Rizk Source of Wealth Bullshit!

[pinnit2014]

and yet when it comes to self exclusion they are "unable" to make internal database that shared between sites with same license? Im talking about MT sites here as they have been abusing SE system since day one. It could be fixed by now but amount of topics we had because MT sites let people deposit but not cashout (because of SE and because they care) was unreal.

its odd how that works isnt it.

you really gotta feel sorry for casinos sometimes. they really have it hard way. Heck sometimes even normal, non casino rules and laws apply to them!!! its such a shame their own T&C arent above the law anymore :/ I bet if he was to take rizk to court they wouldnt even let them keep his money ! its a travesty really. #FREECASINOS

I always wondered that as well. There is always talk about data capture, data points, sharing of data but with the caveat of ‘well obvs not SE, that’s only when they win’

We’d a case in the UK whereby construction companies were fined for holding ‘a list’ of people - a blacklist of staff, so to speak re Union membership. Interesting to know if a chargeback list would be viewed in the same way because a. Just because you’ve done so doesn’t mean you’re a nefarious criminal.

 

[colinsunderland]

I'm sorry guys, but I think this is very bad advice you are giving to Deeplay. Two wrongs don't make a right.

And please don't think I am siding with the casino, because I am not. The way Deeplay has been treated is nothing short of scandalous. If I was on the receiving end of this kind of treatment, I would be very, very angry indeed.

But I don't see charging back as the best course of action to solving D's problem here.
The best thing he can do is to make full use of every legal avenue available to him, if needed.

FWIW, I do agree with something that Chipkin said, if he does take legal action, he should go all out for the full £2,500, not the £800.
Granting a player's request to raise his/her deposit limits one day, only to then reject a withdrawal the next day is shady at best, totally rogue at worst.

I have read this thread with a great deal of interest and I have to say this whole episode is actually pretty disheartening.
Rizk was one of my favourite casinos to play at, now I'm wondering if I have been a complete fool for trusting them and speaking highly of them in the past.
To say that I am bitterly disappointed is an understatement.

Legal action may be the best option, however that could mean Xmas or beyond before he gets his money, so chargeback would be much quicker. This is actually exactly what chargebacks are for, if you pay for goods or services and you don't get what you pay for, from any retailer, not just a casino, you have the extra protection from your card company. You say he should use every legal avenue available, then chargeback is one of them.

Can't stress enough that chargebacks should never be used in this situation. Having worked 5+ years in fraud ops in Malta, when you make a chargeback against the casino it will affect your ability to deposit at other casinos as you will be added to a internal database which is shared amongst operators. Secondly, you risk a visit from the police and other authorities.

With all due respect, there is zero chance of the police turning up at anyones door after initiating a legitimate chargeback. This is not fraud, well unless you count Rizk's practice of taking payment with having no intention of providing the service they are paid for, so why on earth would the police be involved. If by any chance they were involved, then that would be grounds for a criminal investigation against the directors of Rizk for perverting the course of justice, as they would have had to have lied to the police to get them to visit. This isn't a case where someone claims they didn't use their card, its a claim for non performance of a contract.

As for the database, I haven't seen that in any casinos T&C's, nor in any data protection terms. If they do that it is a breach of the data protection act, unless I have missed it in the terms somewhere. I'm presuming this is some sort of fraud database/list? In this situation, if Deeplay was added to it, it would be libelous, and I would be adding defamation to my list of claims. It is not fraud, it is a perfectly legitimate situation where a chargeback can be used

What Deeplay has been through this week is nothing short of disgusting and as it's now the weekend, will sadly have to endure further delays. You are not alone with this issue, there are literally dozens I know of that have had deposits / withdrawals frozen in the last couple of weeks. A serious issue which will no doubt lead to repercussions to Rizk and other well-known operators.

Another problem now is that eCOGRA and IBAS are not dealing with this type of complaint either. Instead, you get a e-mail back within 24 hours telling you to sort it out yourself.

Glad I'm off work until Monday!

Completely agree, and the fact that you know of dozens in the same position shows clearly this is a large scale problem.

How does this work with your deposit guarantee? Do you pay people back who get hit with this? You might want to add something about it to your terms otherwise I can see you getting hit with a lot of claims

 

[Deeplay]

Im not gonna go legal I have neither the time nor the patience for such. This is one fight I did not choose! I am beyond angry right now . But i dont have time for this bullshit . People make there own choices .... and there own minds up but if you get this you will be in the shit especially if you have a withdraw pending and dont want to supply documentation on every aspect of your life.

I am not giving over my paypal transaction history never will as It would breech my own contract with paypal told them this around 10 times. as Self employed we dont have nor need p60s so Rizk cant even get that right. I have had no employer for decades now "self employed" i will keep the thread updated if i get news good or bad.

 

[Deeplay]

Casinomesiter / Bryan are involved at this stage so I wont comment further until there is resolution either way. cheers Deeplay

 

[colinsunderland]

Casinomesiter / Bryan are involved at this stage so I wont comment further until there is resolution either way. cheers Deeplay

In which case I would do the same and wait for the outcome of that. If it doesn't get anywhere though, and you don't want to go the legal route, chargeback your deposits, I think you would get away with doing it back to the point of your last withdrawal, but certainly the £2500 since deposit limits were increased. That will take 10 minutes on the phone to the bank.

 

[t4llek]

I feel for you deeplay, but like casinomeister said people are going to do 2 simple things, either go unregulated joints online or just go to land based, both of these options will receive people with open arms and they wont gve 2 fucks about all of this, as fir rizk doing this on the withdraw end, its perfect no matter what anyone says, its perfect for them to fuck ppl over like they did to you.

 

[aceking123]

silly question but being self employed you should have your accounts done yearly , you would be able to show your net income from this & this would stand in law , you could then give them a one way ticket as such , if they dont pay i would charge back , because its going to cost you to do a legal route.

I know this is frowned upon but you clearly have limited choice regarding the casino holding you by the bollocks.

 

[deepsky2]

Looks like we are taking a rizk if we to choose to play at Rizk!! Doesn't matter how big or how popular a casino may be something like this can and will only give them bad PR. pulling a stunt like this holding his fund's ransom is plain dirty on their part and even if Rizk ends up doing the right thing, in the end, I will never play the casino ever! This kinda stuff makes me sick.

 

[colinsunderland]

The more I think about this, the more this smells of large scale fraud by Rizk.

They have accepted money from customers, knowing they might not payout any winnings.

The have sent emails to affected customers with lies that they intend to deceive the affected players with, the intention of which is to permanently deprive the customer of their money.

This has clearly happened to a lot of customers.

If accredited and licensed casinos are allowed to even attempt to do this, then we might as well just ignore anything like that and deposit anywhere, as you probably have around the same chance of getting paid.

 

[Borgie]

If a casino.holds on to money then it defeats the whole purpose of what they are supposedly trying to prevent. If it is money laundering they suspect they have now helped themselves to a pile of illegal cash .

If they think he's a problem gambler they took over 2k in deposits without blinking but hey maybe by holding on to his winnings they can stop him gambling elsewhere !! They are all heart .

 

[mcgameboy]

Well I think this thread has made me realise that I have got absolutely no choice but to stop playing until further notice.
I'm going to have to get in contact with every casino where I have an account and ask them flat out "what's da fucking craic here?"
And THAT is going to be tough sledding in itself, not to mention rather monotonous and mind-numbingly boring.

But if the joint-highest rated CM-Accredited Casino is going to resort to issuing FU clauses that are totally anti-player anytime they bloody feel like being a spiteful PITA,
while hiding behind the smokescreen that is "compliance with regulator demands", then frankly I don't feel that I can trust ANY casino right now, CM-Accredited or not.

The UKGC have basically created an anti-player warfare charter. And Rizk are the first casino to show that they are more than happy to exploit it for maximum gain.

Looks like my gambling activity for the forseeable future is a Lucky Dip on the Euro Millions twice a week and the odd couple of sessions of slots in fun play mode.
I may be over-reacting to this a bit, but after reading Mr. D's post in another SoW thread, I heard nothing but alarm bells going off in my head.
I want no part of anything that is going to bring me hassle, annoyance and deep frustration, just because I had the audacity to win for a change.

 

[colinsunderland]

The UKGC have basically created an anti-player warfare charter. And Rizk are the first casino to show that they are more than happy to exploit it for maximum gain.

But they haven't. There is NOTHING in any guidance or law that allows them to keep your money as Rizk are doing here. If there was and I had missed something, then I'm sure the rep, or someone else, would have posted it by now.
IF they have sent a Suspicious Activity Report off then they can hold it, but ONLY until the authorities say it can be released, and I will bet anything that that hasn't happened here. If it's RG then they HAVE to return the account balance when they close the account.
This is simply a dodgy casino, Rizk, stealing players' money.

 

[goatwack]

Casinos are masters at taking deposits when they shouldn't, one need only look at any Self Exclusion thread where one or the other continue raking it in, with some not even wanting to return the original deposits!

So I wouldn't go singling Rizk out (and no, I don't play there!), you can bet half the casinos here would have done the same. and I agree it is fraud......maybe we ought to send the police round Rizk's?

 

[The Dude]

Hi guys and gals. I'm putting a fork into this thread since there is a discussion going on between Rizk and Deeplay. Once there is a resolution either way, I will reopen this thread. Thanks for your understanding and have a great weekend.

 

[Deeplay]

just an update I did eventually get paid. But I did have to supply a document and was and still am pissed of at this. They way it was handled was terrible, and I found it very very intrusive. I never did get confirmation from them via email only here from the rep. And I will close all my accounts with this group. I did not have the time nor energy to take up a legal fight on this so they had me by the bollocks. As they would not pay without some kind of document.

What is clear to me is they are waiting until withdraw before hitting a player with this knowing this will force them to act. This IMO Is totally wrong. And you can expect more of this in the future. Very badly handled and my main questions on this were never answered they were just avoided.

Kudos to Bryan who went above and beyond what you would expect in trying to assist me on this. He kept checking in even over the weekend. And gave some very good advise and support! So all respect to him and his team.

Make your own mind up on this one. But Rizk casino wont ever see another penny of me again as will no other casinos in that group.

 

[pinnit2014]

From reading all the above it seems and others, we've to jump the first hurdle of KYC (and the whole '4 corners aren't visible'), if we take a bonus it's hit and miss if we've breached the t's and c's cos of some vague terms, then we've to actually win on the slot and then we've got this SOW stuff. I'm thinking it's too much bother getting

Glad you got your dosh in the end and sadly the above thread has undermined the good Rizk thread from last month.

 

[slotter999]

@Deeplay Glad to hear you got your cash but it was unscrupulous what you had to go through. If I were you I think I'd still fire off an email to the UKGC highlighting the problems you've encountered and particularly the demonstrated behaviours of this casino i.e. SOW at cashout / still allowed to deposit / intrusive documentation requests. I doubt they'll act but maybe you'll be the first of what will likely be many similar cases so bringing it to their attention now might get the ball rolling on that thought process.

And I agree closing all your accounts with this group is your only realistic option. If this group decide this is how they are going to operate then they are going to lose lots of customers (angry customers by time they've been treated the way you have).

 

[Valhalla]

Sheesh... you're probably safer playing at a rogue casino these days for God's sake

 

[Deeplay]

The other thing to note even though it may be seen as a minor point I was told by the rep Monday after they agreed to pay that compliance would email me confirmation of this and then I could request to keep my accounts closed (they already locked me out when I first refused to send documents ) nothing came and its now Thursday. No confirmation they had my documents nothing zero. Sure the rep confirmed this but surley is this what it comes down to ?

Anyway thanks to casinomesiter who did offer a secure way to get the document over I did get paid. Rizk have no such option for sending documents for SOW ... just ye olde email

 

[Chipkin9]

@Deeplay Very glad to hear you got paid eventually from this borderline rogue behaviour...still would have prefered if you went the chargeback route but c'est la vie.

I would take a stand with you and close all my casino's with this group; but I have already stopped depositing at the MT Secure group casino's a long time ago after trying to not pay me after rejecting valid government issued photo ID (I don't hold a Drivers License or Passport). The only reason I keep the casinos opened is in the very rare event something free is offered out and I can potentially get something from nothing off them or they run a promo on here with a very likely opportunity that I will come out ahead. Other than that they see nothing off me ever.

Again I am glad you got through this in the end

 

[AnnaTS]

If i had an account at Rizk i would close it after hearing about this, No casino should be doing a SOW check while a withdrawal is going through, They should do it after a withdrawal but before the player deposits again.

I would guess they are doing it at the withdrawal stage hoping people can't be bothered or they think they have caught someone money laundering in hopes they don't have to pay out.

 

[dealer wins]

So glad you got paid. You have also made me give up online slotting OP, and im 2 days clean so far. Feels good actually (Im saving my slot budget up for a big blowouts on my holidays from now on, and shock horror all my gambling will now be done at unregulated casinos!!! on cruise ships, the irony lol)

 

[colinsunderland]

just an update I did eventually get paid. But I did have to supply a document and was and still am pissed of at this. They way it was handled was terrible, and I found it very very intrusive. I never did get confirmation from them via email only here from the rep. And I will close all my accounts with this group. I did not have the time nor energy to take up a legal fight on this so they had me by the bollocks. As they would not pay without some kind of document.

What is clear to me is they are waiting until withdraw before hitting a player with this knowing this will force them to act. This IMO Is totally wrong. And you can expect more of this in the future. Very badly handled and my main questions on this were never answered they were just avoided.

Kudos to Bryan who went above and beyond what you would expect in trying to assist me on this. He kept checking in even over the weekend. And gave some very good advise and support! So all respect to him and his team.

Make your own mind up on this one. But Rizk casino wont ever see another penny of me again as will no other casinos in that group.

In which case they should be rogue.
They admit using AML docs for KYC, something they aren't allowed to do. Shows that data you supply them is not secure and is misused.
They ask for AML docs on withdrawal. If there is uncertainty about SoF then it should be done on deposit. I understand it might not be done within seconds, but the deposits in this case were over a week.
They still accept deposits knowing there is no chance of a payout.
They refuse to return funds when they have no legal basis to do so.
They refuse to answer pretty much any question asked about the process
Support ignore players questions.

Scammers pure and simple

 

[aceking123]

Its sad but true they should be at least sent into the grey zone along with all other MT secure sites, im glad they paid the op , but i dont think they should get off lightly due to the way this casino has dealt with the matter. its seems to me a strong lesson should be sent out to all the other casinos , that retaining players money on demand of a withdrawal & holding them subject by the bollocks should be allowed by any casino.

This could of been dealt with some much better like paying the player then requesting SOW. like many many members had pointed out in here.

 

[ternur]

In which case they should be rogue.
They admit using AML docs for KYC, something they aren't allowed to do. Shows that data you supply them is not secure and is misused.
They ask for AML docs on withdrawal. If there is uncertainty about SoF then it should be done on deposit. I understand it might not be done within seconds, but the deposits in this case were over a week.
They still accept deposits knowing there is no chance of a payout.
They refuse to return funds when they have no legal basis to do so.
They refuse to answer pretty much any question asked about the process
Support ignore players questions.

Scammers pure and simple

That's a bit harsh, isn't it?

KYC is part of AML/CFT framework. And deposits are only part of the triggers that lead to EDD.

Instead of putting all the blame on the casino, one should really focus on how the UKGC deals with the license holders and what they require them to do. Sure, there is room for improvement, but non compliance in these matters is something no casino is willing to risk. Not a single one.

I'm glad Deeplay got paid, never really doubted it.

 

[colinsunderland]

That's a bit harsh, isn't it?

KYC is part of AML/CFT framework. And deposits are only part of the triggers that lead to EDD.

Instead of putting all the blame on the casino, one should really focus on how the UKGC deals with the license holders and what they require them to do. Sure, there is room for improvement, but non compliance in these matters is something no casino is willing to risk. Not a single one.

I'm glad Deeplay got paid, never really doubted it.

No not harsh at all in my view.

The UKGC do not state a casino should accept deposits after a SOW request has started. That is Rizk's choice.
The UKGC do not state a casino can use AML documents for RG. In fact they clearly state the opposite. That is Rizk's choice.
The UKGC do not state if a player refuses to supply documents that the casino should withhold funds. That is Rizk's choice. There are some, very limited, times the funds can be withheld, I very much doubt this was one.
The UKGC do not say AML checks should be done on withdrawal, that is Rizk's choice.
The UKGC do not state casino staff should refuse to any all questions on AML matters, Rizk's choice.

 

[ternur]

No not harsh at all in my view.

The UKGC do not state a casino should accept deposits after a SOW request has started. That is Rizk's choice.
The UKGC do not state a casino can use AML documents for RG. In fact they clearly state the opposite. That is Rizk's choice.
The UKGC do not state if a player refuses to supply documents that the casino should withhold funds. That is Rizk's choice. There are some, very limited, times the funds can be withheld, I very much doubt this was one.
The UKGC do not say AML checks should be done on withdrawal, that is Rizk's choice.
The UKGC do not state casino staff should refuse to any all questions on AML matters, Rizk's choice.

But.

The UKGC states that failure to meet compliance standards on both AML and RG is something they will act upon.

What's the choice here? Get fined? Lose the license? Or make sure AML/CFT/RG procedures are in place and are used. Being compliant really is a no-brainer.

 

[Chipkin9]

But.

The UKGC states that failure to meet compliance standards on both AML and RG is something they will act upon.

What's the choice here? Get fined? Lose the license? Or make sure AML/CFT/RG procedures are in place and are used. Being compliant really is a no-brainer.

Nope. If the casino carryout checks on actual people they suspect of being involved in ML then they will not face any fines what so ever. They will be doing what is expected and required.

What Rizk are doing is rogue imo.

Trying to withold peoples money and using AML as an excuse is disgusting.

Like I said earlier in the thread it is being used as cover so they can say "We are complying with our obligations"; despit the fact they are not obligated to carry out these checks on anyone and everyone and especially on withdrawals.

 

[theapple]

That's a bit harsh, isn't it?

KYC is part of AML/CFT framework. And deposits are only part of the triggers that lead to EDD.

Instead of putting all the blame on the casino, one should really focus on how the UKGC deals with the license holders and what they require them to do. Sure, there is room for improvement, but non compliance in these matters is something no casino is willing to risk. Not a single one.

I'm glad Deeplay got paid, never really doubted it.

yeah im with you on this one. Most of the blame should be put on UKGC and players themselves. Casinos should keep on doing checks on cashouts only as money laundering people would definitely be cashing out more often so as long as you dont cashout you should be fine.

most people here are too harsh and quick to blame casinos, when casinos themselves had no time to prepare themselves and didnt even know this is coming until about a year or so ago! To fix something that affects players cashouts but not deposit takes much longer than that so people should give casinos a break, imo.

 

[brianmon]

But.

The UKGC states that failure to meet compliance standards on both AML and RG is something they will act upon.

What's the choice here? Get fined? Lose the license? Or make sure AML/CFT/RG procedures are in place and are used. Being compliant really is a no-brainer.

Assuming those procedures are correct and being used correctly.
Otherwise the UKGC might be acting on that rather than acting on not being compliant

 

[colinsunderland]

But.

The UKGC states that failure to meet compliance standards on both AML and RG is something they will act upon.

What's the choice here? Get fined? Lose the license? Or make sure AML/CFT/RG procedures are in place and are used. Being compliant really is a no-brainer.

I'm not sure of your point. The guidelines the UKGC issued and the directive were not being followed here. Unless they submitted a SAR then they should have paid him. If anything Rizk should be fined or lose the license for what they did as nothing was in line with what they have to do.

The choice is, follow the guidelines and be compliant. Don't make rules up that hurt the player for absolutely no reason.

 

[dpp00]

well not encouraging is it, nothing answered or any reassurance given for other players, glad deeplay got paid but rizk has lost a good customer

and a few others already, (don't think the dragons will be investing in this business model),

cant slate casinos for trying to follow rules they been forced to accept but can certainly call them out on how they go about it,

simple fact is they could have paid the op his money then requested the sow/ and yes he would have said no thanks and moved on but that's HIS decision to make

not rizk's, and hey just my own opinion but someone was making these decisions at rizk as how to handle this and got it wrong from start to finish,

if it was my company id be offering them the chance to take advantage of our early retirement plan.

 

[The Dude]

I'm not sure of your point. The guidelines the UKGC issued and the directive were not being followed here. Unless they submitted a SAR then they should have paid him. If anything Rizk should be fined or lose the license for what they did as nothing was in line with what they have to do.

The choice is, follow the guidelines and be compliant. Don't make rules up that hurt the player for absolutely no reason.

Yeah, you are being a little harsh here - and I think you need to chill out a bit.

From the casino rep:

...the biggest problem here was that it appeared that the documentation request was triggered by a withdrawal request. It was not, it was triggered by his deposits, unfortunately his withdrawal request came before the documentation request was received by him. We are introducing functionality this week that, once a documentation request is triggered by deposit, then the player will be unable to deposit further or even play any games and should mean that we do not have this situation in future...

I am quite surprised for all this calling for "rogue" and blacklisting any of the GiG casinos. This casino did what it was supposed to do, in the best way that it was set up to do it. And most of this is being dictated from their licensing agreements.

And it really pisses me off that a number of you have forgotten how far Rizk has gone to give the members of this forum special invites to their offices, tours of the work place, explanations of their operations - all detailed here. Calling them unethical - rogue - criminal. That is a load of bullshit.

Do not turn this forum into a circus of barnstorming torch and pitchfork mobs. This is not a platform for personal agendas.

This issue was resolved. And as I mentioned earlier, this is the first time that complexities like this had arisen, and the casino reps and operations did the best they could under the circumstances. It sort of reminds me of when the ID docs were first requested. Sometimes you have to work out the complexities as they come.

So chill out on the rogue talk.

 

[colinsunderland]

Yeah, you are being a little harsh here - and I think you need to chill out a bit.

From the casino rep:



I am quite surprised for all this calling for "rogue" and blacklisting any of the GiG casinos. This casino did what it was supposed to do, in the best way that it was set up to do it. And most of this is being dictated from their licensing agreements.

And it really pisses me off that a number of you have forgotten how far Rizk has gone to give the members of this forum special invites to their offices, tours of the work place, explanations of their operations - all detailed here. Calling them unethical - rogue - criminal. That is a load of bullshit.

Do not turn this forum into a circus of barnstorming torch and pitchfork mobs. This is not a platform for personal agendas.

This issue was resolved. And as I mentioned earlier, this is the first time that complexities like this had arisen, and the casino reps and operations did the best they could under the circumstances. It sort of reminds me of when the ID docs were first requested. Sometimes you have to work out the complexities as they come.

So chill out on the rogue talk.

The rep is free to post which regulation they were basing the refusal to pay the funds on.
They can also post the reasons for the misuse of data when they UKGC say AML documents cannot be used for any other purpose.

If they had answered the questions earlier in the thread then I think you would find it wouldn't be half as long.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Yeah, you are being a little harsh here - and I think you need to chill out a bit.

From the casino rep:

I am quite surprised for all this calling for "rogue" and blacklisting any of the GiG casinos. This casino did what it was supposed to do, in the best way that it was set up to do it. And most of this is being dictated from their licensing agreements.

And it really pisses me off that a number of you have forgotten how far Rizk has gone to give the members of this forum special invites to their offices, tours of the work place, explanations of their operations - all detailed here. Calling them unethical - rogue - criminal. That is a load of bullshit.

Do not turn this forum into a circus of barnstorming torch and pitchfork mobs. This is not a platform for personal agendas.

This issue was resolved. And as I mentioned earlier, this is the first time that complexities like this had arisen, and the casino reps and operations did the best they could under the circumstances. It sort of reminds me of when the ID docs were first requested. Sometimes you have to work out the complexities as they come.

So chill out on the rogue talk.

I'm with you on this Brian. Rizk has done more for us than a lot of accredited casinos. I for one will still keep them as one of my two favorites.

However, whilst I agree that nobody should run around with pitchforks, it is difficult to understand how they set-up their SOW procedure in such a poor fashion. I mean, they have a legal team, compliance team, tech support...the lot....GIG is after all not a small operation, yet they do not think of blocking the account while a SOW procedure is in progress and then ask the player to send highly sensitive documents via email. Plus, from what I read there were a few hiccups in communicating with Deeplay.

On those three points, I think the criticism is justified. The soon a SOW is triggered, there should be a pop-up message that the account will be locked within xx seconds (comparable to the RG pop-up) for deposits/withdrawals/play until the SOW procedure is complete. The casino should then send out an email with the required docs together with a link to a secure upload location. Rather simple in my view.

But as the Captain pointed out, they are working on it / changing it. Admitting mistakes is always the first step in the right direction. I am convinced they learned their lessons from this experience. No casino wants to lose legit customers over a SOW or get bad press in forums.

 

[The Dude]

And just to add - some of you are affiliate webmasters. Don't forget you are posting on a competitor's website (mine). So please remember you are abiding by these terms:

Webmasters need to remember that they are guests in this house; treat it well. We have a higher expectation of posting styles for webmasters than what we expect from players. If you’ve come here to gripe about a certain casino, that’s fine, but please be mindful that a bit of tact can go a long way.

Harassing moderators, disrespecting i-Gaming representatives, beating up players, and exploiting this board is not only uncool, it will not be tolerated. Please understand that the forum is not a marketing tool, a source of traffic, or a place where one can grandstand an agenda. It is a community where we share and discuss topics that pertain to online gaming – and then some. If it appears that you are attempting to undermine or damage the Casinomeister brand via snarky remarks, flaming, or other antagonist behavior, you will be asked to leave. Just imagine me being a member of your forum and how you’d expect me to act.

Special Forum Groups - Casinomeister

 

[nutnut]

Whilst my initial feeling was disgusting when you look back at this thread with calm head casino just got itself in a sticky situation.

They're not rogue and I doubt this happens again so the reaction is a little OTT now.

Colin has his guns set on Rizk I'd hate to piss him off in really life. Though I do see his view point but feels little to extreme and more of a vendetta now. So probably best we all move on and choose not to play there rather than bash them even more.

 

[aceking123]

Colin has some valid points here. I understand Bryan. But feel on this occasion rizk has indeed abused the system. You cannot ignore that rizk timing or any otherspin they want to say.

They did in fact hold the player to ransom at withdrawal point.

This should not go unnoticed by players.

It's not pitchforks or mobs. I've seen the whole thread since start & not convinced that rizk played by rules.

I hope some lessons learned here shall educate some of the other casinos.

 

[goatwack]

I don't think anyone dislikes Rizk but there are a few grumblings about how they handled Deeplay's payment. I'm not convinced he'd have even been paid were it not for the thread and Bryan & co's intervention.

I think it's only fair to at least give them a warning of sorts, I realize they have the confines of these UKGC guidelines, yet believe that they thought they could pull a fast one here. How many players would have downed tools and given up on the withdrawal? Loads....

Interpretation is one thing, but I thought laws stated the player gets paid regardless, and then gets the Spanish Inquisition. I think Rizk definitely went down the 'stalling' route purposely and should be called out on it

 

[Captain Rizk]

As mentioned earlier in the thread, I cannot and will not go into specifics about the Deplay situation as that is confidential information. This includes answering specific questions about this situation

However what i can say around SoW is that we have followed ALL of the guidelines that have been given to us as they have been given by the UKGC. In general we pride ourselves on trying to process withdrawals as fast as we possibly can and therefore we do not look for or find excuses NOT to process them - this goes against our entire ethos and to suggest anything other is completely untrue.

Could things have been done better? Absolutely.
Are we rolling out changes that will make this process more transparent and fairer? Absolutely

We have started rolling out these changes brand by brand and Rizk is scheduled to go live early next week. What this will mean is that the moment an alert is tripped or a threshold triggered, the player will not be able to play or deposit any further. Is this slightly draconian, maybe, however we believe that this is the best solution (for now) that we can find to a very difficult situation, and that as we move forward with these new guidelines we will continue to learn and adapt as necessary with the aim to make our customer experience as smooth as we possibly can.

 

[aceking123]

As mentioned earlier in the thread, I cannot and will not go into specifics about the Deplay situation as that is confidential information. This includes answering specific questions about this situation

However what i can say around SoW is that we have followed ALL of the guidelines that have been given to us as they have been given by the UKGC. In general we pride ourselves on trying to process withdrawals as fast as we possibly can and therefore we do not look for or find excuses NOT to process them - this goes against our entire ethos and to suggest anything other is completely untrue.

Could things have been done better? Absolutely.
Are we rolling out changes that will make this process more transparent and fairer? Absolutely

We have started rolling out these changes brand by brand and Rizk is scheduled to go live early next week. What this will mean is that the moment an alert is tripped or a threshold triggered, the player will not be able to play or deposit any further. Is this slightly draconian, maybe, however we believe that this is the best solution (for now) that we can find to a very difficult situation, and that as we move forward with these new guidelines we will continue to learn and adapt as necessary with the aim to make our customer experience as smooth as we possibly can.

Hi captain what I still do not understand is,your saying it's rolled out as per casino but yet you are all indeed using the same house. So what is rolled out at one should be rolled at all others ? So why hasn't it ?

Promos other things I can understand. But for licensing it makes no sense at all. You all must comply?

Correct me if I'm wrong please as I do not understand ?

 

[Captain Rizk]

Hi captain what I still do not understand is,your saying it's rolled out as per casino but yet you are all indeed using the same house. So what is rolled out at one should be rolled at all others ? So why hasn't it ?

Promos other things I can understand. But for licensing it makes no sense at all. You all must comply?

Correct me if I'm wrong please as I do not understand ?

Hi AceKing, we already comply with the legislations and guidelines as it stands. This "roll out" is a Version 2, if you like, that we believe bring improvements to the questionnaires, documentation requests and the way that we restrict players if there is need to do so - we believe that it is a fairer and better way of applying the guidelines following learnigns that we have had over the past few months.

In terms of doing it brand by brand, this is a way to ensure a smooth transition to V2. Each brand sits on the same platform but has different middleware and Front End layers that will interact differently with the platform. If there are problems with all of them at once then the platform tech team would be unable to cope and therefore it is sensible to do the roll out in a staggered way

 

[aceking123]

Hi AceKing, we already comply with the legislations and guidelines as it stands. This "roll out" is a Version 2, if you like, that we believe bring improvements to the questionnaires, documentation requests and the way that we restrict players if there is need to do so - we believe that it is a fairer and better way of applying the guidelines following learnigns that we have had over the past few months.

In terms of doing it brand by brand, this is a way to ensure a smooth transition to V2. Each brand sits on the same platform but has different middleware and Front End layers that will interact differently with the platform. If there are problems with all of them at once then the platform tech team would be unable to cope and therefore it is sensible to do the roll out in a staggered way

Hi captain thanks for swift response I now understand why & thanks for explaining for me )

 

[lockinlove]

Glad you got paid man! What a whole pile of crap to go through yeesh

 

[dunover]

I suggest the Rizk do what Casumo did for me - I had a great chat ambassador there who stayed online and liaised between me and the risk department (no pun blah blah) as I uploaded stuff and had it rejected, eventually getting there after about an hour. Yes, it was stressful and I felt like kicking the cat, wall and other inanimate objects afterwards but got there in the end.

During this hour there was no end of aggro and sending back and forth bank stuff etc. and I can imagine what it must have been like for Deeplay who never had the live help and had the frustration of e-mails and waiting for responses which will drag the nightmare out further.

Given that this is not a usual daily request at many casinos I think a dedicated agent on live chat who can oil the wheels and has the right training and links to those authorizing the docs would be a good idea. Or maybe an online template clearly explaining what is needed and which the player can fill it with attachments or images and get it submitted and hopefully correct first time.

 

[SpinUk]

Having gone through the SOW process with Rizk and other sites with ease - which I might add was painless and swift, the only criticism was that there was no secure portal to deliver the documents - I would have thought a tech guy there could knock that out in an afternoon.

But I agreed with Maxd, I don’t think they are rogue, more protecting themselves against a hefty fine if they get things wrong.

 

[Reelsoffun]

As mentioned earlier in the thread, I cannot and will not go into specifics about the Deplay situation as that is confidential information. This includes answering specific questions about this situation

However what i can say around SoW is that we have followed ALL of the guidelines that have been given to us as they have been given by the UKGC. In general we pride ourselves on trying to process withdrawals as fast as we possibly can and therefore we do not look for or find excuses NOT to process them - this goes against our entire ethos and to suggest anything other is completely untrue.

Could things have been done better? Absolutely.
Are we rolling out changes that will make this process more transparent and fairer? Absolutely

We have started rolling out these changes brand by brand and Rizk is scheduled to go live early next week. What this will mean is that the moment an alert is tripped or a threshold triggered, the player will not be able to play or deposit any further. Is this slightly draconian, maybe, however we believe that this is the best solution (for now) that we can find to a very difficult situation, and that as we move forward with these new guidelines we will continue to learn and adapt as necessary with the aim to make our customer experience as smooth as we possibly can.

Could I ask how would you deal with someone who don't have a job and isn't on any benefits so no P60 but has funds to gamble?

Is that situation or similar, basically condemning the person to never be able to deposit, play and withdraw? Due to they would have none of the evidence to show?

 

[Captain Rizk]

Could I ask how would you deal with someone who don't have a job and isn't on any benefits so no P60 but has funds to gamble?

Is that situation or similar, basically condemning the person to never be able to deposit, play and withdraw? Due to they would have none of the evidence to show?

Well the theory that the UKGC work by is that, if they have funds to gamble and that these funds were legally obtained, then there HAS to be some documented proof, a money trail if you will, that they can use to show where the funds came from.

 

[Jasminebed]

Well the theory that the UKGC work by is that, if they have funds to gamble and that these funds were legally obtained, then there HAS to be some documented proof, a money trail if you will, that they can use to show where the funds came from.

I'm just a little curious how Big Daddy giving me an allowance might differ from Big Daddy giving me drug money to launder?

He's been gone almost a decade, but my boyfriend chose not live together after my kid grew up and left home as promised, one of the ways that couples save on expenses. He was wealthy enough, I got a monthly allowance. $25 of which got spent most Fridays on a free bus to a casino when he worked out of town. He died just a couple of months before I started playing online.

I started a poll about SOW requests, less than half of players would find it easy to comply, let's leave secure upload question aside.

I do not think Rizk wants to alienate their customers or lose them.

I don't know what Deeplay felt comfortable with providing via CM and a secure method, and Brian, I am so glad you helped.

Interlog got his payment when he dug in his heels. His account was closed.

This is how it should be handled.

But boys in girls, in all honesty, the OP should not have been able to deposit and play. A SOW request should shut down an account from play and depositing. No player should be able to play pending such a request, which means that a casino cannot hope a player plays it back out of frustration.

We've heard for years how requesting ID in advance of deposits would deter players from depositing, and a reason to only request KYC at withdrawal or a certain threshhold.

Even if providing paystubs or bank statements with employment or pension is simple, how many would just move on if on withdrawal you got a nice letter saying
"Congrats on your recent withdrawal, you should see it in your account in 1-3 banking days. But we'd like this SOW stuff in order to let you deposit and play again'?

I'm willing to not tar and feather Rizk and Captain Rizk. The player has now been paid, and I believe them to be sincere to do better going forward. They are undoubtedly not totally clear about what might risk fines for them. How could they be? I have a legal background, I find it difficult to follow.

I don't think Rizk used it as a stalling technique, but I can see it totally being an open playing field for casinos to do so.

I'm glad Deeplay is paid.

But Guts, part of the group, has informed players to expect SOW.

I can't see all their player base being money launders or proceeds of crime.

But at least half won't be wage or pensions.

 

[mack341]

I think the whole SOW system should be computerised, with a software program analysing and following customer activity and then issuing alerts, that way eveybody is treated equally and consistently.

I'm not a customer of rizk as I just tend to stick with the uk bookmaker brands but if rizk is a very popular site with CM players then I think it was always more likely to be one of the first in a thread like this. I think its a shame for both deeplay and the casino to have to part ways, caused basically by the UKGC issuing extensive directions, getting between the player and casino and causing problems.

Casinos though will always err on the side of caution to make sure they don't fall foul of the UKGC's new extensive requirements re AML and responsible gaming, but hopefully the systems/procedures will improve for the customer's benefit.