Royal Panda Keeping Deposit

[Slottery]

Sorry which operator was this? That's not my understanding of the rules.

Does that really matter? Can't announce it due to NDA but as i posted to one post with few examples, these verifications don't need every single letter matching exactly.

Rule is that players age need to be verified yes, but in practice, it's not exactly need to be exact match. Regulators and operators are working quite closely together and how to follow these rules in practice that they satisfy set regulations.

Operators using different methods for verifications, would assume most of them approve them with UKGC not to get in troubles (or use ways and service providers already approved), there are quite many operators where you are able to create account and deposit if your first name have spelling mistake, that i'm sure about.

 

[EkJR]

Does that really matter? Can't announce it due to NDA but as i posted to one post with few examples, these verifications don't need every single letter matching exactly.

Rule is that players age need to be verified yes, but in practice, it's not exactly need to be exact match. Regulators and operators are working quite closely together and how to follow these rules in practice that they satisfy set regulations.

Operators using different methods for verifications, would assume most of them approve them with UKGC not to get in troubles (or use ways and service providers already approved), there are quite many operators where you are able to create account and deposit if your first name have spelling mistake, that i'm sure about.

Your mixing up the rules I think. Read Section 17 LCCP mate, it's very clear what needs to be matched and the matches are exact. I have spoken to the UKGC numerous times about it. Wherever this "doesn't have to be exact" statement has come from is false. First name and Surname must be exact. Verification checks only work on the basis that the registered details match what's on the register, normally a credit file soft search. If the name differs in any way other than middle names then the check fails. Test it out yourself on any of the main casinos, it does not work.

 

[ladyhawke]

How many others on this thread have accidentally spelt their name (which you type a lot?) incorrectly when registering for a casino? #JustAsking

Just a little something for everyone who is querying the mis-spelling of the OP's name to think about.

I have an unusual spelling of my very common first name, and when I went to pick up my new passport, guess what? Yup, mis-spelled even though all the supporting documentation provided by myself was correct.

Red faces all around at the High Commission.

So mistakes can happen, for all sorts of reasons, and for those who say it is BS are being disingenuous.

 

[Mr_Slot5]

Just a little something for everyone who is querying the mis-spelling of the OP's name to think about.

I have an unusual spelling of my very common first name, and when I went to pick up my new passport, guess what? Yup, mis-spelled even though all the supporting documentation provided by myself was correct.

Red faces all around at the High Commission.

So mistakes can happen, for all sorts of reasons, and for those who say it is BS are being disingenuous.

Agree, where is the player protection in all this. To me, it's on the casino to check whether someone is excluded or not. Especially when it's their own terms stipulating they will apply said exclusion cross platform.

 

[goatwack]

Just a little something for everyone who is querying the mis-spelling of the OP's name to think about.

I have an unusual spelling of my very common first name, and when I went to pick up my new passport, guess what? Yup, mis-spelled even though all the supporting documentation provided by myself was correct.

Red faces all around at the High Commission.

So mistakes can happen, for all sorts of reasons, and for those who say it is BS are being disingenuous.

Well, I have more tongue-twisting names than you can shake a stick at, and to this day have organizations mis-spell my name on record. So whilst mistakes can and do happen, it's still slack and ignorant on their part.

Though difference being what I'm seeing is the OP using the 'goodwill' of the community here to further their agenda and reclaim monies they're not entitled to as far as I can see. Whilst of course using the usual SE-swerving tropes we've all seen a million times before.

Is it that difficult to spell 'Robert'? nah

Is haranguing Chat with 'Give me the money you stole from me' & 'I'll get solicitors onto yo' ass' aggressive and counter-productive? yep

 

[EkJR]

That's from Royal Pandas T&C:s and most of casinos do have same mentioned. There are two options when you enter your name and DOB, real and fake.

All casinos where i've read T&C:s this pretty much mentioned with same words so once you accept T&C:s in registration, it's players sole responsibility to make sure details are right.

Most of the time casinos are correcting them when it's a slight mistake but using fake details messing up many things lik self-excluding checks, possible duplicate accounts etc... So nobody shouldn't be very surprised to get winnings gone if details are not correct. In this case we also have SE twist which make it bit more messy.

Like said earlier, would make complaint myself as it don't take too much time and would get better explanation what everything have happened and why, but wouldn't really have too high hopes to get winnings paid. Casino refunded deposits like they would do in SE cases when somebody was able to play, they could have been more strict and keep deposits as well due to fraud but this seems quite ok outcome for player.

They use an electronic verification check. The check looks at 4 details

FIRST NAME
SURNAME
POSTCODE
DATE OF BIRTH

The check is to initially ascertain the following

1. Is the player old enough to gamble
2. Is the players identity correct
3. Is the player living at this address or linked to it

They use a 3rd part who matches this using a soft check on credit file. If, say, first name is wrong the check fails. The casino should then ask for manual ID. Sure some of the reps will confirm this. Try it yourself in the UK, this is what will happen.

 

[EkJR]

Well, I have more tongue-twisting names than you can shake a stick at, and to this day have organizations mis-spell my name on record. So whilst mistakes can and do happen, it's still slack and ignorant on their part.

Though difference being what I'm seeing is the OP using the 'goodwill' of the community here to further their agenda and reclaim monies they're not entitled to as far as I can see. Whilst of course using the usual SE-swerving tropes we've all seen a million times before.

Is it that difficult to spell 'Robert'? nah

Is haranguing Chat with 'Give me the money you stole from me' & 'I'll get solicitors onto yo' ass' aggressive and counter-productive? yep

I get this, but the ball is in the operators court from before a ball is kicked so to speak. They need to be sure that the player is who they say they are before they put a penny in. The casino, through electronic verification, have somehow allowed this to happen. I stated above what should and does happen everywhere else. No sympathy for the casino in this circumstance. As for the SE, they are on different licences and as far as the UKGC are concerned the SE applies to the licence not the operator.

 

[Slottery]

Your mixing up the rules I think. Read Section 17 LCCP mate, it's very clear what needs to be matched and the matches are exact. I have spoken to the UKGC numerous times about it. Wherever this "doesn't have to be exact" statement has come from is false. First name and Surname must be exact. Verification checks only work on the basis that the registered details match what's on the register, normally a credit file soft search. If the name differs in any way other than middle names then the check fails. Test it out yourself on any of the main casinos, it does not work.

Only can say that i disagree, but what we speak here don't change anything so we all can rely on information that we have and are happy with.

 

[EkJR]

Only can say that i disagree, but what we speak here don't change anything so we all can rely on information that we have and are happy with.

As said, read section 17 of the LCCP. It outlines exactly what is required. There is no dubiety over it where there used to be. I'm conveying what the UKGC are stating, not what an operator may or may not think.

 

[Slottery]

As said, read section 17 of the LCCP. It outlines exactly what is required. There is no dubiety over it where there used to be. I'm conveying what the UKGC are stating, not what an operator may or may not think.

There's no need for us to argue about it, as i said verification method and accuracy used was approved by UKGC audit, nothing to do what operators may or not think.

 

[EkJR]

There's no need for us to argue about it, as i said verification method and accuracy used was approved by UKGC audit, nothing to do what operators may or not think.

No I'm not arguing about it. I'm stating what I'm being told and advised by them only. It's funny that on WH, Paddy Power and all of the bigger operators they all follow the 'exact' rules, try it out and see.

 

[Slottery]

No I'm not arguing about it. I'm stating what I'm being told and advised by them only. It's funny that on WH, Paddy Power and all of the bigger operators they all follow the 'exact' rules, try it out and see.

No need to try, i have no reason not to believe these operators are doing what you said. I don't really have anything more to add to this verification conversation than what i've wrote already

 

[colinsunderland]

Knowing how credit checks work, a name spelt wrong should not pass. A casino who says age verification has been done on someone. who's name was wrong, should be pulled up for it by the UKGC and audited as clearly they aren't doing it properly.

The easy way to check for the OP is do a SAR on the casino to include any information exchanged with a CRA or external agency for verification purposes, and also checking their own credit files. It shouldn't appear if the name was wrong, and if it doesn't then age verification wasn't completed.

 

[colinsunderland]

@Mark_32Red do you get many customers genuinely making spelling mistakes? I know when I'm typing fast I've wrote Cilon and Colon on occasion when ordering stuff

 

[Mr_Slot5]

@Mark_32Red do you get many customers genuinely making spelling mistakes? I know when I'm typing fast I've wrote Cilon and Colon on occasion when ordering stuff

Colon? I'm completely boweled over by that one.

Ok I'll get my coat...

 

[goatwack]

Arse-ee what you did there

my coat left years ago

 

[dionysus]

Arse-ee what you did there

my coat left years ago

it's like an 18+ nursery rhyme
'..and the coat ran away with the socks'

 

[ladyhawke]

Well, I have more tongue-twisting names than you can shake a stick at, and to this day have organizations mis-spell my name on record. So whilst mistakes can and do happen, it's still slack and ignorant on their part.

….

Is it that difficult to spell 'Robert'? nah

I agree. And I don't agree.

For any official government document to have a mis-spelling almost beggars belief. But it does prove that even at the highest level, mistakes do happen. Definitely "slack and ignorant on their part".

For us lesser mortals, we still have the obligation to be as careful as we can be before pressing SEND. Every time I do a bank transfer, I check, double check, and then triple check the details, as I don't want my money ending up in a strange account, with no legal redress to get it back.

Better to be safe than sorry in the first place.

Now onto Robert/Robret/Robiert.

Changing Robert to Robret is easy enough to do - it is just a simple transposition of letters, which can happen if one is typing too quickly, and the fingers are misinterpreting signals from the brain.

As for Robiert (not entirely sure which one the OP actually used), again quite easy to do as random letters can sneak in quite easily if one is not concentrating hard enough. I am a fast, accurate typist (mostly!) but sometimes when I look back at what I typed, I think...WTH?

 

[ladyhawke]

@Mark_32Red do you get many customers genuinely making spelling mistakes? I know when I'm typing fast I've wrote Cilon and Colon on occasion when ordering stuff

Colon? What exactly were you ordering. No, please don't answer that! I think I would like to remain in blissful ignorance.

 

[goatwack]

it's like an 18+ nursery rhyme
'..and the coat ran away with the socks'

My stories have been quite the revelation among the Hockey community

 

[Harry_BKK]

My 2 cents:

Any SE-ed player is mostly an experienced gambler who most probably knows the ins and outs of executing an SE and the consequences, especially in light of the latest publicity the UKGC, the fines etc have had in the UK

At the same time, addiction does not let you go that easily, so you open a new account somewhere else. Now, in any normal case you know it will get you into trouble if the sites are somehow connected and therefor you will double- and triple-check that that is not the case (you will do this even when you did not SE due to gambling problems). Royal Panda has this little gem at the bottom.



So, next to the SE itself. Gamblers, especially addicts, are mostly well informed what the red flags are when registering (if not from anything else but from failed new registrations due to an SE at various sister sites). There are also forums for UK and other players, where tips are exchanged, e.g. which details/errors pass the initial check at which casinos. Don't ask me, I won't give you names.

The OP must be the umpteenth player claiming they misspelt this or that and are blaming it on dyslexia. You do know there are online tools for dyslexic people that help avoid exactly that?

My conclusion:

The OP knew exactly what he did. He has been tipped off that CM has a good RP rep who will probably help him get at least his deposits back so he registered at CM and "tada" deposits are back in his account with the advice given by CM members and now he "smelled blood" as he sees a chance/loophole to also get his winnings.

As always, I'll happily be proven wrong just for the sake of the OP getting his winnings.

@EkJR Section 17 of the LCCP states they must identify the customer but it does not clarify the type and amount of discrepancies allowed to let a customer start playing while asking for additional docs or clarification. Any procedure/software allows for some percentage of error to avoid too many false flags. Pretty sure that the UKGC discussed and agreed upon that in consultations with casino operators. Surely something they will not disclose publicly as it would give info to exactly those people who try the SE trick.

As for being part of a company group, you can refer to SR code paragraph 3.9.1.4

 

[Mr_Slot5]

Regardless of whether or not it was intentional, flags should have been raised by matching gender, DOB and address. The fact that these seemingly weren't enough to flag is solely on the casino.

A casino cannot cry over spilt milk if it's their own lax systems that have let a self excluded player gamble.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Regardless of whether or not it was intentional, flags should have been raised by matching gender, DOB and address. The fact that these seemingly weren't enough to flag is solely on the casino.

A casino cannot cry over spilt milk if it's their own lax systems that have let a self excluded player gamble.

The casino does not cry, no need to worry. They acted according to the regulation after they were able to confirm that the player was SE'ed at a sister site. Return the account to its original state, void all bets and return the deposits. There is nothing more they need or are obligated to do.

Now you can say, they should have detected the misspelling. Again, a certain percentage of error is allowed to avoid too many false flags. IIRC, GAMSTOP works on 4 out of 5 matches.

The UKGC does not state exactly the procedure in case of errors/misspellings and what the procedure would be. What they do say is that operators can ask for more docs and/or clarification. They do not ask the operators to keep the account locked until such clarification has been concluded.

Below the only paragraph in the LCCP pertaining to the identity of players. You can see, they say "should" and "may".

It says under 1. "must obtain", but it does not say what kind of errors or the percentage of the match (100%, 99% or just 50%; two out of three, three out of three etc) are allowed for the operator to permit the player to play. It is all very vague but usually, such things are clarified in consultations between the UKGC and operators to avoid giving out sensitive information to potential addicts who could use it to their benefit.

But the info seems to get leaked in parts as it is posted in specific forums and addicts/fraudsters are using it. Not saying the OP is necessarily one, I stated I'll be happily proven wrong.

 

[mack341]

Let's imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, as it were, and the casino had paid out the winnings before realising about the misspelt first name and SE at a sister site, how would they be able to reclaim the money in a small claims court in the uk, what would be the term/condition in the contract which would win them the case and the judge order the money to be repaid?

Confiscation of winnings, certainly a large sum like this, is the most serious action a casino can take against a player, the justification I've seen so far is similar to a 'minority report' style system 'you intended to commit fraud if you had lost your deposit' needs to have a degree of evidence supporting it more than just 'there's a lot of players out there trying it on, so this man is also guilty'

What do you think, give it to me straight?

 

[Harry_BKK]

Let's imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, as it were, and the casino had paid out the winnings before realising about the misspelt first name and SE at a sister site, how would they be able to reclaim the money in a small claims court in the uk, what would be the term/condition in the contract which would win them the case and the judge order the money to be repaid?

Confiscation of winnings, certainly a large sum like this, is the most serious action a casino can take against a player, the justification I've seen so far is similar to a 'minority report' style system 'you intended to commit fraud if you had lost your deposit' needs to have a degree of evidence supporting it more than just 'there's a lot of players out there trying it on, so this man is also guilty'

What do you think, give it to me straight?

Fact is that the SE malarkey has become a real headache for UK operators.
Fact is that many SE-ed players are trying to get around it
Fact is that some or maybe many too are trying the SE-trick on purpose
Fact is the UKGC regulation does not give firm guidance on how to handle it
Fact is tools like GAMSTOP can be circumvented to exploit the loopholes.
Fact is I can't remember a single case here on CM (I might be wrong or just plain forgetful) where misspelling or other things turned out to be an honest mistake.

The ship has sailed once the casino paid out. The only thing they can do then is locking the account.

But you see mack we are discussing this issue in a weird way. None of us has asked the OP why he does not seek help since he SE'ed in the past and could have a gambling problem. Instead, we have posters falling over each blaming as usual the casino for all things, whereas none apportions any responsibility whatsoever to the player!