Question about Gambling websites with Curaçao license using incorrect Merchant Category code (page 735)

Im not happy he is back to average again:

https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/destream.net

I've a strange one with a merchant that I've searched on here and nobody has mentioned.

Collective Security Treaty Organisation

4 payments totalling £1142.91

I've obviously googled and what's come up surely cannot be what google is saying????!!!

Because trustpilot removed the negative reviews. They were flagged by destream. Same as mine. I appealed the flag, but trustpilot said if i won't change my review, they will remove it.

This is all very very strange. You should just point to the CREATIVE STUDIO wording and that's it

Yes I reviewed mine and they put it back on I was also reported for having two profiles but nothing came of it😂

Just had 5 disputes refunded by Barclays after the merchant had refunded directly only the difference on foreign fees happy as it was £100 that merchant didn’t do. Does anyone know of a good gambling block that I cannot remove from IPhone?

How did you get on with this? I bank with Chase - first go round on this no merchant contested 14 transactions but I have 2 large ones to do with Chase this relapse and 5 smaller ones so want to prepare in case they do contest.

So thats the merchant name creative studio? and the name as a transaction? I don't understand

Weird

Barclays has now confirmed that my case involves a scam. I’ve been assured that all manipulated payments will be refunded. The only remaining issue is the review of the Skrill transactions, as the casino directly encouraged me to open a Skrill account to continue making deposits.

Great news with Barclays, may I ask what route you took to get them to do scam? I managed to do 12.7 invalid data, first go round after a complaint but have just gone goods not received this time got 10 left for them to process spoke on phone today and she said it will go through but case by case for temp refund. Have to wait the full term with Chase so mid July for refunds

Skinsmagnate contested the chargeback. Chase closed my case saying Skinsmagnate provided evidence. Chase bank failed to show me the evidence. I think i asked them 5 times.

Initial message from Chase:

"Hi there,

We've heard back from Sknsmgnt about your disputed transactions (Case References: *** & ***). 

They have provided evidence, which we'll share with you shortly. This evidence means we cannot take the case further because it shows the goods were provided...I've closed your cases..."

At the end of the day, Chase indirectly admitted they have no proof.

"...We are requesting the Merchant to provide evidences regarding this case."

This was always going to be the risk with goods not received and also Chase as the customer support are useless, they always process the chargeback but I doubt they know what they are doing. Is it case now of complaint/final decision and ombudsman? Surely Chase should be providing the evidence so you can contest it and push to pre arb

I don't have their final response letter and it's only 6 weeks now since my first complaint to Chase. My last communication with Chase was on the 28th April. Still no proof from the merchant.

From what I'm reading chase sound terrible

Send them this in your next communications

https://www.finextra.com/blogposting/28365/neobanks-pay-attention-illegal-gambling-payments-could-sink-you

That’s the sort of stuff I did on the first one I had a response of we don’t usually do 12.7 invalid data but the evidence you have provided means we will. I think this time I am exhausted with it all and just chosen path of least resistance. I do have evidence of chasing merchants and screens for payment processors that I claimed didn’t go through but not as robust as last time due to just wanting to see if I can get it back and move on.

Totally understand pal. I can’t risk Cifas markers so only way for me

Yeah I work in finance so same for me but I am just playing daft that this is the product and nothing received - trying to shift the onus onto the merchants to prove I haven’t had anything.