money please?

I have a suspicion as to which one you are referring to here, but there are many regulatory variables at play here on a player by player basis which renders the phrase “casinos cant block money” as too simplistic and is slightly misleading for community members to read.

If casinos cant block money, criminals would have a field day laundering money. Not that anyone here is a criminal. I’m just pointing out the dangers of over-simplifying without having a full read of the compliance requirements on casinos. These AML requirements come from national legislation and not the UKGC itself.
is no regulation says when player win £1000 £2000 block their wining and ask for sow,If I pay from my bank, bank all read check me where the money come from, criminals cant just deposit cash in bank without having back up, every bank check everyday where the money come from,
here where it says I post link so you can see it your self
If a gambling business needs more information before you can withdraw your funds, for example, for anti-money laundering checks, then they should ask promptly and not only when you want to withdraw your funds.

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

DesiCasinosIndia

Newbie member
Joined
Feb 7, 2022
Location
Malta
is no regulation says when player win £1000 £2000 block their wining and ask for sow,If I pay from my bank, bank all read check me where the money come from, criminals cant just deposit cash in bank without having back up, every bank check everyday where the money come from,
here where it says I post link so you can see it your self
If a gambling business needs more information before you can withdraw your funds, for example, for anti-money laundering checks, then they should ask promptly and not only when you want to withdraw your funds.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
2 problems here :

First: you made the assumption that because the money comes from your bank then its legitimate as the bank has done its checks. the banks are subject persons under the AML law so they must do these checks. Casinos are also subject persons. So going by your logic, if money is transferred from a subject person to a subject person, then no checks are required? this is not true. A casino cannot say “the money came from a bank therefore its clean” they would lose their licence right away.

Second: about not asking for information at withdrawal, this is correct. The question is though: could they have asked for it sooner? What if they asked all players for all docs upon registration? Would every player be happy with that? If not, what if certain requests are based on thresholds which players hit so say they hit it and in the same few minutes they also request a withdrawal? This happens a lot.
 

justdoit

Full Member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
2 problems here :

First: you made the assumption that because the money comes from your bank then its legitimate as the bank has done its checks. the banks are subject persons under the AML law so they must do these checks. Casinos are also subject persons. So going by your logic, if money is transferred from a subject person to a subject person, then no checks are required? this is not true. A casino cannot say “the money came from a bank therefore its clean” they would lose their licence right away.

Second: about not asking for information at withdrawal, this is correct. The question is though: could they have asked for it sooner? What if they asked all players for all docs upon registration? Would every player be happy with that? If not, what if certain requests are based on thresholds which players hit so say they hit it and in the same few minutes they also request a withdrawal? This happens a lot.
AML is basic check by banks, they also do due diligence (cdd) check larger amount of money.. I do lot larger transfer every day, is no way transferring from UK bank to UK bank you dont get check every time you make transfer cdd wil check you. in UK everyone get check by banks

regards to asking for doc when we join casino yes I will be happy to send doc and play without streets ( only if casino is worth playing with good RTP) we all know casino dont want to ask for doc coz they know most of costumers will refuse witch is their right their money, but casinos they wait till costumers win so they have no option ( force ) to send doc, so thats the loop hole ( tricks) casinos are using to force costumers spend money with them. P.S If I am correct so the casinos are braking UKGC rules by holding costumers money?
In @Rizk casino you cant play without doing SOW check,
one more year 70%-80% of UK casino will drop out from UK market
for now I feel more safe to play in Crypto casino like @Stake than in any UK casinos
 

perunamies

Sad Little Troll
Joined
Jun 1, 2022
Location
At home
2 problems here :

First: you made the assumption that because the money comes from your bank then its legitimate as the bank has done its checks. the banks are subject persons under the AML law so they must do these checks. Casinos are also subject persons. So going by your logic, if money is transferred from a subject person to a subject person, then no checks are required? this is not true. A casino cannot say “the money came from a bank therefore its clean” they would lose their licence right away.

Second: about not asking for information at withdrawal, this is correct. The question is though: could they have asked for it sooner? What if they asked all players for all docs upon registration? Would every player be happy with that? If not, what if certain requests are based on thresholds which players hit so say they hit it and in the same few minutes they also request a withdrawal? This happens a lot.
The problem is that online casinos are amateurs. Most banks are not. Also, it's a bit funny when all casinos are located in tax havens and dodgy countries and they're worried about OUR money. We should be worried about them.
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
2 problems here :

First: you made the assumption that because the money comes from your bank then its legitimate as the bank has done its checks. the banks are subject persons under the AML law so they must do these checks. Casinos are also subject persons. So going by your logic, if money is transferred from a subject person to a subject person, then no checks are required? this is not true. A casino cannot say “the money came from a bank therefore its clean” they would lose their licence right away.

Second: about not asking for information at withdrawal, this is correct. The question is though: could they have asked for it sooner? What if they asked all players for all docs upon registration? Would every player be happy with that? If not, what if certain requests are based on thresholds which players hit so say they hit it and in the same few minutes they also request a withdrawal? This happens a lot.
I have seen this pop up a few times and IIRC there either was a case (non-casino related) where someone tried to say exactly that: that the money came from a bank, ergo we essentially don't need to do any checks: we can rely on their controls and it was told: No (unless there were very specific agreements in place with the bank - almost like them being an agent of yours)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top