1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Virtual VS bsilva028 : split from the Virtual Probation thread

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by bsilva028, Dec 3, 2013.

  1. bsilva028

    bsilva028 Banned : multi-account fraudster PABnoaccred PABaccred

    it was already said before that after the 180 days of probation will also have something to vote what we think of put them out of the rogue pit or not.

    i asked to the reps clarify some good things, like until now nothing was answered neither changed in their rogue rules, i will not say more nothing about this.

    when the vote happens i will give my vote
    continue in rogue pit forever, it will be what i will vote.

    [Max says: this post and the 100+ that follow were originally part of The Virtual Casino Group and Ace Revenue and were split off because it became a massive, fraudster-inspired derail. Apologies for any discontinuities that may have caused: thread splitting is not an exact science and there will be jagged edges here and there. If anything actually needs fixing -- moved from this thread to that or whatever -- please send me a PM with the details (post number, link, whatever) and I'll do what I can to make things right. FTR this post originally appeared here.]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 24, 2013
  2. bsilva028

    bsilva028 Banned : multi-account fraudster PABnoaccred PABaccred

    me, like i said before, for me this is one more trick of them
    however, and like when i started online gambling, (i didn´t know anything about best or worst casinos) in a search it appeared me one of their casinos, in that time i registered, i have made some deposites, when i tried to casout the 1st time i did not get paid in that time with stupid escuses, so since there until now i uninstalled them and never logged in again

    yesterday, in 1 of their spams, it was a free chip, like it was free, not my own money, i played it, completed the playthrough and tried to cashout.
    uninstalled again.

    i am now waiting for the results.
    i am not expecting to get paid so early, i only played it with test purposes, i want to see if they are really different (thing that i dont belive)
    but let´s just see.

    if i get paid in less than 1 month, i will post here, if i dont get paid in that time (thats what i belive it will happen) i will post also.
     
  3. bsilva028

    bsilva028 Banned : multi-account fraudster PABnoaccred PABaccred

    well, like i said before, i would post here the results

    the withdrawal request was denied, asked live chat why:

    excuse given:

    "players from portugal can´t cashout from free chips"
    so even if receive them in e-mail they cant cashout.

    its more than proof:
    this is a big trick of virtual to try get out and keep being the same as they allways was:
    rogue rogue and rogue again.
    i will not complaint with anything, like i also said before, i was not expecting to gat paid, this was only a test, the test results are the same as few years ago. they dit not changed and i dont belive that they will change never.

    there are lots of other rogue casinos but, so rogues like this group? i dont belive.
    they are really the shame of online gambling and they should disapear from the planet for a better online gambling world happen.
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2013
    7 people like this.
  4. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    This is classic Virtual rogue behaviour. They decide not to pay, and then think up an excuse to justify it. If they were acting with honesty and integrity, they would not be sending players free chips in the first place if they could never cash out. You will probably find that the blame will now be shifted onto an affiliate having "spammed" you with that offer without regard to your eligibility.

    If they have embarked on a programme of great change, it seems the memo has yet to reach the CS agent that you dealt with. This should have been addressed BEFORE they embarked on this publicity push, so that such embarrassing "test results" would not come to bite them on the ass.
     
    4 people like this.
  5. bsilva028

    bsilva028 Banned : multi-account fraudster PABnoaccred PABaccred


    yes also belive that the excuse now will be: "its not our fault, its affiliate´s fault, affiliates are sending spams where they have acess to the username that the player uses in the casino, so its their fault not ours, we are honnest"


    if they were really different they should say: lets honour what we sent, but with the guarantee that players from country a,b or c or or player 1,2 or 3 will no longer receive promotions and/or free chips
     
    2 people like this.
  6. greedygirl

    greedygirl Purveyor of Onions CAG webmeister

    When I saw the posts by bsilva, I contacted the casino straight away to ask for the full story. I don't feel it is my place to discuss this, but I'm quite certain Tawni will be explaining things in detail. What I will say is that perhaps, when CM members get the full story, you may have a different opinion in this situation.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. mattsgame

    mattsgame Ueber Meister CAG webmeister

    Ok, first off I think everyone has seen and knows I am not the biggest Virtual Fan. But.... it is in the terms and condition that players from Portugal cannot withdraw from free chips. If the mail came from them it is a stuff up, but they would not be the first casino to send players free spins or bonuses to players from bonus banned countries, my bet though it will be from an affiliate but you should still check the terms regardless.

    The one thing I do not like about this term is this little bit
    I was going to stay out of this thread, dammit.
     
    5 people like this.
  8. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    This also relates to their other rogue practice of deliberately sending players offers they are not allowed to use. Mostly, it was the "back to back free chip trick" that got them the most flak. They would aggressively market free chips to players and many took the offers in good faith. They then sprung the trap later on when the player managed to win. Sometimes, it wasn't even a win from a free chip, but a win much later on that was confiscated because at some time in the past they had played back to back free chips.

    If this offer came from the casino, they knew damn well where this player resided, and that this would render them ineligible. To make matters worse, they have the discretionary removal of the restriction on an individual basis. Of course, if a player receives such an offer direct from the casino, it is reasonable to believe that they have done so because they have had the restriction lifted.

    Given that large offers and free chips are the fundamental business model used by this group, it is even more damning given that they vigorously defend the practice because "our players like it". Of course they do, except the ones that win and find out the whole thing was a clever illusion designed to fleece them.

    Whilst they may have certain restrictions in their terms, it seems they are pretty random. Why single out Portugal seemingly at random for an extra special shafting:confused: Who else has been disadvantaged by some term or other that can change overnight without notice?

    So far, it seems that nothing has changed, and the few members here that admit they have dipped their toes in to see if things HAVE changed appear to be finding out that nothing really has changed after all.
     
  9. TawniVirtualAce

    TawniVirtualAce I-Gaming Industry Representative

    There are definitely two sides to every story and this is no exception.

    In the case of bsilva, at a quick first glance, it appears that he has created no less than 40+ accounts within six of our casinos, since 2008 (quite possibly, more). He has made a total of $80 in deposits (back in 2008). With each account, he has used free chips and has been denied winnings previously, four times, based on the fact that he resides in Portugal. He cannot claim he was unaware of this term.

    In this particular instance, bsilva not only ignored the term stating he cannot withdraw on bonuses due to his location, but also he broke the term regarding multiple free chips without depositing. He accepted three free chips in succession, Dec. 17th.

    He states:
    This is patently untrue. We’ve looked up the origins of the coupons he used. Two of the three came from casinofreebees.com. The third came from the casino itself, a standard free chip offered to all its players.

    As a result of what has occurred, I’ve spoken with management regarding making changes with the following:

    • We need to find a way to limit the number of accounts any player has.
    • We also need to find a clear way to prevent players from those countries with bonus limitations from redeeming free chips.
    • Additionally, we need to implement some sort of fix, preventing players from using multiple free chips without depositing, between.

    Management is in full agreement with what I’ve described and will immediately look into how these fixes can be achieved. I will report back on progress on these items, in the coming days.

    I don’t disagree with this and I will speak with management regarding this, Monday. As Greedygirl mentioned early on, the resolution center has re-opened, so if anyone has had this term enforced, I invite them to please submit a claim to This email is not visible to you. (for the Virtual brands) or This email is not visible to you. (for the Ace brands).

    This is quite a bit to address in one shot. This brings into play limitations due to difficulties with the U.S. I’m not trying to skirt things, but because this is going to require lengthy explanations, I’ll hold off until tomorrow. It’s been a very long day and I’d like to be thorough in my response to this.
     
    3 people like this.
  10. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    This is the most damning of all.

    You have knowingly been sending such offers to players who are ineligible.



    Er, try reading the RTG user manual - Club World can do it, and have been doing just this for some while.

    Only the first is the tricky one, something all casinos have problems with, and something that the software cannot really get to grips with when faced with a player who is knowingly and determinedly trying to beat the system.

    This is also a serious accusation against a CM member, and one that needs to be tested independently as to it's validity.

    Unfortunately, Virtual in the past have pulled this "multiple accounts" trick before, and in some cases it has been bogus, merely a means to deny payouts.

    I am also interested as to why Portugal has been singled out, it's just an EU member state, and a long standing one. It is considered no more or less "criminal minded" than any of the other long standing EU member states. one can understand such terms for countries that have a chaotic regime, or which have undergone dramatic changes, but only because this makes an easier environment for fraudsters and criminals to operate because the state structure is not fit to properly police the citizens.
     
    1 person likes this.
  11. Nifty29

    Nifty29 Dormant account

    The way I read it, Tawni meant it came from their website I.e. "available to all players"...NOT via email. Just like the other codes "came from" that other website.

    I'm no fan of Virtual, but I am a fan of truth and accuracy in ANY discussion.

    If bsilva is proven to have done what Tawni suggests, they should be banned from here for fraud IMO, or at least for deliberately misleading the membership.
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. dionysus

    dionysus can turn wine into water CAG MM

    I agree. It cuts both ways.
    If the player knowingly is misleading the members in an intentionally misrepresented crusade to satisfy their agenda of bonus abuse and wrongful bad-mouthing, the axe!
    If the casino is wrong, a huge apology is due and is set back in the forum eyes
     
  13. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    The implication is that it was an email offer:-

    If Bsilva is proven to have been committing multi account frauds, then they should be sanctioned under normal policies, not given special leeway because "it's only Virtual". This would have to come via a PAB process, and this is something bsilva should be looking to do in order to clear their name.

    I believe casino reps can approach Max and in a sense, PAB against a player in this kind of circumstance, as not getting to the bottom of this can also reflect badly on the casino, and players who know they have been caught out often decide not to pursue a PAB as it would likely lead to them getting named, shamed, and banned.
     
  14. Nifty29

    Nifty29 Dormant account

    We only have bsilvas word that this is what live chat said....and we don't even know what the question was.

    It may have been a general comment, and it may have applied to the codes from the other website.
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. bsilva028

    bsilva028 Banned : multi-account fraudster PABnoaccred PABaccred

    to greddy girl and tawny

    1st: i dont have multipe accounts - thats another BAD EXCUSE FROM YOU

    2nd: if i broke some rule of some get more than 1 free chip its BECAUSE CASINO HAS SENT THEM

    3rd: if i am not able to my withdraw due to my locations, casino has my location so it shoulnt send the bonuses

    4th: casino also knows that i am verified because when y have the 1st problem back in 2008, casino has asked for my docs

    5th: how do you know which casino was?? i did not mention if was in some casino of virtual or ace revenue, i did not mention the name of the casino.
    i was the only player in the world making a withdraw this week??

    6th: its only virtual because i´ve never had problems in any other casino.

    7th: i have proof, that only in 2008 cool cat has more than $300 in deposites, so, tawny is not speaking the true, its speaking the rogue side of the story

    8th: another proof that its a lie, i dont even know the site: casinofreebees.com. and i can sent all the sites in historic to prove that i never was in that site.

    acredited casinos that i never had problem:
    MG: 32red group, fortune lounge, vpl, club red gaming, bellerock, roxy.

    netent: nordicbet, redbet, whitebet, guts, maxino

    playtech: paddy power, betfred, omni, fly, bet365, sports interaction

    rtg: club world group, sloto cash, jackpot capital group.

    rival: slots capital

    other brands: inter casino, vip casino, 3dice

    non-acredited casinos:

    club gold (playtech), casino rewards (mg), miami club (wgs), liberty slots (wgs)

    so i really dont need to play there.
    another thing ONLY to tawny:

    you continue to give bad and rogue excuses to dont pay the players:
    you said, your words, that i didnt read that i couldnt cashout due to my location, once again, this was your words and are predatory!!! casino does not allow my location to make cashouts, so casino dont have to send the bonuses !!!! if they was sent, they should be honored.
     
    1 person likes this.
  16. bigjohn

    bigjohn Meister Member MM PABnoaccred

    I am more inclined to take bsilva's word at this point.

    Some of the things Tawni said don't seem to make sense or reflect a predatory nature. For instance, how does a casino leave someones account open if they believe that person has 40+ accounts?
     
    1 person likes this.
  17. bsilva028

    bsilva028 Banned : multi-account fraudster PABnoaccred PABaccred

    another untrue of tawny:

    the called "investigation" that she has made:

    after she posts that "investigation" blaming me, and saying that i did not speak the true, i receveid another spam with another free chip:

    what kind of investigation it was afterall?? so she investigated and AFTER that i continued to receive spams???

    another thing that i did not post in previous post:
    more casinos that i never had a problem with rules:
    inetbet, and they have some bonuses that are strictly restricted to some games, and rules must be very well readen to dont be broken, and i never had problem
     
  18. bsilva028

    bsilva028 Banned : multi-account fraudster PABnoaccred PABaccred


    and no nifty, i did not make any fraude, you already read other posts, you also saw my activity since 2010 here, yes in the year that learned who was virtual and other rogues and when i discovered the true online gambling, it was here in cm.

    i never defended anything when someone makes fraud
    and like i said before, i dont even know the site mentionated by tawny. and if, in her side of the story, she said i claimed 2 free chips from a certain site and a 3rd given by the casino. (her words)

    so after claiming 2 codes from another site the casino sends a 3rd code if they do not allow them?? specially that they know i couldnt got it??
    so she is contradicting herself
    she says: "bsilva claimed 2 free chips from a site, and a 3rd that the casino has sent" so the casino has sent the 3rd code after me claiming the 2 firsts???

    again, like i said in another page, i did not was expecting to get paid, it was a test to check if they were really different, and by the excuse given they are not different, they sent a free chip to a player that couldnt cashout, THEY SENT IT, it wasnt me asking.
     
  19. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    It's Virtual remember. This was yet another predatory tactic from the past. They allowed accounts to remain open, taking deposits etc, but would use the multiple accounts violation as soon as the player won. This is probably why these 40+ accounts are still open. The turning over a new leaf exercise did not include making sure that historical multiple accounts were closed in line with the promised change to more honest practices.

    The allegations are actually quite specific

    So, despite this GROSS multi accounting from way back in 2008, his accounts are STILL open in 2013, and he is STILL being sent inducements to play.

    Despite it being only $80, he IS actually a "depositing player".

    Given how specific these allegations are, it should be easy for this to be proven to Max as a true account of what went on, and thus absolve Virtual of any wrong doing in this case.


    Maybe Virtual should go back over their database and see how many other serial fraudsters have managed to remain undetected and thus still have access to their accounts. If any of these players start trying to play again, they will all end up having their withdrawals confiscated, and the ensuing publicity would be very bad news indeed for Virtual. Far better to close all such suspect accounts now so that any players who have been flagged will have to ask CS to reopen their accounts if they want to try again, at which point Virtual can say "no" if they have such specific evidence of multi account fraud as they do for bsilva.
     
    1 person likes this.
  20. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    @ bsilva028 : please tone down the "lies and rogue Rogue ROGUE" rhetoric. If you can't discuss these issues without all the accusations and name-calling then maybe you should take a break to cool off for a while, or whatever form of "chill out" suits you. The point is that this can and should be done in a more civilised manner, please and thank you.
     

Share This Page