Question N1bet unusual verification process

[Jono777]

Ouch

Reminds me of my hatred of having to wear a badge with "Trainee" on it when I started my first job!

 

[bamberfishcake]

Ouch

Reminds me of my hatred of having to wear a badge with "Trainee" on it when I started my first job!

Didnt think they had name tags in the 1920s?

 

[paul7388]

Didnt think they had name tags in the 1920s?

Ouch that will hurt.

 

[bamberfishcake]

Ouch that will hurt.

I did think of 'do they use nametags in brothels?' but plumbed for a more conventional attack.

 

[Video_Poker_Pro]

just take the picture

 

[Jono777]

Ouch that will hurt.

Nope

I did think of 'do they use nametags in brothels?' but plumbed for a more conventional attack.

Would have preferred that mate, "Gimp Jon" has a nice ring to it and would maybe pay better than my job did back then.

1920's tut, aresholes

 

[N1 Partners Group]

Hello @kamciono5 and all those involved in the discussion,

We cannot but agree with the opinion of Mark_Lottomart. Recently, cases of fake identities and forged documents have really become more frequent.
We want to make sure that you are the one playing in the created account and request documents as part of our standard account checks in events of withdrawal from no deposit bonuses.

The support agent replied that your ID was accepted, your account has not yet been verified, and we see that you managed to close it. Most likely, you are having problems with this requirement, which also suggests certain conclusions.

 

[Avernite]

Hello @kamciono5 and all those involved in the discussion,

We cannot but agree with the opinion of Mark_Lottomart. Recently, cases of fake identities and forged documents have really become more frequent.
We want to make sure that you are the one playing in the created account and request documents as part of our standard account checks in events of withdrawal from no deposit bonuses.

The support agent replied that your ID was accepted, your account has not yet been verified, and we see that you managed to close it. Most likely, you are having problems with this requirement, which also suggests certain conclusions.

I get the selfie with the paper, date and writing. But why outside the house while trying fitting in several things at once? Surely there are easier ways to uniquely verify identity than that.

 

[deleted20230517]

It's nonsense. And they know it. The most easiest way is a video selfie with a paper claiming the date of today and the filmer attesting to his username on the casino followed with his real name. Now since you have the passport data how difficult is it to verify?

But something tells me N1 brand has always bin the king of being on ice in this regard. It's not like Cuaracao licensing does mean anything.

 

[Mr Dan]

and request documents as part of our standard account checks in events of withdrawal from no deposit bonuses.

So this means that you have zero interest when accepting deposits all day long and for as much as people want.Why do you not want to check money you ACCEPT is from a legitimate source? Does it also mean people who want to withdraw following successful wagering of a bonus are not required to verify?

 

[Casinomeister]

It's nonsense. And they know it. The most easiest way is a video selfie with a paper claiming the date of today and the filmer attesting to his username on the casino followed with his real name. Now since you have the passport data how difficult is it to verify?

But something tells me N1 brand has always bin the king of being on ice in this regard. It's not like Cuaracao licensing does mean anything.

Obviously it is an extreme. Nonsense? Well the jury is out on that one since we don't know the details of the matter. I know from my own experience of running this site for 25 years that player fraud is the biggest threat that online casinos face. Until you step into the shoes of an operator, it is difficult to have any understanding on what goes on with player verification.

As for verifying folks as they sign up, that's a no brainer on how unsuccessful that would be. A casino would lose most if not all of their customers if they had time consuming ID verification SOW requests up front. That is why there are terms and conditions that you read and agree to. That is the verification process that you undergo - the honour system. Which unfortunately falls flat on its face with the bucket loads of players trying to game the system.

 

[Mr Dan]

Which is basically you justifying casinos accepting as many deposits as they want into their coffers knowing that should someone win they will have a chance of keeping that win by creating hoops to jump through, in the case of the OP, quite ridiculous hoops. A casino's traffic and player base is not of a players concern. It should be common practice that once a payment is ACCEPTED, winnings should be paid. It cannot be that difficult to implement checks on a deposit basis. "Please be aware that should you complete this deposit, any winnings will be subject to additional verification being required". The player then knows it is coming and can decide whether or not they want to continue. But that NEVER happens does it. Only at the withdrawal stage.

 

[Casinomeister]

Which is basically you justifying casinos accepting as many deposits as they want into their coffers knowing that should someone win they will have a chance of keeping that win by creating hoops to jump through, in the case of the OP, quite ridiculous hoops. A casino's traffic and player base is not of a players concern. It should be common practice that once a payment is ACCEPTED, winnings should be paid. It cannot be that difficult to implement checks on a deposit basis. "Please be aware that should you complete this deposit, any winnings will be subject to additional verification being required". The player then knows it is coming and can decide whether or not they want to continue. But that NEVER happens does it. Only at the withdrawal stage.

How about dropping the passive aggressiveness before you piss me off. OK? I am explaining things here so that the membership can understand this issue. Just because I explain something doesn't mean I subscribe to this practise.

 

[Avernite]

How about dropping the passive aggressiveness before you piss me off. OK? I am explaining things here so that the membership can understand this issue. Just because I explain something doesn't mean I subscribe to this practise.

What's your personal stance on it then as a player? Because personally I've experienced document rejection as a stalling tactic before, having official bank letters rejected for example, only for them to be magically approved once the winnings are played through.

Surely if there are worries of bonus abuse from player fraud they could make a requirement to verify before playing the bonus. Some accredited sites can verify within minutes here and it's usually quite a simple process, the general criticism N1 gets is how they seem to request more and more hoops to jump through. Something you wouldn't get at Winz or Bitstarz, for example, and they operate on similar platforms.

 

[Mark_Lottomart]

What's your personal stance on it then as a player? Because personally I've experienced document rejection as a stalling tactic before, having official bank letters rejected for example, only for them to be magically approved once the winnings are played through.

Surely if there are worries of bonus abuse from player fraud they could make a requirement to verify before playing the bonus. Some accredited sites can verify within minutes here and it's usually quite a simple process, the general criticism N1 gets is how they seem to request more and more hoops to jump through. Something you wouldn't get at Winz or Bitstarz, for example, and they operate on similar platforms.

My thoughts: The harsh reality is, the N1 rep referenced no deposit bonuses. I would suggest from previous experience that 99% of signups claiming a no deposit bonus don’t win so it’s a pointless task.

Players are automatically checked for age and basic KYC on registration (or bonus claim etc). That’s enough for a no deposit bonus. If they then add payment methods to withdraw, or win above set thresholds additional checks can then be triggered. Isn’t that fair? Particularly if it’s a win from no deposit.

Fraud alerts for collusion or fake docs might trigger on bonus award but it’s probably cheaper to allow the NDB than check the losing accounts for fraud? Why scrutinise a player who claims an NDB and doesn’t win? If they had to verify before the bonus was awarded, 1, the players wouldn’t bother and 2, the staff required to carry out the verification would cost too much.

Obviously the process is different if a player is depositing their own cash I just wanted to share some thoughts on no deposit players as I’ve had some experience of that in the past and that’s what N1 referenced which may have been overlooked.

Mark

 

[shadow123]

Sorry but I think that as crappy and expensive it would be, no player should be allowed to deposit until they are fully verified
then there is no excuse for asking for further docs at withdrawal time.Hard not to see a link between large withdrawals and
document requests, there are postings here almost every day.

 

[Mark_Lottomart]

Sorry but I think that as crappy and expensive it would be, no player should be allowed to deposit until they are fully verified
then there is no excuse for asking for further docs at withdrawal time.Hard not to see a link between large withdrawals and
document requests, there are postings here almost every day.

Not sure if you’re replying to my post or another, but mine specifically mentions non depositing players, as per N1 post.

 

[paul7388]

My thoughts: The harsh reality is, the N1 rep referenced no deposit bonuses. I would suggest from previous experience that 99% of signups claiming a no deposit bonus don’t win so it’s a pointless task.

Players are automatically checked for age and basic KYC on registration (or bonus claim etc). That’s enough for a no deposit bonus. If they then add payment methods to withdraw, or win above set thresholds additional checks can then be triggered. Isn’t that fair? Particularly if it’s a win from no deposit.

Fraud alerts for collusion or fake docs might trigger on bonus award but it’s probably cheaper to allow the NDB than check the losing accounts for fraud? Why scrutinise a player who claims an NDB and doesn’t win? If they had to verify before the bonus was awarded, 1, the players wouldn’t bother and 2, the staff required to carry out the verification would cost too much.

Obviously the process is different if a player is depositing their own cash I just wanted to share some thoughts on no deposit players as I’ve had some experience of that in the past and that’s what N1 referenced which may have been overlooked.

Mark

I can see your point about possible reasons.

But not sure if you have saw all the posts for the last few months. I could understand the casinos stance if this was about players winning on no deposit bonuses or new sign ups. But there have been several posts now lately from longstanding members here that had been verified at N1 casinos and played at them for a long time that are all getting hit with the crazy requests on withdrawals.

 

[Mark_Lottomart]

I can see your point about possible reasons.

But not sure if you have saw all the posts for the last few months. I could understand the casinos stance if this was about players winning on no deposit bonuses or new sign ups. But there have been several posts now lately from longstanding members here that had been verified at N1 casinos and played at them for a long time that are all getting hit with the crazy requests on withdrawals.

I’ll hold my hands up and say I was just responding to this issue and the reps response Paul. I agree if there are other issues with deposits then it needs scrutinising. Hopefully no harm caused with my comments.

 

[deleted20230517]

Here,



Their announcement that one of their partners is quitting. No adress no message on what happens on the affiliates, the income revenue (i made a couple of hundred euro), just we're pulling the plug, thank you for coming. I mean thats one of the N1 sub affiliates.

People should avoid the whole N1 Brand at all cost. Seriously.

 

[paul7388]

I’ll hold my hands up and say I was just responding to this issue and the reps response Paul. I agree if there are other issues with deposits then it needs scrutinising. Hopefully no harm caused with my comments.

Of course no harm done by your comments you are doing what you do best and offering an insight into possible reasons speaking through your experience in Industry,

That is only reason i pointed out a few months ago there were various posts from several members all stating same was happening to them and they were not new players.

 

[Mark_Lottomart]

Here,

View attachment 180993

Their announcement that one of their partners is quitting. No adress no message on what happens on the affiliates, the income revenue (i made a couple of hundred euro), just we're pulling the plug, thank you for coming. I mean thats one of the N1 sub affiliates.

People should avoid the whole N1 Brand at all cost. Seriously.

Job advert for content writers just there! Wow.

 

[shadow123]

Not sure if you’re replying to my post or another, but mine specifically mentions non depositing players, as per N1 post.

Sorry Mark not a reply to your posting just a comment

 

[Avernite]

My thoughts: The harsh reality is, the N1 rep referenced no deposit bonuses. I would suggest from previous experience that 99% of signups claiming a no deposit bonus don’t win so it’s a pointless task.

Players are automatically checked for age and basic KYC on registration (or bonus claim etc). That’s enough for a no deposit bonus. If they then add payment methods to withdraw, or win above set thresholds additional checks can then be triggered. Isn’t that fair? Particularly if it’s a win from no deposit.

Fraud alerts for collusion or fake docs might trigger on bonus award but it’s probably cheaper to allow the NDB than check the losing accounts for fraud? Why scrutinise a player who claims an NDB and doesn’t win? If they had to verify before the bonus was awarded, 1, the players wouldn’t bother and 2, the staff required to carry out the verification would cost too much.

Obviously the process is different if a player is depositing their own cash I just wanted to share some thoughts on no deposit players as I’ve had some experience of that in the past and that’s what N1 referenced which may have been overlooked.

Mark

Fair and good points. I don't imagine it'd be worth ripping off NDBs as it'd be so much work for a max of $100. But that's just me.

From your side of things, what's the most extreme verification method you've seen and how does it compare to this situation?

 

[Mr Dan]

I'll go back to observing, rather than express my opinion which you don't like. You constantly say things like this particularly to newbies. It is a sensitive and argumentive subject, so a lot of posts will appear aggressive. Keep your playground for the big lads, I will slope off to the corner just where you want me.

How about dropping the passive aggressiveness before you piss me off. OK? I am explaining things here so that the membership can understand this issue. Just because I explain something doesn't mean I subscribe to this practise.