Hello,
We feel like it is important to give some missing background information to what led to these circumstances.
Prior to obtaining these wins in a slot game, the player had played another game evidently knowing that this particular game was compromised due to a bug that was exploitable.
What was observed in the player's account was a pattern that was consistent through multiple accounts. This allowed the player to obtain funds through illicit means which were then used in another game to achieve the win they are referring to.
Simply put, as the slot win was due to the funds gained from knowingly abusing a glitch in another game, this is where the Terms and conditions were breached and the account closure stems from. Not from the slot win which they refer to.
We hope that this clarifies the situation for everyone.
Wow, that's quite a claim.. You're saying that I have hacked a casino game provider?
Would you mind sharing the bet history and amounts for everyone to see please? And on which game, and how was the bug exploited?
I have played some other games prior to the slot game, IIRC I turned my ~€600 into €800-900 or something. And won ~€20,000 at the said slot game. Even if I were to have exploited a bug, are you seriously claiming that I have hacked a casino game provider, only "stole" a few hundred bucks from there which would make up like 25-30% of the bankroll, and then played a legit game? I don't know about you but if I were to hack a casino game, I'd probably go max wins on that game.
No, they were saying you learned about a bug in one of the game that a game provider provided to BetPanda, and you utilized it. Not necessarily hacking into the provider, just realizing there is a glitch that open for a possible exploitation and you exploited it.
Regarding the bet history and amount to prove their rebuttal, given you can't provide for public yourself, I guess I can ask them for it, be the forum's eyes to verify their claim, but based on past experiences of witnessing these for-private-eyes-only evidence, what they'll show is the internal version of their log, so it's basically their property and contain elements that's not meant for public consumption. Thus, for-private-eyes-only.
If you're agree to it? Me seeing their supporting evidence for the forum's behalf?