I felt anxious due to the circumstances outlined earlier. There was a significant amount of money held up as they blocked all my withdrawal attempts. When I finally won it, I envisioned making plans for my funds. Besides, I couldn't comprehend how mere nervousness and sweating could justify confiscating $90,000.
The culprit in this situation is not me, but rather bc.game. It's concerning to see that not everyone is exerting pressure on them to address the issue.
To BC.Game:
My USDT (TRC20) address is TNPDxPWyQFFoj9mV6NPCNN7ZQG9jknVXhs
From now on, I'll solely utilize this forum as a means to communicate with them. It appears to offer a more personal interaction, unlike dealing with automated responses.
They obtained the funds from the game provider, and then unjustly withheld them from me. This situation is simply unacceptable. I urge them to rectify this immediately and fulfill their obligation to pay out my winnings without further delay.
So to clarify, according to your side, the distress shown by you during the KYC process were simply over-sweating and a "dreamy" eyes? To avoid miscommunication, I actually asked your current situation at that time, that alerted BC's team and prompt them to make this decision.
This has to be the most absurd excuse by a casino for withholding a player’s winnings that I've ever encountered. Why is the OP being put on trial here? If BC Games were acting in good faith and were dissatisfied with the OP's picture, they should have simply requested a retake. It's worth noting that the OP had already passed KYC before the big win and the second KYC attempt. This situation reeks of BC Games attempting to steal the OP's winnings and concocting a ridiculous excuse to justify it.
Though I agree that [as I said previously] if OP's KYC shown signs of duress or perhaps even domestic abuse, what they should do is notify the authorities instead of confiscating fund, I won't jump too fast to a conclusion before understanding every side. Perhaps, if the situation BC tried to bring to our awareness involved OP being in a situation where she is clearly "unfit" for a KYC or being forced, like [at an extreme] being held at gun point, or pushed and forced to sit in front of the camera, perhaps they were concerned that the real operator of the user ID #23428479 is someone who tried to bypass account restriction by borrowing her ID, and upon the request of KYC, understanding that their picture won't match her ID, forced her to take her picture.
This is why I ask her what was her situation during that KYC that could trigger BC to classify it as under duress. If it's a mere sweating etc, then it's probably a misunderstanding and an overreaction from BC.