Rizk Source of Wealth Bullshit!

[Borgie]

So based on yours & Dionysus's assessments last few posts, I'm a raving homosexual that dresses up in cheerleader outfits with my nutsack on show!

It's not wholly inaccurate though truth be told

Do you think they have a camera in your flat? Uncanny that they describe you so well lol.

 

[geordiecolin]

Do you think they have a camera in your flat? Uncanny that they describe you so well lol.

Pornhub casino installed spycam on his laptop while he was engaged with all they had to offer so I was reliably informed

Edit. Not that I have been on google or anything but what happened to TOMScasino?

 

[Mr Wild]

The thing is, yet again they're doing at the withdrawal stage.
Using the withdrawal to blackmail the player into submitting documents.
I can see the UKGC handing out fines for this unethical practice next

Actually its written that the operator is allowed to take deposits and let customers play for 30 days after a SOW check. However, your not allowed to approve withdrawals. But that will probably change in the future as they will get a lot of complaints.

 

[TheAverageGuy]

The issue is more the taking of deposits before the SOW and only triggering the SOW on a withdrawal. Pick an excuse for doing it that way, it can only be seen as shady.. at best.

When the call from the MGA was to stop using any excuse in the book to delay/cancel withdrawals. using the newest tool in their "war against problem gambling and money laundering" as a reason to delay a withdrawal.. just sends the wrong message.

Yes! We absolutely care about those things.. when they want some of their money back..

 

[geordiecolin]

Some of my last email received

"I understand how you must feel, we wish to make this process as fast and smooth as possible. Please understand that this is just standard procedure for most of our players, without the questionnaire being filled in we cannot help to move forward I'm afraid, apologies for this."
Shall I attempt to direct this fully in here? Should I just sink away like most do?

 

[Chipkin9]

Jesus they're still at this shit?

Fs Geordie, sorry to see you on the end of this now too. MT Secure Trade are hands down one of the worst operators out there. They are borderline dodgy and push things as far as they can without going completely over the line.

I haven't much else to say other than I really fucking despise these roguish stunts from "Accredited" operators.

And yes they are roguish. I've said it before and I'll say it again. They are NOT suposed to be carrying out these AML checks unless they suspect a player of possibly being invloved in criminal activity. That's what the UKGC state. To top it off and to prove they are rougish they are still carrying out these checks only when a player requests a withdrawal so they can just hold onto the players funds indefinitely and possibly forever; that's rogue!

Perhaps consider contacting the UKGC about this and see where they stand on this matter. They will eventually respond (up to 20 days).

INFO@gamblingcommission.gov.uk

 

[colinsunderland]

Actually its written that the operator is allowed to take deposits and let customers play for 30 days after a SOW check. However, your not allowed to approve withdrawals. But that will probably change in the future as they will get a lot of complaints.

I have never seen that written, do you have a link to the document please?

 

[geordiecolin]

Jesus they're still at this shit?

Fs Geordie, sorry to see you on the end of this now too. MT Secure Trade are hands down one of the worst operators out there. They are borderline dodgy and push things as far as they can without going completely over the line.

I haven't much else to say other than I really fucking despise these roguish stunts from "Accredited" operators.

And yes they are roguish. I've said it before and I'll say it again. They are NOT suposed to be carrying out these AML checks unless they suspect a player of possibly being invloved in criminal activity. That's what the UKGC state. To top it off and to prove they are rougish they are still carrying out these checks only when a player requests a withdrawal so they can just hold onto the players funds indefinitely and possibly forever; that's rogue!

Perhaps consider contacting the UKGC about this and see where they stand on this matter. They will eventually respond (up to 20 days).

INFO@gamblingcommission.gov.uk

I have the funds and the patients to see though whatever I decide to. The one thing I despise is a person that crumbles without good reason. I have no good reason too.

 

[keegannye]

“Gambling businesses have a responsibility to ensure that they keep crime out of gambling and tackle problem gambling – and as part of that they must be constantly curious about where the money they are taking is coming from.”

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

This is what they are up against. And it's happening (or will be happening) everywhere in the EU/UK.

I like the fact that they are trying to keep crime out of gambling, by making it harder with these stupid laws. What about funding terrorism through oil sales (which every country uses to get around) in the middle east?? I mean is it so hard to do your job at finding out where people get their money from, that you need the providers to do it for you, and then what, report the person under suspicion of money laundering, or dont let them join or withand then they will just go elsewhere. i mean talk about plot hols.....

 

[dealer wins]

I like the fact that they are trying to keep crime out of gambling, by making it harder with these stupid laws. What about funding terrorism through oil sales (which every country uses to get around) in the middle east?? I mean is it so hard to do your job at finding out where people get their money from, that you need the providers to do it for you, and then what, report the person under suspicion of money laundering, or dont let them join or withand then they will just go elsewhere. i mean talk about plot hols.....

Yep, we in the UK sell over £1,000,000,000.00 in arms to Saudi, but are paranoid over a normal person depositing a few quid into an online casino to have a bit of fun. Makes me mad all this shit imposed on us!!

A genuine money launderer using an online casino would be so easy to spot its laughable without any need for any documents!!!

 

[geordiecolin]

Yep, we in the UK sell over £1,000,000,000.00 in arms to Saudi, but are paranoid over a normal person depositing a few quid into an online casino to have a bit of fun. Makes me mad all this shit imposed on us!!

A genuine money launderer using an online casino would be so easy to spot its laughable without any need for any documents!!!

After double checking what I had deposited I had deposited in total £30 over the course of a few months!

 

[aceking123]

Shocking £30 quid. Stand your ground.

 

[theapple]

After double checking what I had deposited I had deposited in total £30 over the course of a few months!

no wonder you triggered the aml check.



But we gotta be fair here and say Rizk has been working on making their aml checks better, since January this year. So no it wasnt 7 months ago, because in a few days its gonna be a year since this was brought up for the first time. Its not like they had years to sort it out... not even a year has passed since they started working hard on this matter, so i really think people should show more understanding and patience.

Its not like it could have been fixed overnight. Or over300nights.

 

[geordiecolin]

no wonder you triggered the aml check.



But we gotta be fair here and say Rizk has been working on making their aml checks better, since January this year. So no it wasnt 7 months ago, because in a few days its gonna be a year since this was brought up for the first time. Its not like they had years to sort it out... not even a year has passed since they started working hard on this matter, so i really think people should show more understanding and patience.

Its not like it could have been fixed overnight. Or over300nights.

I blame Brexit

 

[pinnit2014]

Did something similar a week or so ago - this time at deposit.

After depo'd a box came up with SOW question of main source of income etc. Tick box. Filled it in, cursing them, but then account was open a few minutes later.

I'll not using them again though as the request for details will probably come with the next deposit/withdrawal

 

[Sebastian - Rizk]

Hello everyone,

I just wanted to let you know that I have asked the relevant department to look into geordiecolin's case. I am keeping geordiecolin up to date with it and will of course shed a light here in the thread on what has happened.

 

[Sebastian - Rizk]

Hi everyone,

I have now looked into the case and here is what has happened. @geordiecolin has been informed about this via PM.

First of all, at Rizk we strive to ensure that all our players enjoy a fun and safe gaming experience. At the same time we are adhering to our regulatory obligations. As part part of our Player Safety & AML strategy, we have set in place automatic safety thresholds.

In geordiecolin's case, although he hadn't been playing with us for a long time, his latest deposit of £30 took him over the cumulative lifetime threshold, which then triggered the request for Source of Wealth information. For players who have not completed the SoW, we have an automatic system in place which will restrict both deposits & withdrawals, which is why his withdrawal was not processed. As a result of a review into the circumstances of the case, his withdrawal has been processed today. Just to make it clear, at no point was his login restricted. Every time the SoW request is triggered, also an email is automatically being sent out to the same email address which is registered on a player’s Rizk account.

Right now, geordiecolin gets an automatic message every time he logs in asking him to fill in the Source of Wealth form. If he doesn't, he's gonna remain restricted for both deposits & withdrawals.

I hope this clears things up, if not, feel free to ask questions regarding this matter either here or via PM.

 

[Homosap]

One angle I have used is that if they suspect me of any sort of illegal activity then they have all of my details and I'm quite happy for them to report me to the relevant UK authorities. Said authorities I'll be more than happy to share the sort of information to prove what I earn and where it comes from. But I'm buggered if I'll give more than the bare minimum to an online casino. In two cases, both of which I got my withdrawals and then closed my accounts, I refused certain requests after consulting with my bank and being advised not to supply the level of banking information they asked for. Both cases were casinos I had used, and lost/won at, over 2+ years always with the same bank card. I keep a specific card and account for all of my online gambling. In both instances I'd had big hits and big withdrawal requests and suddenly they wanted so much more information. I got very shirty with them and would definitely have gone legal if they hadn't caved.

These regulations are another example of generic blanket conditions being used/misused against everyone to target a tiny minority.

 

[geordiecolin]

Thank you so much for very swiftly dealing with my issue Sebastian and Rizk.

I can only assume the logging in problem was due to a glitch,but I assure you I tried many times and it was probably just unfortunate timing.

I regard Rizk very highly. Even during this issue and me posting in this thread about it and before you contacted me about my issue I had posted my nomination for Rizk being one of the top three casinos this past year- I understand the headache SOW compliance must be.
I suspect that the reason why I was hit with the SOW request is because I have been bloody lucky over time in Rizk. My latest win must have taken me over some threshold? ( And the main reason I had not deposited for some time. I rarely push my luck)

I am sorry that your SOW is still in place for me but I struggle to believe that I should share such personal information which could compromise people and companies that I deal with.
If I change my mind in future once more feedback from depositors is provided over time that indicate that nobodies contacts, privacy or data has been breached then I may reconsider providing SOW information.
In the mean time thank you to Rizk for your awesomeness and thank you to Bryan for his assistance too

 

[dealer wins]

Its just unbelievable this thread, if someone had said 5 years ago that this is what would become of online casinos I would have laughed at them.

I just booked a cruise for over £5000, guess what, no ID needed, no source of wealth, no locked Iglucruise account, no questions about how I could possibly afford such extravagance and that I must be money laundering or using dirty money!! Just paid my money and got my cruise ticket!!!

 

[Slottery]

As Sebastian said, Rizk and guess other casinos under same platform are using these automatic thresholds without any other measures. I haven't yet seen that UKGC would have been demanding to do that for amount of this, would be interesting to see where that is coming from? Using just cumulative lifetime amounts for sure not necessary if that threshold triggers from such amount like this, there is quite a huge different if you trigger some threshold in short time or in years.

I don't know Colins game history but if it have been pretty much same amount deposits and withdrawals, there shouldn't be reason to be worried that he is laundering money or have gambling problem, it should be more taken an account how much you deposit like monthly and if it's amount what can be expected full age person can afford to playing and your game play or deposit patterns are not suspicious (like only wager deposit ones in very low risk games like 50/50 roulette bets), use anonymous payment methods and nothing haven't dramatically changed.

Following just one measure, lifetime threshold is not really great way and in this kind of occasions i'm 99.89&% sure that UKGC wouldn't have fined Rizk about processing withdrawal and then block his account. I know it's problematic as UKGC don't really provide too clear guidelines, but casinos would need to check these also case by case to avoid this kind of hassle and bad experience and few page more to this topic.

I'm pretty sure that UKGC would be happy enough that these checks would be done when there is need for that and not just blindly follow life time thresholds without any exceptions or common sense. I know it's not Sebastian who do these rules and happy that he stepped in and helped Colin out in situation what wouldn't really go anywhere without someone taken look at account.

I hope that at least players who are under MGA license, operators really would follow their instructions where one big thing to take an account in their latest implementing document (updated in July 2018) is clearly stated that casino can rely in lifetime thresholds OR last rolling 180 days period which makes much more sense. There's still seem to be loads of studying to do for casinos to adopt this SOW process which i do appreciate and understand but using common sense instead of "Computer days NO" is for sure not forbidden and when reading fines from UKGC which have been posted here as well, i assume that we all can agree these been very extreme cases and casinos should have been take some action to stop these players playing much earlier.

Let's hope bit better practice to this when there is department who are dealing with these, they could check every single account where withdrawal is blocked because of this threshold and make judgement if that can be paid and then block account or is there reason to believe that player who deposit and withdraw for example these amounts Colin did, don't have to get grey hair because of this. Computers are quite smart but some human judgement don't do bad and these topics would disappear somewhere in history.

edit: If somebody deposit 10€ as a first deposit, be lucky enough to hit big win which trigger his lifetime threshold, should there be more worried of ML, financing terrorist or that player have gambling problem

 

[goatwack]

Sorry but 'Lifetime threshold' is flimsy and somewhat reaching.

So assuming I reach this target myself after six years' lowrolling this gives the casino the green light to pry into my financial history WAY beyond normal requirements, or label me a terrorist money-launderer that can barely afford to gamble.

So apart from being the world's crappiest and most ineffective money-rinser, I'm also being tarnished by the casino and being held to hostage by overzealous worker ants who don't even understand that it's not the small players they should be focussing on. Get a grip, casinos

 

[Slottery]

Sorry but 'Lifetime threshold' is flimsy and somewhat reaching.

So assuming I reach this target myself after six years' lowrolling this gives the casino the green light to pry into my financial history WAY beyond normal requirements, or label me a terrorist money-launderer that can barely afford to gamble.

So apart from being the world's crappiest and most ineffective money-rinser, I'm also being tarnished by the casino and being held to hostage by overzealous worker ants who don't even understand that it's not the small players they should be focussing on. Get a grip, casinos

Unfortunately at least this group seem to be thinking that is right way to do, that SOW demand really is not there for players who play 10 years £50 every month without any remarkable changes in game play, payment methods, higher deposits or something. So wouldn't play there if would be from UK and with them already some years, if Colins account is still open (or you can anyway request your life time threshold numbers from their support) would be then easy to know where that lifetime trigger stands and change casino when you start to be that near that you start to be in "danger zone" to trigger it with your around normal game session when you are little bit lucky.

 

[colinsunderland]

Hi everyone,

I have now looked into the case and here is what has happened. @geordiecolin has been informed about this via PM.

First of all, at Rizk we strive to ensure that all our players enjoy a fun and safe gaming experience. At the same time we are adhering to our regulatory obligations. As part part of our Player Safety & AML strategy, we have set in place automatic safety thresholds.

In geordiecolin's case, although he hadn't been playing with us for a long time, his latest deposit of £30 took him over the cumulative lifetime threshold, which then triggered the request for Source of Wealth information. For players who have not completed the SoW, we have an automatic system in place which will restrict both deposits & withdrawals, which is why his withdrawal was not processed. As a result of a review into the circumstances of the case, his withdrawal has been processed today. Just to make it clear, at no point was his login restricted. Every time the SoW request is triggered, also an email is automatically being sent out to the same email address which is registered on a player’s Rizk account.

Right now, geordiecolin gets an automatic message every time he logs in asking him to fill in the Source of Wealth form. If he doesn't, he's gonna remain restricted for both deposits & withdrawals.

I hope this clears things up, if not, feel free to ask questions regarding this matter either here or via PM.

Was this requested as part of AML procedures or Responsible Gaming?

 

[goatwack]

I've said this since the onset of these directives that AML is being merged with RG, we're seeing the proof with how casinos are handling this.

If I can't/ won't prove the 'money trail' then I'm a launderer. If I do, but casinos deem me to be spending my money beyond my means, then I'm a problem gambler.

Either scenario sits well with them as it swerves UKGC fines, whilst having alternating excuses to withhold winnings.

Or maybe I'm just being cynical and casinos really care for our welfare