I do not agree that this matter can simply be considered closed.
Before my account was closed, I had already reported that BitGuruz was violating its own Terms and Conditions. Ironically, the very issue I raised appears to be the same reason used to close my account.
Your Terms and Conditions state that the use of a VPN is prohibited. However, your own website advises users to use a VPN because a large number of games are otherwise unavailable. In addition, your live support explicitly recommended that I use a VPN and even suggested Finland as the best location.
I therefore expect BitGuruz to provide a clear explanation as to how this can be reconciled with your own Terms and Conditions. Simply referring to your Security Department and unilaterally declaring my complaint closed does not address the issue I raised.
There is another important contradiction that has still not been addressed. BitGuruz publicly advertises that "No KYC" is required, even for large deposits. However, your Terms and Conditions, AML Policy, and KYC Policy create the impression that customer verification is taken very seriously and that enhanced due diligence may be required, particularly for larger transactions or where necessary under your AML obligations.
These two positions appear to contradict each other. On the one hand, your published policies emphasize compliance with KYC and AML requirements, while on the other hand, your advertising promotes the absence of KYC, even for substantial deposits. I therefore expect BitGuruz to explain how these statements are consistent with your own published policies.
There is another serious matter that has not been addressed.
Based on the information available to me, I have identified multiple transactions on my bank statements that appear to have been processed under merchant names and MCC codes that do not correspond to gambling transactions. Gambling transactions are generally expected to be processed under MCC 7995. However, my statements include, among others:
- Vocaloidy – MCC 5815
- Take Your Goods – MCC 5732
- Jewel Birds Rescue – MCC 5816
These are only a few examples of the merchant names and MCC codes that appear on my bank statements.
In my view, these transactions raise serious questions regarding the way payments were processed. I intend to report these concerns, together with the supporting evidence I have collected, including company records, screenshots, and other documentation, to the appropriate authorities and payment networks, including the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), Mastercard, and Visa, so that they can assess whether the payment processing complied with the applicable rules. From my understanding, such matters are treated very seriously by the payment networks and may result in significant consequences if violations are established.
I had hoped these matters could be resolved through constructive communication. Instead, BitGuruz has chosen to close my complaint without addressing any of the substantive issues I have raised.
I assume BitGuruz wishes to deal with its customers fairly and transparently. If you continue to refuse to address these contradictions and concerns while simply declaring the matter closed, I will have no option but to continue the legal and regulatory procedures that are already underway. Just as BitGuruz states that it acts in accordance with its Terms and Conditions, I will continue to rely on your published Terms, the applicable laws and regulations, and the evidence in my possession.
I remain willing to resolve this matter amicably, but that requires a genuine response to the issues I have raised rather than a unilateral decision to close the complaint.
I am suddenly unable to upload images right now, but I will add them as evidence once CasinoGuru has resolved this issue.
And even better, here I can place images in my message, but not on Bitguruz, which explains what I already suspected: the GuruzGroup.
I had put 4 in my post but only 1 is coming through so I am sending it in 4 parts
number 3
number 4
