The whole PAB system is broken in my opinion

[Przecinek]

Back in the bot days, it turned out that casinos like "Casino Club" handed over information to Max and CM like "he has been playing more than 300 hands per hour" or "he has been playing for more than 8 hours straight" - once they emerged for everyone to see, they were almost immediately falsified as a solid proof. Players can play even up to 800 hands per hour, and as to how long they can play ... well we all know

Why am I mentioning this: well casinos back then also didn't want to reveal too much in order not to help abusers and bot users avoid detection, it turned out though that their proof wasn't as solid as they though it is. We're not experts - just gamblers.

I hope that proof against fraud is much more solid. Somehow I will never trust what casinos say at face value - and considering their history, I don't think it's all that suprising.

 

[Nifty29]

Back in the bot days, it turned out that casinos like "Casino Club" handed over information to Max and CM like "he has been playing more than 300 hands per hour" or "he has been playing for more than 8 hours straight" - once they emerged for everyone to see, they were almost immediately falsified as a solid proof. Players can play even up to 800 hands per hour, and as to how long they can play ... well we all know

Why am I mentioning this: well casinos back then also didn't want to reveal too much in order not to help abusers and bot users avoid detection, it turned out though that their proof wasn't as solid as they though it is. We're not experts - just gamblers.

I hope that proof against fraud is much more solid. Somehow I will never trust what casinos say at face value - and considering their history, I don't think it's all that suprising.

Somehow I will never trust what players say at face value - and considering their history, I don't think it's all that suprising.

 

[gaydave]

Also, For the umpteenth time, why are do we keep saying "don't tell them anything or they will know how they got caught". For crying out loud, how about don't tell them HOW you suspect them but at least tell them what you suspect them of. "Fraud" aint cutting it.
For example, if a casino said " we think they are multi accounting" Then the player could provide any and all documents showing that they are real. The player can prove who they are but they cannot prove who they aren't. However, the casino can simply go to the next player and demand that they show proof. Until they find the actual fraud ring. BUT that isn't what happens with places like inetbet. They simply say "fraud" and the player has no recourse or way to prove their innocence. The casino does not have to say what they found that led them to believe there is fraud but they sure as hell need to say WHAT the accusation is.
I am asking PLEASE quit muddying the waters by repeatedly saying that the casino cannot reveal anything as far as proof. Players deserve the respect to know what they are accused of and the respect to show that the casino is wrong if that is actually a fact. If the casino is correct then fine but it can't be so subjective. Like if a mediator personally has met, likes and somewhat trusts an operator then that is no reason to take their word or proof as gospel. A mediator needs to hear both sides and treat it as a court of law, accepting proof from both sides.

 

[Casinomeister]

BUT that isn't what happens with places like inetbet. They simply say "fraud" and the player has no recourse or way to prove their innocence.

Okay - enough is enough.

1.11 - Please do not exploit this board to promote your own personal agenda. If the moderators (and members) feel that you are spamming the board with links or ad copy to your website, harassing members with agenda laden posts, or consistently ragging on a casino that did you wrong, etc., your account may be suspended.

You've tried my patience.

60 day suspension for continuously ragging on about player fraud at iNetBet.

 

[Steve Russo]

Also, For the umpteenth time, why are do we keep saying "don't tell them anything or they will know how they got caught". For crying out loud, how about don't tell them HOW you suspect them but at least tell them what you suspect them of. "Fraud" aint cutting it.

That is my view. GG has had at least two instances where the casino was positive that the player was fraudulent. In both cases, I do not doubt for a moment that the casino was sincere. However, once they provided the details of their accusations, and allowed me to report them, the players were able to come up with solid proof of their innocence.

In both cases, the casino agreed, apologized, and paid.

I ask those who question this to answer the following: If I were a prosecutor, and brought a charge of theft against you, would you be able to defend yourself if I told the court, "I know this to be true because the police told me the details, but I am not going to tell you because it would interfere with future investigations"?

This is not theoretical. In one of those two cases the person accused of fraud was being denied 29,535 GBP in winnings. That is an extremely serious penalty -- more than most fines in criminal cases.

 

[shumantic]

I no mean to be argumentative but why do all get suspended for being against inetbet but those that always post for inetbet also have agenda but ot suspended?

From an outside perspective there is not good happening at inetbet. It is not only being dismissed but people are punished for saying it. Then silenced and kicked out of forum. Why must they stay quiet about an obvious problem?

It is insane to be against giving an player accusation of what he did. Why so secret and covert? The need to not make the casino prove is wrong. If this is how is then prcess is very broken.

They need to be made to answer.
Also, these have not been issues that have been resolved at all.

 

[Casinomeister]

Gaydave has been derailing just about every thread in recent weeks with this iNetBet nonsense. He's not a forum newbie and knows about our rules when it comes to agenda laden posts. That's exploiting the board - it's not like he doesn't know what he's doing.

Again, yet another thread turned into iNetBet steals money.

 

[jetset]

I hope this isn't the case, but the last few threads almost feel to me like a concerted, and I might say at times very provocative, attempt to cause damage to both CM and iNetBet; the same accusations have been repeatedly brought up by posters who have frequently been warned about "agenda-laden posts," but appear unable to accept warnings to desist.

That said, I hope iNetBet is following these threads and the accusations that are being levelled against the management; if there is even a grain of truth in there, said management needs to take a long and careful look at itself and how its security system is operating.

On the disclosure of sensitive security information; as desirable as more transparency may be to some here, it's simply not going to happen, so dry your tears and get used to the idea. There's far too much at risk for any operator to start revealing sensitive business protection tactics and technology.

With the PAB system, both sides of the story are considered by Bryan and Max, which imo is a better approach than ignoring anything the casino says in confidence. And I repeat: this is not a court of law; it's a practical online system for the resolution of player complaints in a fair, fast and uncomplicated manner.

If a complainant does not trust or like the system or Casinomeister's way of mediating, then noone is forcing he or she to use it, and a solution closer to said player's heart should perhaps be sought elsewhere.

 

[Nifty29]

That is my view. GG has had at least two instances where the casino was positive that the player was fraudulent. In both cases, I do not doubt for a moment that the casino was sincere. However, once they provided the details of their accusations, and allowed me to report them, the players were able to come up with solid proof of their innocence.

In both cases, the casino agreed, apologized, and paid.

I ask those who question this to answer the following: If I were a prosecutor, and brought a charge of theft against you, would you be able to defend yourself if I told the court, "I know this to be true because the police told me the details, but I am not going to tell you because it would interfere with future investigations"?

This is not theoretical. In one of those two cases the person accused of fraud was being denied 29,535 GBP in winnings. That is an extremely serious penalty -- more than most fines in criminal cases.

So, you're saying that CM has it all wrong. Sorry, but it certainly appears that you are saying that if all the evidence isn't allowed to be published, then a fair decision cannot be reached....and since this is how the PAB process works, then you are saying that the process is not fair. I don't really know how else to read it, and I'm not exactly sure why you would actually post that here....it's almost like you're saying "See...ours is better...prove it isn't"...and I'm not Bryan, but if it was my site I would be a little offended.

The problem you're going to have Steve, is that a lot of operators will stop providing you with information and perhaps even opt out of your process altogether, because they are basically being blackmailed (for want of a better word) by being told to either allow everything to be published, or have the decision go against you regardless. The issue I have with that, besides it making little sense, is that it distorts reality i.e. you may KNOW a player is a fraudster, and you KNOW the operator has proof, but if they decline to allow you to publish it, you will rule against them and make them appear to be "ripping off innocent players" by making accusations without proof. You are knowingly ruling in the player's favor, even though you're aware they are or are most likely scammers. How on earth is that helping the industry?

As for the court scenario.....well it is irrelevant because the PAB process isn't a court, and there are certainly cases in courts where sensitive information regarding sources etc can be heard by the judge only in chambers anyway, so your example isn't necessarily applicable, and we aren't just talking about someone pinching a bag of oranges from the greengrocer here, it's much more complicated than that as you well know.

I notice that some members (or ex-members in some cases) are flocking to your site due to your policies of making decisions on published evidence only, and coming back here to say "see this player is innocent etc". Trust me, these people and their ilk are not the kind of people you want championing your service, as there is a very good chance that a fair number of them are fraudsters themselves and they are using the more "lax" (my opinion) rules at your site to try and discredit the operators who have outed them as such.

At the end of the day Steve, and by your own admission, you are publishing decisions that are not based on all
the facts, as you do not take into account those that cannot be published, and I just cannot see how that is acceptable in any way.

It's nothing personal by the way, I don't know Steve or Graeme from a bar of soap...it's the questionable (my opinion) business decisions and a dispute resolution service that doesn't consider all the facts that motivate me to express my opinion.

 

[vinylweatherman]

That is my view. GG has had at least two instances where the casino was positive that the player was fraudulent. In both cases, I do not doubt for a moment that the casino was sincere. However, once they provided the details of their accusations, and allowed me to report them, the players were able to come up with solid proof of their innocence.

In both cases, the casino agreed, apologized, and paid.

I ask those who question this to answer the following: If I were a prosecutor, and brought a charge of theft against you, would you be able to defend yourself if I told the court, "I know this to be true because the police told me the details, but I am not going to tell you because it would interfere with future investigations"?

This is not theoretical. In one of those two cases the person accused of fraud was being denied 29,535 GBP in winnings. That is an extremely serious penalty -- more than most fines in criminal cases.

Cases like these only damage the industry, because the casino was clearly wrong, yet initially acted as though it had irrefutable proof. In both cases, mediation worked, because it got to the truth and justice was done.

The alternative to publishing the information is for a mediator to know what additional questions to ask the player in order to test the casino's evidence, yet not reveal so much as to allow the fraudsters to develop contermeasures to future detection.

In the PAB cases, it seems that during analysis Max does ask players to provide additional details, but does not necessarily say why. Operators seem to feel the PAB process gives them a fairer hearing because all evidence is considered, not just that in the public domain.

What this means is that the casinos that should REALLY be avoided are those that flatly refuse to allow ANY independent mediation of a dispute, as if this was the case with the two GG cases, there would be two players suffering a grave injustice.

Although revealing what frauds have actually done wrong can help them, it can also allow the majority to understand what is REALLY going on, and why there is such a problem with what is billed as random software, and a secure gaming environment.

Fraud is only going to be attempted where there is a means to profit from it, which is why it is so hard to accept that there can ever be a means to defraud single player against machine games without using the leverage provided by bonus money for mathematical advantage.

Even the much hated (by operators) bots offer no advantage to players. Bots only make the gameplay that much faster, but cannot improve the overall outcome over that of a skilled player using perfect strategy over a longer period of time.

Operators have themselves to blame for being afraid if things that really don't matter, or that even work in their favour, and lumping them all in to the catch-all "fraud" category, alongside the REAL fraud methods that can pretty much guarantee a profit for the fraudsters, and eventual bankruptcy for the operators.

The TV show "Rip Off Britain" deals with this from both sides, but is available online only to UK IP addresses, and even then for 7 days after transmission.

There may well be "unofficial" copies available elsewhere which a search on the title might reveal. The subject has also been covered by channel 4 in it's "Dispatches" series, some of which are on youtube more or less indefinitely, but blocked for non-UK viewers when on the official youtube channel. BBC "Panorama" also occasionally covers the inside story of fraud and it's detection.

So far though, online casinos have not been mentioned in a specific case study. It is mostly rogue traders defrauding customers, cheats who defraud the tax and welfare systems, and ID theft, use, and detection of fake documents.

 

[nothappy]

Nifty, you have an obvious agenda against gambling grumbles and an obvious agenda for inetbet. It is getting tiresome. Others get banned for the same purpose.

 

[Casinomeister]

Nifty, you have an obvious agenda against gambling grumbles and an obvious agenda for inetbet. It is getting tiresome. Others get banned for the same purpose.

Sorry, but I think Nifty is being quite straightforward and level headed in this case. I read his post and saw nothing wrong with it. You're baiting him. Knock it off.

 

[Mousey]

I have made an effort to schlog thru this thread. I have yet to find any tangible suggestions as to how to truly improve the PAB system here at Casionmeister -- OH, other than publicly post all evidence. Horsehockey. To reiterate what has already been posted. If you do not trust Maxd or Bryan to objectively plea your problem to the casino, then by all means, take it elsewhere.

One last thing, and I'll shut my mousey little piehole. This is my personal opinion, and no disrespect to owners/staff of Grumbles, but I'm tired of seeing Grumbles mentioned in many recent posts by Casinomeister slaggers. I don't give a flying rat's butt what does or doesn't happen at Grumbles. It has nothing to do with Casinomeister and how Bryan and Max and staff operate. Bet the web traffic at Grumbles has really picked up, huh? Free publicity whether good or bad....

 

[Casinomeister]

Thanks Mousey for putting a little perspective on this - nine pages and I haven't seen many suggestions either, especially from the OP, on how to fix something that is "broken".

Looks like another horse beaten to death.

 

[Steve Russo]

So, you're saying that CM has it all wrong. Sorry, but it certainly appears that you are saying that if all the evidence isn't allowed to be published, then a fair decision cannot be reached....and since this is how the PAB process works, then you are saying that the process is not fair.

Please do not put words in my mouth. As I noted in my earlier post, I obviously think that my way of working is better or else I would change it. At the same time, Max (and CM) think their system of working is better or else they would change it.

I have never said anything even approaching "CM has it all wrong". Not only did I not say it, I would not say it.

At the end of the day Steve, and by your own admission, you are publishing decisions that are not based on all the facts, as you do not take into account those that cannot be published, and I just cannot see how that is acceptable in any way.

No, I am publishing decisions that are not based on all the accusations. There is a big difference between "accusations" and "facts". I am certainly willing to report any accusation made by a casino against a player, but if the casino puts it "off the record" I simply disregard it as there is no way for the player to refute it.

Let's say that I were to write to CM and tell him that "Nifty29 met with me in Milan on Oct 15 and told me that if Gambling Grumbles did not pay him $10,000 he would attack us on various bulletin boards." Would that be a fact or an accusation? How would you react if CM were to ban you, based on this accusation, without ever telling you what I had accused you of because I put it "off the record"?

On the other hand, if you were told the specifications, you might be able to pull out your passport and prove that you were in Thailand for the entire month of October.

Generally, however, when a casino makes an untrue accusation it is not purposely telling a lie. It has simply come to the wrong conclusion. It can be very certain of what it is saying and still be wrong. This, however, can not be proven unless the player is given the details of the accusation and the possibility of disproving it.

Keep in mind that while the player might convince me with less than overwhelming evidence, the most he will get out of that is a report favoring him. That is not what a player wants. He wants his money. To get it, he has to prove his case to the casino's satisfaction and that is a much heavier burden. Yet, because we were able to present all the details of the accusations, players have, indeed, proven their innocence to casinos and received their money.

 

[Nifty29]

Please do not put words in my mouth. As I noted in my earlier post, I obviously think that my way of working is better or else I would change it. At the same time, Max (and CM) think their system of working is better or else they would change it.

I have never said anything even approaching "CM has it all wrong". Not only did I not say it, I would not say it.

Then why post those examples? Seems that it could only be to highlight what you perceive to be the PABs shortcomings....either that or just to promote your site. Either I find inappropriate given you are posting it here.​

No, I am publishing decisions that are not based on all the accusations. There is a big difference between "accusations" and "facts". I am certainly willing to report any accusation made by a casino against a player, but if the casino puts it "off the record" I simply disregard it as there is no way for the player to refute it.

Let's say that I were to write to CM and tell him that "Nifty29 met with me in Milan on Oct 15 and told me that if Gambling Grumbles did not pay him $10,000 he would attack us on various bulletin boards." Would that be a fact or an accusation? How would you react if CM were to ban you, based on this accusation, without ever telling you what I had accused you of because I put it "off the record"?

On the other hand, if you were told the specifications, you might be able to pull out your passport and prove that you were in Thailand for the entire month of October.

Generally, however, when a casino makes an untrue accusation it is not purposely telling a lie. It has simply come to the wrong conclusion. It can be very certain of what it is saying and still be wrong. This, however, can not be proven unless the player is given the details of the accusation and the possibility of disproving it.

Keep in mind that while the player might convince me with less than overwhelming evidence, the most he will get out of that is a report favoring him. That is not what a player wants. He wants his money. To get it, he has to prove his case to the casino's satisfaction and that is a much heavier burden. Yet, because we were able to present all the details of the accusations, players have, indeed, proven their innocence to casinos and received their money.

Well you're entitled to your opinion Steve. The evidence an operator provides is almost always written e.g. account data, play history, ip, etc, so I don't know what relevance your Milan scenario has.....but since you mentioned it, I believe what max would do is simply ask for proof of where I was at that time. He doesn't need to tell me why. It's not a good example of why you feel full public disclosure is the way forward.

Anyway back to the evidence thing.....

If a casino.shows you waterproof documentary evidence of fraud, but will not allow it to be published, you are saying that you would report in the player's favor even though you may even be convinced yourself? What about going back to the player yourself and asking pertinent questions, and compare the answers to what the casino showed you? It is ridiculous to say that the ONLY way to ascertain a players innocence is to give them all the evidence the casino has....that's what the fraudsters want....and you're serving it up.

As I said, you are saying that even though you are convinced a player is guilty you will report otherwise if the casino doesn't accept your terms (IMO akin to blackmail). How anyone can claim any kind of high ground with that attitude defies belief.

My prediction is that you will be inundated with fraudsters who know they can't lose either way, and that many good operators will refuse to deal with you due to your lack of respect for their security processes. Of course i could be wrong, but time will tell.

You're not entirely accurate about fraudsters only wanting their money....they also want as much leverage and support as they can muster to attempt to make it cheaper for the casino to pay up than continue to stand by their conclusions. Just look at the threads around here lately....don't just take my word for it. Again, you're playing right into their hands IMO.

 

[Simmo!]

Whatever happens I believe it is wrong to publish any information that may enlighten fraudsters or potential fraudsters with methods of perpetrating fraud or detection.

What Is also good is that both CM and GG offer a service to players with different approaches. It gives the player two different avenues to persue if they so wish. It might be an idea for the two sites to perhaps share some info on specific cases if they don't already?

 

[Steve Russo]

As I said, you are saying that even though you are convinced a player is guilty you will report otherwise if the casino doesn't accept your terms (IMO akin to blackmail). How anyone can claim any kind of high ground with that attitude defies belief.

There you go again -- putting words in my mouth.

I have never said that I will report otherwise if I am convinced a player is guilty.

What I said is that I will not take "off the record" information into consideration when reporting on a dispute. Such information never convinces me that a player is guilty. Likewise, unsupported allegations by a player never convince me that a casino is guilty.

I am not overly impressed by charges made by either side. Nor do screenshots provided by players or account records given to me by casinos make too much of an impression on me -- I have seen falsified examples of both.

Generally, what does convince me is one of three things:

1. The failure of a casino to even respond.

2. A statement (by either side) which is against that side's interest (and, believe it or not, that happens very often, albeit generally unintentionally).

3. The most common of all: an agreement by both sides on the facts, with only the interpretation of those facts being at dispute.

Today I wrote a report (it is not yet posted) which is an example of # 2 and, had I contacted the casino (which I did not) would be an example of # 3.

I received a complaint from a player who felt that he was unfairly being required to play a very high playthrough. It came down to £48,865 play in blackjack for a £39 bonus.

Do I think that is overly harsh? Yes, and I said so. Do I feel that the casino was at fault in this case? No -- because its website clearly states the bonus T&Cs. The player gave me the link to the T&Cs -- hence, it is an example of # 2 above.

This left me with nothing to ask the casino about, hence no reason to write to it. Still, if I had, it would simply have said the same thing as the player --that these are the terms of the bonus. This would make it a good example of # 3 above.

 

[LHofsdal]

The way I see it....

The way I see it, Gambling Grumbles and Casinomeister are here to help reach a solution to players complaints. Each has their own way of doing. Is it right, is it wrong? That is a matter of opinion. I personally have never had to use either of their services, (thankfully), but what I do see is this....

I see that both places are here to find out what went wrong and if there is a possible solution. Without either site/system where would players be that needed assistaance? Are they flawed? Perhaps, but I don't see the flaws as being big enough or major to make the system "broken" in anyway. GG and CM can only make decisions on the evidence provided to them, wether or not it is true is what the investigation process is all about. If one side does not want to provide any details or evidence that is their right, and then a SUGGESTION is made. This is not gospel folks, you either heed to the suggestion or not. That is your right.

As for revealing what type of fraud has occurred, it is usually revealed, like multi-accounts, signatures don't match up etc. But in no way should they reveal anything other than that, trust me when I say people are dishonest and will go to all extremes to lie, steal and cheat. I have said it before, I worked for a major retail for 21 years before I retired, and I have witnessed this first hand. It is no different here with online gaming.

Yes mistakes can be made, and owning up to those mistakes is vital to a reputation of an online casino. Having the trust of these casino is VITAL to both GG and CM. Without this trust, neither site would be worth squat, the casinos would not work with them and where would that leave all players in need of help?

Bottom line here, GG and CM are 2 separate sites, handle things in separate ways, but they are here for the same purpose, TO HELP PLAYERS IN NEED. In my book, how they do it is not my business, as long as they can help in anyway is all I care about. If it wasn't for these sites, just think of all the money that would have been lost to players and made by the casinos.

Instead of trying to find fault with these places, how about a pat on the back to say THANK YOU. After all they are doing it for free and taking time out of their day to help someone else.

I will be the first one to stand in line to pat these gentlemen on the back, because I sincerely THANK YOU for all the hard work you guys do to help us players.

Lori