Quote from: tippytoes on September 27, 2019, 12:52:26 PM

Quote from: bitstars.net on September 27, 2019, 03:41:58 AM

Quote

Ok. Let's say this happened, why do you think it's reasonable to keep the dude's money?

Sure, by all means, you should ban him (and probably his mom for good measure) from using your services in the future. But just pocketing his money is outrageously unethical. And please don't act like it's a legal requirement, as you guys appear to operate under a curacao license, which is the same (rubber-stamp) process I went through several years ago back when I used to run a casino -- so I know for a fact there's no legal requirement to pocket people's funds in situations like this (just one to deny service).

Hi there,

So, I think confiscating the winnings is the right way to do, but confiscating the deposit is questionable as far as I'm concerned. I believe the management checked with AskGamblers, Anti-Fraud team for our platform provider, and curacao for advice and they all agreed that they had the mandate to confiscate the full amount. My personal opinion would be more in line of paying back the deposit to the player and permanently ban him from playing. Then again, I'm not the head honcho, hence I can only give my opinion and recommendation, but it's up to the management to decide what they ultimately will do.

But I'm on the same line as you here.

As you've said, confiscating the winnings is the right way to do here. He should get his original money and not confiscate it all. If he has questionable KYC docs, why did your company even accepted him as a player on your site? And yes I do agree with RHavar, having Curacao license? We all know that it is a substandard license. And you want to be very strict with your clients??? Roll Eyes

I hope this guy will get his money back, else, this gambling site will have greedy, cheating points from me.

Hi there,

Again, I'm not disagreeing with you here. I think that the confiscation of deposits is a bit questionable as well, but ultimately the decision is not up to me as you can imagine. I don't think we disagree here. As for the Curacao license. The reason for us having it is that the other licenses (MGA, UKGC, etc) are not very crypto friendly. If they were as progressive with crypto as Curacao, we'd go for that license.