Rizk - source of wealth request

[goatwack]

Oh yeah, I remember now. Long time since I've had one.

Oh yeah, I remember now. Long time since I've had one.

Can't believe how deadpan Interlog's reply to you was, without even a hint of irony

Still, to this day I still don't really know what they are either. I tend to rip mine up the moment it's foisted onto me, that's why I affectionately call it 'confetti paper time'

 

[nikantw]

Thank you for saying we are a great casino, but I would ask for this document if you reached the relevant threshold.

A lot of players are upset because casinos don't tell them the exact reason or activity that led them to requesting source of income. All sharing that information would achieve is to show the real fraudsters and money launderers exactly what activity to avoid in order to circumvent additional checks and requests.

Rachel.

Well, there is only one activity for ML and they can't avoid it, they can only avoid online gambling .
Fraudsters are another story, so I guess the security check is one for both.

I have a real question though. What about big casino wins? Will you (and any other casino) accept a screenshot of a big cashout (and or a screenshot of a big win) as proof of income?

 

[Vibroverb]

Well, there is only one activity for ML and they can't avoid it, they can only avoid online gambling .
Fraudsters are another story, so I guess the security check is one for both.

I have a real question though. What about big casino wins? Will you (and any other casino) accept a screenshot of a big cashout (and or a screenshot of a big win) as proof of income?

The question there is where did the money for the Casino win come from? Then it would be Casino B asking for proof the Casino A's customers are all clear and I doubt this info would be shared. I'm sure there are more instances of this grey zone, like my uncle from Colombia, Escobar who left me an inheritance of a million....He's long gone now but I can tell you it was all legit

 

[colinsunderland]

Well, there is only one activity for ML and they can't avoid it, they can only avoid online gambling .
Fraudsters are another story, so I guess the security check is one for both.

I have a real question though. What about big casino wins? Will you (and any other casino) accept a screenshot of a big cashout (and or a screenshot of a big win) as proof of income?

I have a feeling thats already been done in another thread where the casino in question wanted to see where the money came from for a previous deposit at a different casino, something I completely disagree with. They should be looking at any transactions they find suspicious at their casino, no one elses.

The thing is, if funds have to be returned to the source then money laundering is unlikely, not impossible, but it does limit the options, and therefore casinos really shouldn't be doing these checks regularly at all. The UKGC hasn't said they have to do them to everyone, just that they have to be alert to the threat and do more checks if needed.

 

[interlog]

Well having told them they are not getting the documents and if that results in an account closure so be it, an email dropped in with a 50% deposit match bonus that I took. £100 turned into a £500 withdrawal.

We shall see what happens next..... to be continued.

 

[Jono777]

Well having told them they are not getting the documents and if that results in an account closure so be it, an email dropped in with a 50% deposit match bonus that I took. £100 turned into a £500 withdrawal.

We shall see what happens next..... to be continued.

....and regardless of casino this is how they catch us with our trousers down!

That been said, I've done this SOW request at a couple of casinos and read of others doing it too. Not as painful as we first thought.

 

[dunover]

You will also get a statement of wealth request now if you trigger a feature on Bonanza at any particular casino.

 

[interlog]

....and regardless of casino this is how they catch us with our trousers down!

That been said, I've done this SOW request at a couple of casinos and read of others doing it too. Not as painful as we first thought.

It is the principle of the thing (yeah, I know I can be stubborn).

Did one at VS - just a simple form to complete with no documentary proof required.

As to caught with the trousers down - they have another thing coming if they don't pay me. I told them they are not getting it so they shouldn't have accepted the deposit. Simples no?

 

[colinsunderland]

It is the principle of the thing (yeah, I know I can be stubborn).

Did one at VS - just a simple form to complete with no documentary proof required.

As to caught with the trousers down - they have another thing coming if they don't pay me. I told them they are not getting it so they shouldn't have accepted the deposit. Simples no?

Yes, very simple. And they should only be asking for this information if they have reason to suspect you may be involved in money laundering. The UKGC is very clear that this should not be used as a data gathering exercise.
I got a pop up on login to casumo last night with 3 questions which I'm sure was for this, I answered them, but not got a withdrawal pending for about 24 hours. I told them previous to deposit I wasn't supplying any documents too, so it will be interesting to see how 2 different casinos deal with it.

 

[Jono777]

I worked out that if I continue to launder my ill gotten gains at £25 a time, it should be nice and clean about 50 years after they've buried me

 

[goatwack]

I'm certain that if my hand was forced and I have to disclose my wealth, casinos would look, laugh & say "No more please stop" and set up some type of crowdfunding for me

 

[interlog]

Update: funds received into my Skrill account just now

 

[colinsunderland]

Update: funds received into my Skrill account just now

got mine from casumo too, was actually slightly under 23 hours.

 

[nikantw]

Well, there is only one activity for ML and they can't avoid it, they can only avoid online gambling .
Fraudsters are another story, so I guess the security check is one for both.

I have a real question though. What about big casino wins? Will you (and any other casino) accept a screenshot of a big cashout (and or a screenshot of a big win) as proof of income?

That was 7 days ago, nothing from them so I guess I have my answer. This so called AML check is just another weapon casinos have to delay payments. A weapon effective even if not used, because now after every big win we will be afraid. Afraid that they won't pay because we deposited money won at another casino, or afraid that if we make a cashout we will not be able to use any of that money to play at another casino.

Yes, casinos love it when we don't cashout and will use anything to achieve that. Its time for UKGC to wake up and force casinos to do instant withdrawals and "withdrawals first". They want to do checks, ask questions? They should do it before the deposit or after the withdrawal.

 

[suchfun]

online casino would be the last place anyone would clean money,why not go into live casino play highroller for few spins cashout, repeat,I see it all the time in Canadian casinos,if I recall some dude went in casino with 6mil in a duffel bag in friggin 20s and got it cleaned at the cage

 

[RichyJ75]

So what if it is a bored housewife/househusband without a job and no income, but they gamble from an allowance from their partner? Would it be acceptable to simply say they are supported by a spouse and that is it? Obviously they cannot give details of someone else's income due to data protection, just details where they got their own money from. Likewise if they gamble using credit cards - still no income but loads of debt? Ideally the casino should flag that as a RG issue and restrict their use, but that could be deemed misappropriate use of data obtained since the credit card statement was never supplied as a RG issue, just proof of where money came from.

Oh what a sticky area ......

In a strange way I feel sorry for the casino support staff who have to implement these rules and then get backlash from players.

 

[colinsunderland]

Heres what the UKGC say on the matter

In order to detect customer activity that may be suspicious, it is necessary to monitor all
transactions or activity. The monitoring of customer activity should be carried out using a
risk-based approach. Higher risk customers should be subjected to a frequency and depth
of scrutiny greater than may be appropriate for lower risk customers. Operators should be
aware that the level of risk attributed to customers may not correspond to their commercial
value to the business.

and this is the source of funds part

Where a customer is assessed as presenting a higher risk, additional information in
respect of that customer should be collected. This will help the operator judge whether the
higher risk that the customer is perceived to present is likely to materialise, and provide
grounds for proportionate and recorded decisions. Such additional information should
include an understanding of where the customer’s funds and wealth have come from.

The bolded parts clearly show this should only be done where a customer poses a higher risk, not for all customers. The also state it should not be used for data gathering (I couldn't find the exact section when I had a quick look earlier). This is what I have a problem with regarding all this, casinos are clearly just doing blanket requests as they are certainly not doing it on a risk basis, from the various reports on here anyway.

A customer depositing £50 per day or per week is not money laundering. I will pretty much guarantee that. Financial institutions like banks have to do a report on any single transaction of over £10,000, which shows the sort of level that would be classed as a 'higher risk'. There are obviously other factors that would be taken into account as one size doesn't fit all, and criminals will change to try to get round limits etc, but on the whole most people should never have to supply this extra information. Imagine if every time you did a £20 transaction with your bank, they told you they wouldn't process it until you took a payslip in to show them?

The fact this seems to be getting done on withdrawal is another point. Unless a customer makes a large, or many small in a short period of time, deposit(s) turns it over once on low risk bets (red/black/0 on roulette for example) there is no reason for a source of funds request to be made on withdrawal, the deposit should trigger it, or previous playing patterns, not just when you finally manage to cashout.

 

[Mr Wild]

Heres what the UKGC say on the matter

In order to detect customer activity that may be suspicious, it is necessary to monitor all
transactions or activity. The monitoring of customer activity should be carried out using a
risk-based approach. Higher risk customers should be subjected to a frequency and depth
of scrutiny greater than may be appropriate for lower risk customers. Operators should be
aware that the level of risk attributed to customers may not correspond to their commercial
value to the business.

and this is the source of funds part

Where a customer is assessed as presenting a higher risk, additional information in
respect of that customer should be collected. This will help the operator judge whether the
higher risk that the customer is perceived to present is likely to materialise, and provide
grounds for proportionate and recorded decisions. Such additional information should
include an understanding of where the customer’s funds and wealth have come from.

The bolded parts clearly show this should only be done where a customer poses a higher risk, not for all customers. The also state it should not be used for data gathering (I couldn't find the exact section when I had a quick look earlier). This is what I have a problem with regarding all this, casinos are clearly just doing blanket requests as they are certainly not doing it on a risk basis, from the various reports on here anyway.

A customer depositing £50 per day or per week is not money laundering. I will pretty much guarantee that. Financial institutions like banks have to do a report on any single transaction of over £10,000, which shows the sort of level that would be classed as a 'higher risk'. There are obviously other factors that would be taken into account as one size doesn't fit all, and criminals will change to try to get round limits etc, but on the whole most people should never have to supply this extra information. Imagine if every time you did a £20 transaction with your bank, they told you they wouldn't process it until you took a payslip in to show them?

The fact this seems to be getting done on withdrawal is another point. Unless a customer makes a large, or many small in a short period of time, deposit(s) turns it over once on low risk bets (red/black/0 on roulette for example) there is no reason for a source of funds request to be made on withdrawal, the deposit should trigger it, or previous playing patterns, not just when you finally manage to cashout.

Well the problem is that its not described what a "higher risk" customer is. So it is what UKGC thinks at the time they review an operator.
They however do say " Operators should be aware that the level of risk attributed to customers may not correspond to their commercial value to the business." So a player depositing £50 per week can be of "Higher risk" as well.

 

[colinsunderland]

Well the problem is that its not described what a "higher risk" customer is. So it is what UKGC thinks at the time they review an operator.
They however do say " Operators should be aware that the level of risk attributed to customers may not correspond to their commercial value to the business." So a player depositing £50 per week can be of "Higher risk" as well.

No but they do give examples in that (and other) documents. I would think that it is pretty obvious what a higher risk customer is, especially to a casino who can see data of many thousands of players, and quite easily pick out ones with abnormal play or transaction history.

It is NOT a reason to blanket request extra information from your customers as a whole, and nor should it ever be. The documents do not state anywhere this should be done on withdrawal either, it should be done when the risk is identified, which, I would argue, is rarely on a withdrawal request.

 

[Mr Wild]

No but they do give examples in that (and other) documents. I would think that it is pretty obvious what a higher risk customer is, especially to a casino who can see data of many thousands of players, and quite easily pick out ones with abnormal play or transaction history.

It is NOT a reason to blanket request extra information from your customers as a whole, and nor should it ever be. The documents do not state anywhere this should be done on withdrawal either, it should be done when the risk is identified, which, I would argue, is rarely on a withdrawal request.

If it is so obvious, please tell us what exactly is a high risk customer?
Please note that checks is not only done for AML, it is also done for RG.

Im 100% with you regarding that checks is not only allowed to be done on withdrawals, operators should have policies to check these anytime during the customer journey.

 

[colinsunderland]

If it is so obvious, please tell us what exactly is a high risk customer?
Please note that checks is not only done for AML, it is also done for RG.

Im 100% with you regarding that checks is not only allowed to be done on withdrawals, operators should have policies to check these anytime during the customer journey.

Firstly, thanks for replying, even if we don't agree, it is good to discuss these things as both sides can then get a handle on what the other side is thinking

You should have been checking for RG issues for years, so that shouldn't be an issue now, but again casinos find it easier to blame something like that than admit what they are doing. If you have concerns about a customer for RG issues, and the style of play was the same a year ago then you should have done these checks a year ago, not now.

As for what does cause a high risk, feel free to send your last year's customer data over and I'll have a look and identify some for you, otherwise you know I can't answer that. It should be noted, it was your comment, not the UKGC, who said a player who deposits £50 a week could be a higher risk. I personally find that would be extremely unlikely, even if they were, someone money laundering £50 a week is not someone the NCA are going to even look at let alone you be sanctioned over.

What I can say, someone who deposits £50 a week, and loses it all 3 of 4 weeks, then hits a big win on Bonanza and withdraws £1000, would not be a high risk customer (based on ONLY that data), as he loses (hardly the point of money laundering), is playing a high risk slot (again, money launderers do not put their money into things that are likely to lose it for them), and has had a win on a game he could have easily lost it all on.

However someone who deposits £50, puts £24 on red, £24 on black and £2 on zero, plays one bet, withdraws, repeats that 5 times a day, 7 days a week, would be higher risk, especially at videoslots where he could deposit using one method and withdraw using another. At casinos where you withdraw to the last payment method it would be a lot harder to launder money that way.

 

[GC_Konstantin]

...they now want copies of payslips or other documents showing income...

So, that means that if a person is living without working (or working without papers) that person will not be able to collect their million euros jackpot (or whatever withdrawal he/she has in queue) ?

This raises more questions than answers I believe ! If for example, I am 22 years and still living on my parents budget, I am not allowed to play at online casinos ? Or I can deposit but can't withdraw ?

 

[ed skull murphy]

online casino would be the last place anyone would clean money,why not go into live casino play highroller for few spins cashout, repeat,I see it all the time in Canadian casinos,if I recall some dude went in casino with 6mil in a duffel bag in friggin 20s and got it cleaned at the cage

I remember when the Euro was introduced, and some of the casino regulars, who clearly had ties with either the underworld, or with businessmen who were not being totally honest with their tax returns, were doing a roaring trade converting the outgoing valuta into Euros for third parties.

I won't name the casino or the nation involved, but I'm sure everyone was aware of what was going on. It may not be so easy these days, but certainly easier than trying the same thing with an online casino.

 

[Vibroverb]

Pretty soon Casinos in the UK will be doing credit checks to identify high-risk customers.

But absolutely any customer can be high-risk if need be, their version of high risk is a winner who will cause them a huge payout, even though his luck was the only thing he did wrong.

It also reminds of that quote - "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." - Cardinal Richelieu

 

[scarletmuse]

Interesting reading guys-interesting how the ‘laws’ and regulations change-ups always affect us more negatively than they should-I too would feel a tad off if I was asked to provide more “intimate” (for lack of a better word) documentation than the typical acceptable bank balance or screenshots statements etc esp. if it’s over a deposit/withdrawal of only a few hundred bucks after having been a regular depositor and having no prior hassles concerning the source of the monies spent or its a typical transaction pattern as per your history...

but I guess criminal activity always finds a way around it, so where’s the line got to be to determine actual suspicious behaviour? As said before-is it the 1st timer dropping 30k or a monthly $50 regular to suddenly uploading 1000s? Or a regular small depositer rarely cashing out and suddenly tries his luck on a diff game or high rolls and gets a lucky jackpot suddenly withdrawing loads more than he ever managed to put in?!?

And what would then determine if a income source is not legit, wen documents are provided, what credentials are they looking for?

Sometimes I have felt uncomfortable with the bank statement info, preferring to block out sensitive narrations that are irrelevant to them like ppls names etc So I dont really want others seeing-my finances are still my business to a degree-and you never know what the fraudsters might be able to do with whatever is written about me on a form or something if it were to be hacked and details stolen.

Another example I was thinking of also is say I came into a big sum of actual cash, from a sale or job I might of done or perhaps won it at a TAB or so on, or maybe I don’t have a debit/credit card that is enabled for online purchases right, so I buy up big on neosurf or paysafe vouchers at the shop and deposit via that method, then couldn’t that be in fact flagged as maybe suss? If no bank methods are ever used but only prepaid codes?! Its not difficuly to also open a new account online and have immediate use of it for withdrawals for those instances where a bank account must be withdrawn to such as first time etc.

Haha For all they know I could be using drug money ir stolen credit cards to buy them or something right?!? When in fact I think optional methods like that or even ewallets like skrill for e.g could actually be seen as a healthier way to play as opposed to using credit cards as someone mentioned and creating large debts that I could potentially abscond from ever paying back.

It was commented earlier a similarity between ecigs/tobacco regulatons and as an Aussie i couldnt agree more. Changes like those of late have actually made my life more difficult, restricting my freedoms to choose how I spend my money and where I play it-we have one casino per capital city here so its not like We have a huge selection to enjoy this pasttime, and to make things illegal or cease operations due to potential for online gambling is just ridiculous-skrill for example is actually preferable to me than paypal for all online purchasing activities gambling or otherwise-it is easier to use, quicker to process transfers in & out, just overall a much better platform in my opinion than shitty 3 day waits and pending bloody paypal in general. But I have to check a box telling them how i plan to spend my own hard earned funds.

As someone said landbased would be easier-in and out quick cash drops and easier than having to
Submit verification and withstand waiting periods before one could even access their potentially laundered monies. If I was a criminal as if i would want to leave a paper trail like that-online, uploads, id and ip addresses etc sheesh...for the most part i like to think we are all pretty honest guys and a big thumbs down to the big wigs in power and the dropkicks who make this all harder for the rest of us Seriously