Hi there,
Thanks for inviting us to share our side.
So, the reason for the confiscation here is that the welcome bonus had been used on the IP already. As you know, only one welcome bonus can be used per IP, which is the case in most casinos, and in this particular case there wasn't a VPN used, meaning there's a direct IP link.
To give some background, we don't have many Norwegian players at BitStarz, maybe averaging a new depositor per day. It's important to state that to give this a bit of context.
Here, we had another Norwegian player (also not using VPN), signing into his account, and then 7 minutes later an account is created on the same IP. For me, that's just a side note as the welcome package has already been used on the IP and therefore the terms and conditions apply.
As a side note (which I don't think adds anything to be fair), the player do have another account as well, in his own name, matching DOB, etc. But no deposits have been made on it and thus it doesn't matter in regards to this case. This was opened back in February.
So to sum it up, we have the one bonus per IP/household policy which every casino online has. It doesn't matter if it's VPN or not as it also extends over shared computers, etc. We don't have many Norwegian players coming in, and when someone using the same IP without VPN comes in 7 minutes later on the same IP and opens an account, that just adds to the suspicion.
The reason we have this rule (along with all other casinos) is to safe-guard us from abusing the welcome bonus (and in this case the player also came through an affiliate that has a special 152% first deposit bonus as opposed to the standard 100%) which further adds to the suspicion that this was very much a bonus abuse motivated action.
Happy to provide any proof you require to support the above.
Olle
Hi there,
Thanks for inviting us to share our side.
So, the reason for the confiscation here is that the welcome bonus had been used on the IP already. As you know, only one welcome bonus can be used per IP, which is the case in most casinos, and in this particular case there wasn't a VPN used, meaning there's a direct IP link.
To give some background, we don't have many Norwegian players at BitStarz, maybe averaging a new depositor per day. It's important to state that to give this a bit of context.
Here, we had another Norwegian player (also not using VPN), signing into his account, and then 7 minutes later an account is created on the same IP. For me, that's just a side note as the welcome package has already been used on the IP and therefore the terms and conditions apply.
As a side note (which I don't think adds anything to be fair), the player do have another account as well, in his own name, matching DOB, etc. But no deposits have been made on it and thus it doesn't matter in regards to this case. This was opened back in February.
So to sum it up, we have the one bonus per IP/household policy which every casino online has. It doesn't matter if it's VPN or not as it also extends over shared computers, etc. We don't have many Norwegian players coming in, and when someone using the same IP without VPN comes in 7 minutes later on the same IP and opens an account, that just adds to the suspicion.
The reason we have this rule (along with all other casinos) is to safe-guard us from abusing the welcome bonus (and in this case the player also came through an affiliate that has a special 152% first deposit bonus as opposed to the standard 100%) which further adds to the suspicion that this was very much a bonus abuse motivated action.
Happy to provide any proof you require to support the above.
Olle