Under the section of terms and conditions - CUSTOMER DUE DILIGENCE:
7.3.2. The transaction in relation to the Account is made from or to a high-risk suspicious account /wallet;
How can be the high risk defined?
7.4. In the event when the Company suspects any of the activities set out in Section 7.3, the Company takes necessary measures to examine the backgrounds of any those activities, including, but not limited to, seeking additional independent, reliable sources to verify the information provided and to determine whether the transaction to be suspicious, taking additional measures to understand the background, ownership and financial situation of the User and other parties to the transaction, making a video or voice call with the User by any means of electronic communications, assessing whether the transaction is consistent with the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship, increasing the monitoring of the business relationship and applying greater scrutiny to the transaction made. At the point where the threshold is reached, the Company may put all funds owed to the Customer into an account (or equivalent) from and on which no withdrawals and deposits can be made, until CDD is completed successfully, to the full satisfaction of the Company.
-
@shield132
It's not about us considering that the OP was the one who caused the bug. Us requesting the KYC after the poll was due to changing the decision regarding the user's case. Once we talk about us as a company crediting the user and him as a customer withdrawing amount, we're still in the partial business relationship. As explained earlier, both in our comment and within the terms and conditions section, we cannot do the business with an account that has gambling activity pattern in the past that was not suspicious in our point of view (not saying it directly, it's just a point of view).
Let us know if there's anything we can add to this case - will gladly participate.