Yes, no one knows, only the provider knows why. I asked around several contacts of mine, different platforms, where I didn't ask nor they mention what provider they use to ensure no bias [see it like I'm trying to have a double-blind-study here], and though the explanation come in different wordings, broken down, it come to one similar point: that the sportbook division has their own risk assessment team, and they're the one who make the call.
I think this is what happened with you and BetPanda with Betby. The call come from that separate entity. BetPanda reps have no idea the basis of the judgement. Of which, if you read the rest of the rep's explanation carefully [I can understand that you can't see it that way, from the current state you're in] they actually are trying to remedy or counter the situation by having reassessment. Whether that reassessment of their own bear a result where they refund you or not, it'll depend on what they find.
What I [think I] know though, the 18.2mbtc didn't slip into betpanda's pocket. It's not in their pocket. If they're paying you and overruling the decision of the provider, it's actually them paying from their own pocket, as the provider will not be the one liquidating the winning amount.
I'm sending you a PM with the requested information.
I confirm that I receive the information. Sadly, it doesn't help much, as I don't have contact with them, so I don't know if your account on those casinos are also already flagged by betby But to be on the safe side, perhaps it's wise to withdraw everything and move to other platform that's not share the same provider?
Why is it only betpanda then that is confiscating funds with betby? and all other sites using the betby provider are not having the same issue?
Couuld it be that all betby are relaying is that "customer is sharp, betting on +ev lines" and betpanda is seeing this --> referring to their terrible TOS --> confiscating user funds
I am 99% sure this will be answer, can betpanda provide the exact message relayed to them by betby? I'm assuming it's what I mentioned above.