- Joined
- Aug 29, 2012
- Location
- Londonia
So the crux of the problem is casinos' loose interpretation of what triggers AML requests, ie everyone that wins.
Please could you link us to where it says a Casino HAS to pay even if someone does not fill out SOW
It doesn't say that anywhere, but what it doesn't do is say they can. There are very limited circumstances whereby a casino can hold the money while any investigations by law enforcement are completed, but that would only be after a SAR was submitted .
It would be heaven for all that really are doing something dodgy if they just could refuse giving any information and get paid anyway. On to the next place.....
Not at all. If the checks are done on deposit or while the account isn't being used, then best case scenario for them is money is returned to same place. That's not how money laundering works, nor does it allow criminals to use their illegally sourced money for entertainment .
There are very very limited circumstances it should be done on withdrawal, and I haven't seen a single case on here where that would apply.
I'm learning some very useful tips on how to best 'invest' my money, thanks guys
Err I mean money laundering is bad
We can't have anything disrupt the flow of FOBTs can we nowMuch easier ways to do it than using a casino that only allows withdrawals to the same place it was deposited from. Use Videoslots, SkyVegas, WilliamHill, Coral instead, their system's are set up for money laundering . Or just go to any high street bookie and launder 10's of thousands per day through the FOTB's with no questions asked
Im very alarmed at some peoples knowledge on how to Launder money
I have a genuine reason for knowing, I'm a drug dealer
Nah seriously I've worked with defence teams in the past on cases that have involved allegations of money laundering, so obviously you need to know how it works to be able to prepare legal arguments
It's the usual mess. The UKGC is technically a QUANGO (Quasi-Autonomous Non Governmental Organization) and was created to administer the UK gambling sector. It cannot pass laws or act in any way to breach rights under existing laws. It issues directives which should be in line with various bits of UK/EUSSR legislation such as advertising, age restrictions, money laundering, fair contracts etc.
The problem is that of inexperience and lack of legal knowledge which leads to vague and often unspecific guidelines for licensees. You can see examples of this in that it took them 10 years to simply apply fair advertising to casinos, and only now is gradually ensuring fair terms in accordance with existing laws and regulations in other sectors such as the financial one.
Money laundering is a complex issue and if you check out the UKGC directives to summarize they simply say one thing - the casinos must ensure they know the source of a player's funds when accepting a higher than average amount of turnover. There is NO fixed or stipulated threshold for this (unlike the 2100 euro KYC one) and little guidance so each casino acts on instinct or its own private criteria which differ across brands and therein lies the problem.
We've witnessed erratic thresholds, inconsistent proof between casinos regarding how many and what sort of statements they require and when they ask, although it seems that to ensure the player provides the info and doesn't simply fail to complete the request and disappear never to play there again they are DELIBERATELY targeting the requests on occasion of a withdrawal. This pressurizes or almost blackmails the player into doing it and taking away their choice of walking away at that juncture!!
Surely the amount of DEPOSITS (along with suspicious deposit/withdrawal patterns) will be indicative of a launderer? So why always ask a player when they win, even after losing a big succession of deposits beforehand as it's obvious that if they've lost a large amount over time that they certainly ain't laundering cash - a real launderer will ensure little margin between running deposits and withdrawals and certainly won't bust deposit after deposit. Criminals expect to pay 10-20% to launder large amounts of money so a player deviating from that net figure will almost certainly not be up to no good....
That is exactly right. ****cut for visibility****Any casino who asks for this on withdrawal & refuses to return funds on refusal are thieves. It is as simple as that. I have asked more than one rep for any link to any law or guidance stating they can do this. Not one has replied. Not a single one, thats because it doesn't exist. Captain Rizk stopped replying in the other thread, and there were plenty of questions in there that weren't account specific that could have been answered. By ignoring genuine questions it just shows that what they are doing is wrong. Even if people don't understand the law, which is understandable as they are never written in plain English, they can see when reps are hiding from answering questions. Hopefully people make their own minds up about that sort of deceitful behavior.
Funny how the casinos expect everything to be done, and done quickly, yet I'm still waiting to find out who M T Secure Trade has shared my details with 2 weeks after asking.
Out of all the 'impartial' government ombudsmen, the ICO seem to be okay, could this end up as a battle between the ICO and the ukgc?
BTW does anybody know when the moderation for new member's messages ends? No its okay i don't intend to spam casino links its just makes me feel i'am under heavy suspicion as i thought after your first three messages the moderation isn't required.