UK player done with regulated casinos. How to move to unregulated play?

justdoit

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
You guys should read this in regards of playing on a crypto unregulated casino:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


140k confiscated. User banned with no reason. Nothing he can do about it. Be warned! This is Gamdom again. They dont like winning users.

9F080134-34D7-4DF7-B141-31B95AB676B4.jpeg.c813c8afa1e59cd77490fd38839c79bd.jpeg


2490AE74-F1BC-4081-895C-639F0C392916.png.f078d6f242e686b4c6cec01a48f5287e.png
not sure way he got banned I won $42k on same casino on DOA2 they paid me right away, they did ask me for ID I send my UK driving licence got approved fast
Screenshot 2022-05-20 at 16.56.30.png
 

justdoit

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Yes I’ve been invited to the ‘players panel’ a few times now on a couple of casinos.

Not sure what good it will do as the UKGC appear to be non responsive when it comes to compromise.
I got invited by Partycasino, I am sure it will help when we fill survey, we siting on silence talking on forums what UKGC is doing to slots, well Government takes feedback from gamcare or gamestop forum.removing autospin bonus buy and now £100pm limit, now we can fight back and give are feedback maybe we can have better gambling...more of us we fill survey better chance UKGC will not take any action on £100pm limit, same time we save are self from going to crypto casino
Screenshot 2022-05-21 at 08.08.29.png
 
Last edited:

TimArmstrong

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Location
Earth
No autoplay. Constant reminder emails about responsible gaming. Constant ingame pop up reminders about gameplay. No bonus buys. Paperwork around verification - ofcourse after depositing. Let's say someone has millions in savings yet same way treated as everyone. Rtp decreases causing players to lose more. It's already a big joke and the only thing this will cause is everyone in the UK looking for alternatives and if a half decent one comes around they will grab it. And what has the ukgc accomplished then? Everyone not/semi protected for anything, just to get the fun back. Things need changed badly.
 

justdoit

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
No autoplay. Constant reminder emails about responsible gaming. Constant ingame pop up reminders about gameplay. No bonus buys. Paperwork around verification - ofcourse after depositing. Let's say someone has millions in savings yet same way treated as everyone. Rtp decreases causing players to lose more. It's already a big joke and the only thing this will cause is everyone in the UK looking for alternatives and if a half decent one comes around they will grab it. And what has the ukgc accomplished then? Everyone not/semi protected for anything, just to get the fun back. Things need changed badly.
Screenshot 2022-05-21 at 14.14.06.png
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
North West
All reducing max stake will do is slow down losses, but also prevent a player from getting ahead by catching a lucky bonus on a higher stake once the balance allows. What has anyone’s salary/job got to do with whether you hit lucky on a session and can afford to up the bet with the bankroll you’ve built?

With such proposals it’s hard to imagine that these people understand anything at all about online slots play. It’ll be the final nail in the coffin of regulated UK casinos as there’ll be an exodus to unlicensed crypto sites.
 

justdoit

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
All reducing max stake will do is slow down losses, but also prevent a player from getting ahead by catching a lucky bonus on a higher stake once the balance allows. What has anyone’s salary/job got to do with whether you hit lucky on a session and can afford to up the bet with the bankroll you’ve built?

With such proposals it’s hard to imagine that these people understand anything at all about online slots play. It’ll be the final nail in the coffin of regulated UK casinos as there’ll be an exodus to unlicensed crypto sites.
what will UKGC do or profit when most of UK gamblers will go too crypto or give up gambling ? Carolyn Harris MP am sure she act what gamban or gamstop inform her...Gamestop if you join 6month or 1 years just take brake you will target as problem gambler even you not...they are 1000s of casinos online without license target UK players.what UKGC or MP`s do to protect UK players..they did fk all
 

TimArmstrong

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Location
Earth
what will UKGC do or profit when most of UK gamblers will go too crypto or give up gambling ? Carolyn Harris MP am sure she act what gamban or gamstop inform her...Gamestop if you join 6month or 1 years just take brake you will target as problem gambler even you not...they are 1000s of casinos online without license target UK players.what UKGC or MP`s do to protect UK players..they did fk all
I have the feeling if this was a non profit organisation things wouldn't be as bad. They just come up with all sort of shit hoping casino's break the rules by mistake and then fine them. And all that money goes in their pockets. Perhaps I'm wrong, not sure.
 

Jeroensgambling

Full Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2021
All reducing max stake will do is slow down losses, but also prevent a player from getting ahead by catching a lucky bonus on a higher stake once the balance allows. What has anyone’s salary/job got to do with whether you hit lucky on a session and can afford to up the bet with the bankroll you’ve built?

With such proposals it’s hard to imagine that these people understand anything at all about online slots play. It’ll be the final nail in the coffin of regulated UK casinos as there’ll be an exodus to unlicensed crypto sites.

I think it's a good move to only raise the stakes on those who can actually afford it.

You want to gamble (away) ? Go ahead, after approval of a reasonable income that can sustain your habbits. Fair enough.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


It's in dutch, but what it comes down to was this: an employee of a house service managed to "slip" through millions over time because she was head of the administration, and was able to fraudulent send money to her own or her daughters account(s) to sustain her gambling addiction.

If above check would be in place, there was no way that she was able to sustain such bets or let alone fund her habbit like that with just a regular income in monthly basis.

I mean someone making on avg a 3000 a month cant sustain doing 10k deposits a month to a casino. It would be either savings or heritage of some orders, and still should be questioned in my opinion.

Another case:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


This women ran a caring agency for people who needed true care. Her business was subsidized for millions and she managed to take quite alot of money (in the millions) over time to play in a landbased casino. When the casino took her apart, in a private conversation she spoken that she had acces to way more money if needed. At that point Holland casino did the right thing: they banned her from all places in Holland pretty much, on where she still managed to take or book a trip to Vegas, and spend over 30 grand in just a few days.

Once accountant figured out she took awefully alot of loans and private bookings to herself, this came up to a staggering 1.2 million on which all involved party's demand to pay that back. She bankrupt now, and she is facing legal consequences now for this case.

If a proper cheque was done upfront, this woud'nt have happend. At least detected in a far more early stage then after the 1.2 million of damage done due to her gambling addiction.
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
North West
I think it's a good move to only raise the stakes on those who can actually afford it.

You want to gamble (away) ? Go ahead, after approval of a reasonable income that can sustain your habbits. Fair enough.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


It's in dutch, but what it comes down to was this: an employee of a house service managed to "slip" through millions over time because she was head of the administration, and was able to fraudulent send money to her own or her daughters account(s) to sustain her gambling addiction.

If above check would be in place, there was no way that she was able to sustain such bets or let alone fund her habbit like that with just a regular income in monthly basis.

I mean someone making on avg a 3000 a month cant sustain doing 10k deposits a month to a casino. It would be either savings or heritage of some orders, and still should be questioned in my opinion.

Another case:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


This women ran a caring agency for people who needed true care. Her business was subsidized for millions and she managed to take quite alot of money (in the millions) over time to play in a landbased casino. When the casino took her apart, in a private conversation she spoken that she had acces to way more money if needed. At that point Holland casino did the right thing: they banned her from all places in Holland pretty much, on where she still managed to take or book a trip to Vegas, and spend over 30 grand in just a few days.

Once accountant figured out she took awefully alot of loans and private bookings to herself, this came up to a staggering 1.2 million on which all involved party's demand to pay that back. She bankrupt now, and she is facing legal consequences now for this case.

If a proper cheque was done upfront, this woud'nt have happend. At least detected in a far more early stage then after the 1.2 million of damage done due to her gambling addiction.
Where’s the logic? I can understand people’s deposits being limited as that can be correlated directly to income. Bet size can not be correlated in all scenarios because you may deposit £20, build it up to £500 and wish to do £5 bets, for example. If a player can afford the initial £20 deposit they can afford to increase the bets to any level during that particular session.

What I’m saying here is an example of logical and pragmatic reasoning.

I can understand with FOBTs because your winnings are capped anyway. Totally different to online slots.

So with that I’ll have to respectfully disagree with you. You seem to have an extreme authoritarian view when it comes to gambling; one that isn’t shared with the majority of slots players it seems.
 
Last edited:

Jeroensgambling

Full Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2021
I'm not from the UK, but i do watch in certain manner regulations and / or updates in that regards. With some players, there's a significant risk that they can blow millions before someone even notices it. No casino in the world is going to complain about the situation because, they are making money on their bets. So nobody asks a question and i think it's a good move to have a more indepth checking on their players.

Landbased casino's are trained for that behaviour too. They start seeing someone come in often? How does he or she play? Are they leaving angry or are they becoming hostile to others after leaving the slots for example? You impossible cant in a online situation because online gambling is isolating. If a casino would ask me how i get my funds i'd tell them it's none of their business to be honest really.

a 2 pound a stake limitation, is a good thing and for a regular based amount of players that could be set to whatever they are comfertable with. This separetes the potential victems vs the already hardcore gamblers out there. They need addictive players, quite alot of any revenue in a casino comes from players who visit or play more then frequent. Always has bin like that.

Politicians understand as well that, they are dependend of quite some TAX revenue out of gambling. By cutting the spending limits they would harm their own tax income in that case.
 

homerbert

Accredited Casino Representative
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Location
NoWhere
Hey guys!

Please consider this post as just a personal opinion of someone who worked closely with many crypto casinos and know how biggest ones working atm from internal information. I do not offer anything nor suggest anything.

Step by step:

From what I can see:

1) Crypto casinos have much more bigger RTP to offer. Simple, they have less expenses on payment systems, they have bigger volumes than most of the 'average' FIAT money casinos, and they do not need to put low RTP settings on games.

2) From what I have seen - biggest crypto brands will beat 'really good with high ratings brands'. In terms of customer support, withdrawal speed, security and in general safe.

3) Crypto defo is a future of gambling. Or let's say decentralised gambling. Nowadays game providers / payments systems / regulators take way too much money on everything and when you go crypto - it's simply easier to work.

Once again - it's just my personal opinion and I'm not recommending anything to anyone.

Industry in strange position at the moment with few different future outcomes, will be interesting to see how it goes.

Br,

V.
 

justdoit

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
I have the feeling if this was a non profit organisation things wouldn't be as bad. They just come up with all sort of shit hoping casino's break the rules by mistake and then fine them. And all that money goes in their pockets. Perhaps I'm wrong, not sure.
you are 100% right.. if you got problem with casino, UKGC will not help at all, MGA Malta license you got problem you fill the form and they will deal with casino
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Last edited:

justdoit

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
I think it's a good move to only raise the stakes on those who can actually afford it.

You want to gamble (away) ? Go ahead, after approval of a reasonable income that can sustain your habbits. Fair enough.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


It's in dutch, but what it comes down to was this: an employee of a house service managed to "slip" through millions over time because she was head of the administration, and was able to fraudulent send money to her own or her daughters account(s) to sustain her gambling addiction.

If above check would be in place, there was no way that she was able to sustain such bets or let alone fund her habbit like that with just a regular income in monthly basis.

I mean someone making on avg a 3000 a month cant sustain doing 10k deposits a month to a casino. It would be either savings or heritage of some orders, and still should be questioned in my opinion.

Another case:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


This women ran a caring agency for people who needed true care. Her business was subsidized for millions and she managed to take quite alot of money (in the millions) over time to play in a landbased casino. When the casino took her apart, in a private conversation she spoken that she had acces to way more money if needed. At that point Holland casino did the right thing: they banned her from all places in Holland pretty much, on where she still managed to take or book a trip to Vegas, and spend over 30 grand in just a few days.

Once accountant figured out she took awefully alot of loans and private bookings to herself, this came up to a staggering 1.2 million on which all involved party's demand to pay that back. She bankrupt now, and she is facing legal consequences now for this case.

If a proper cheque was done upfront, this woud'nt have happend. At least detected in a far more early stage then after the 1.2 million of damage done due to her gambling addiction.
you can have 20 casino accounts and deposit 1k each no one will ask you anything.
I'm not from the UK, but i do watch in certain manner regulations and / or updates in that regards. With some players, there's a significant risk that they can blow millions before someone even notices it. No casino in the world is going to complain about the situation because, they are making money on their bets. So nobody asks a question and i think it's a good move to have a more indepth checking on their players.

Landbased casino's are trained for that behaviour too. They start seeing someone come in often? How does he or she play? Are they leaving angry or are they becoming hostile to others after leaving the slots for example? You impossible cant in a online situation because online gambling is isolating. If a casino would ask me how i get my funds i'd tell them it's none of their business to be honest really.

a 2 pound a stake limitation, is a good thing and for a regular based amount of players that could be set to whatever they are comfertable with. This separetes the potential victems vs the already hardcore gamblers out there. They need addictive players, quite alot of any revenue in a casino comes from players who visit or play more then frequent. Always has bin like that.

Politicians understand as well that, they are dependend of quite some TAX revenue out of gambling. By cutting the spending limits they would harm their own tax income in that case.
UK makes about £3.1 billion on tax from gambling a year, easy they make another £2-£3 billion from casinos fine them a year
 

Guntis

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Location
United kingdom
Landbased casino's are trained for that behaviour too. They start seeing someone come in often?
In some London casinos seem like their staff is instructed to ask their customers if they are comfortable with their gambling habits, but others are more concerned with money laundering. You can go to Hippodrome and buy £10,000 in table game chips with your bank card and no one will say anything, but if you come in with a grand of cash in your pocket, they will jump around you like pigs.
 

justdoit

Full Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
In some London casinos seem like their staff is instructed to ask their customers if they are comfortable with their gambling habits, but others are more concerned with money laundering. You can go to Hippodrome and buy £10,000 in table game chips with your bank card and no one will say anything, but if you come in with a grand of cash in your pocket, they will jump around you like pigs.
I use to go to Grosvenor Casino with friends on weekend, The Barracuda in Baker street, last time they stop my friend and ask him about his Cash he got it from ATM, they told him show his bank app he got it from bank lol he replay go fk u self to them we left,now we just go to Malta for weekend we stay one night and come back, Jan to April flys are cheap and hotels
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
North West
In some London casinos seem like their staff is instructed to ask their customers if they are comfortable with their gambling habits, but others are more concerned with money laundering. You can go to Hippodrome and buy £10,000 in table game chips with your bank card and no one will say anything, but if you come in with a grand of cash in your pocket, they will jump around you like pigs.
To be honest with you, I'm perplexed as to why so many people carry cash on them these days.

I very rarely have cash, so much easier to pay for stuff with a simple tap of your card.
 

Guntis

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Location
United kingdom
To be honest with you, I'm perplexed as to why so many people carry cash on them these days.

I very rarely have cash, so much easier to pay for stuff with a simple tap of your card.
In my daily routine, i'm the same - I almost never have cash in my pocket. But it's a different story when it comes to casinos. In London's Leicester Square, there are five casinos almost attached to each other, so if you win at one, you can decide to try your luck at another. And this is how you may end up walking from one casino to other with a bunch of cash in your pocket.

Hippodrome is generally the worst in terms of checking where your money comes from because anyone can walk in there without being registered and throw it on the table to exchange it for chips or simply go and stick it in slot machines.

There are some withdrawal limits for unregistered customers of up to 1k i guess, which means if you win more than that they'll pay you out 1k only and you'll get the rest when you come in next time with your ID and get registered (in case you don't have your ID on you right now).

But even 1K is enough for those who are up to some dodgy things since they can milk the cash desk without any probs.

When you come in with a sealed package of red 50s, they can see that it came from one of their neighbouring casinos; sometimes they even keep the seal. However, if you have a ton of unsealed 20s, they will be suspicious.

On the one hand, you can understand them, but when your money is coming from legitimate sources and they keep asking you stupid childish questions, you just want to leave the casino because such simply ruins your evening.
 

Guntis

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Location
United kingdom
I use to go to Grosvenor Casino with friends on weekend, The Barracuda in Baker street, last time they stop my friend and ask him about his Cash he got it from ATM, they told him show his bank app he got it from bank lol he replay go fk u self to them we left,now we just go to Malta for weekend we stay one night and come back, Jan to April flys are cheap and hotels
Grosvenor is my fav, and the one on Edgeware road isn't bad too, Victoria Casino which is the same company.

But Malta, I guess I'll give it a shot... lol! I see that tickets start at £17, which is about the same as what I pay to get from Windsor to Waterloo.
 

Guntis

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Location
United kingdom
Hey guys!

Please consider this post as just a personal opinion of someone who worked closely with many crypto casinos and know how biggest ones working atm from internal information. I do not offer anything nor suggest anything.

Step by step:

From what I can see:

1) Crypto casinos have much more bigger RTP to offer. Simple, they have less expenses on payment systems, they have bigger volumes than most of the 'average' FIAT money casinos, and they do not need to put low RTP settings on games.

2) From what I have seen - biggest crypto brands will beat 'really good with high ratings brands'. In terms of customer support, withdrawal speed, security and in general safe.

3) Crypto defo is a future of gambling. Or let's say decentralised gambling. Nowadays game providers / payments systems / regulators take way too much money on everything and when you go crypto - it's simply easier to work.

Once again - it's just my personal opinion and I'm not recommending anything to anyone.

Industry in strange position at the moment with few different future outcomes, will be interesting to see how it goes.

Br,

V.
I think some crypto-only casinos are already rocking the scene due to their fast payouts, high RTP slots, and modern looking websites. Plus the majority of their reps are sitting on the bitcoin talk forum and can be reached at any time.

Yes, they are unregulated, so to find one of the top quality players simply need to do a bit of research. But "regulated" usually does not mean that the site is better to play at since it's all about who runs the casino and what their business intentions are.

For UK players, however, no-gamstop sites are far more dangerous to play at because they are simply websites with a connected package of fake games and dubious payment methods.
 
Last edited:

Jeroensgambling

Full Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2021
Ah another N1 representative who holds a history of not paying out their customers.

Crypto
On the one hand, you can understand them, but when your money is coming from legitimate sources and they keep asking you stupid childish questions, you just want to leave the casino because such simply ruins your evening.

Their license requires them to figure out of the customer is'nt laundering money or not. If they dont ask questions and they did got caught > huge ass fine waiting for them. In worst case they get their license stripped.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • dmr
Top