Question about Gambling websites with Curaçao license using incorrect Merchant Category code (page 1,134)

What’s the address?

Hi. I’ve requested but still waiting. How long did your review take?

Hi

digtlid is digitplaystore

cstonli is Dota2store

doset is dota2store

Any contact information?

Looking for mailadress for paymentz to interdersoft limited, they are curacao licensed, lituanian bankaccount ,

all seems to belong to Terdersoft bv .

cant find anything to contact them. They also use the Kycoin for mastercard deposits

Hi LizzieCG,

It was several months, they're unlikely to respond to personal requests, you need to be a business.

Has anyone managed to get refunds from these payment providers?

-Decta.com

-Justipay.com

-Qostiq.com

-Cardserv.io

-Taslink.ua

One of my banks is Mastercard - debit card the other is visa - credit - these have both raised them.

My other is Mastercard- credit which are refusing to raise them due to ‘Mastercard rules’

just wanted to kind of see my chances once they are raised do people kind of usually win?

Yes, more often than not you will win.

I did explain in my other post 😉

P.S. You need to point out to the Mastercard Credit Card firm that it's illegal for them to accept gambling payments on a credit card, so they're talking out their rectal orrifice.

Can I ask who the Debit Mastercard bank is, please?

You can email me in confidence badgerlover23@proton.me if you don't want to share that info publicly, which I understand in the circumstances.

I am a business so I’ve registered it against that.

Anything for

CYBGEU

CYBGAHABEU

FITSEUN

QBR

all england based i think

I'm still looking for Worfix Ltd. Can anyone help?

I think we're talking past each other a bit – possibly because of the automatic translation in the forum. I'm deliberately writing in German because nuances are easily lost with English/auto-translate.

Regarding "Contact at Mastercard":

Even if someone knows someone at Mastercard, this offers you, as a cardholder, virtually no practical advantage. Mastercard/Visa don't "block" your chargeback – what matters is whether your issuer (your bank) actually submits and pursues the dispute/chargeback. The scheme is primarily a set of rules/network/arbitration body between the participants.

Contract & Fees:

As a cardholder, you don't have a direct contract with Visa/Mastercard. Your debit/credit card agreement is with your bank (issuer). Scheme/interchange fees are handled by the merchant/acquirer and distributed within their system – this isn't a fee you pay directly to Visa/Mastercard for each purchase. You may pay bank-related fees (card/account fees, interest, FX fees, etc.), but that's separate.

Consumer Duty/Gambling Block :

It's difficult to fault a bank for not stopping gambling payments if the transaction wasn't identifiable as gambling due to incorrect MCCs/descriptors. A gambling block can only be technically effective if the transaction data correctly identifies the category. Therefore, the crucial question is where the misclassification originates (merchant/acquirer side) and what the bank can realistically influence. It would be like receiving a parking ticket when the car was demonstrably parked in the garage: It's difficult to establish a "breach of duty" for something that was objectively neither detectable nor controllable.

Chargeback expectation:

Assuming that you can get everything back via chargeback after gambling shifts the focus away from the real issue: The known problem needs to be addressed, not retrospectively "technically fixed." Accordingly, in practice, correctly authorized gambling transactions (MCC 7995) on Visa/Mastercard are often only very limitedly susceptible to chargebacks – otherwise, the systems would be constantly flooded in such cases.

Incorrect MCC:

In the scheme rules, an "incorrect MCC" is more of a compliance/data issue than an automatic "cardholder refund button." With Visa, this can only become relevant as "invalid data" in specific situations (e.g., if demonstrably incorrect data led to authorization or an MCC mismatch exists); with Mastercard, this often involves (pre-)compliance/acquirer issues rather than a traditional cardholder chargeback. In short, an "incorrect MCC" can have consequences for the merchant/acquirer – but it doesn't automatically mean that all past losses will be refunded.

And personally, because you mentioned addiction:

I respect your efforts to get clean. But even if refunds were available, money alone won't break the cycle. Crucial are protective mechanisms (blocks, limits, self-exclusion) and genuine stability – otherwise, a "refund" quickly becomes a "trigger" again. I don't mean this as an attack, but rather as a reminder of a pattern that, unfortunately, is all too common here.

In the end, it's quite simple:

UK law only mandates refunds for "unauthorized payments." Authorized but disguised gambling payments (e.g., incorrect MCC/descriptor instead of MCC 7995) do not automatically trigger a refund. Instead, it's at most a matter of scheme dispute/compliance issues and whether the bank conducted a fair review and responded appropriately. Unfortunately, the bottom line remains: if the payment is authorized, it's authorized, regardless of the true reason.

My tip:

Trying to "recoup" losses keeps many people trapped in a vicious cycle. Instead, use this time to become gambling-free – health and life are irreplaceable.

I agree with this but I also think why should we suffer when these horrible companies steal millions of pounds from vulnerable people?

Still looking for

GEMCEBR, London

Hi Lizzie, did you get anywhere with diglit? Do they respond/refund?

thanks,

olga

You were only robbed if it was fraud/deception or unauthorized payments. If you entered your card details and confirmed the payment, it was voluntarily authorized – and you got what you wanted at that moment: to play. That doesn't make the providers "good," but it doesn't make it theft either. It's simply the system that allows such crap.