Hi Branislav and jenwing116, looks like a juicy one this one. Let me run through what I can see here.
Looking back to September 12th a withdrawal request was requested for $646.21. This was subsequently denied as there were missing verification documents which were required in order to proceed with the payout request. All fine no issues here.
Documents seemed to be received on both the 13th and the 14th, however there was a question why the surname on your account with Spinfinity was changed multiple times. This does raise red flags with any casino you visit.
After some communication with the player, or in the players own words she 'got mouthy' with us which was essentially the players downfall in this case. The player admitted that she had charged back thousands of dollars at another casino online that is not in our group, boasting about the chargeback and using that as her threat leverage. The players account was all but verified, it seemed we just needed one document and the cashout was ready for her. Unfortunately due to the following boast, our cashier department had to reflect on the threat given and reacted appropriately...
Player stated...
"I ended up having to chargeback thousands of dollars to Luckyland Casino. They were not happy but my bank loves to chargeback casinos who don't pay on winnings...So it's in your best interest to handle this or I'll simply charge back all the money I've spent to date at your casino in order to win that $600."
As we now see this player has previous for chargebacks and is quite clearly a high risk customer for any online casino. As a direct result of this, the decision was made to refund the players deposits and enforce the ban. This was not done to avoid paying out a small win, but for the security of the casino. Following this very clear threat, it was perceived that if the win of $646 was paid out, due to the players attitude and behaviour, it was clear to the caisno that the intent was there, which would see the deposits would be charged back regardless at a later date.
The differing details for the same player between the two accounts was the reason that the player was asked about the cards and addresses for verification between casinos. It's understandable that people move house or have expired credit cards, but as a matter of KYC we need to ensure that everything is in order as a responsibility to our customers.
Either way, this would be a lose lose situation for the casino, if we had paid out the win, we'd get notified of chargebacks down the line, so the player would walk away with their deposits over time ($2,065) AND the win amount ($646). So the justifyable decision was taken to refund the deposits only and close the players account due to the risk posed by this player, and for her love of charging back her deposits at online casinos.
Taking all the above into account, the decision of the casino will not change and there will be no further action on this complaint. The player states they have copies of the commincations, as do we. It's all recorded for both ours and players security should it every be called upon, as in this situation for example. The ban is in effect indefinitely across all our sister casinos no and in the future.
Hi Branislav and jenwing116, looks like a juicy one this one. Let me run through what I can see here.
Looking back to September 12th a withdrawal request was requested for $646.21. This was subsequently denied as there were missing verification documents which were required in order to proceed with the payout request. All fine no issues here.
Documents seemed to be received on both the 13th and the 14th, however there was a question why the surname on your account with Spinfinity was changed multiple times. This does raise red flags with any casino you visit.
After some communication with the player, or in the players own words she 'got mouthy' with us which was essentially the players downfall in this case. The player admitted that she had charged back thousands of dollars at another casino online that is not in our group, boasting about the chargeback and using that as her threat leverage. The players account was all but verified, it seemed we just needed one document and the cashout was ready for her. Unfortunately due to the following boast, our cashier department had to reflect on the threat given and reacted appropriately...
Player stated...
"I ended up having to chargeback thousands of dollars to Luckyland Casino. They were not happy but my bank loves to chargeback casinos who don't pay on winnings...So it's in your best interest to handle this or I'll simply charge back all the money I've spent to date at your casino in order to win that $600."
As we now see this player has previous for chargebacks and is quite clearly a high risk customer for any online casino. As a direct result of this, the decision was made to refund the players deposits and enforce the ban. This was not done to avoid paying out a small win, but for the security of the casino. Following this very clear threat, it was perceived that if the win of $646 was paid out, due to the players attitude and behaviour, it was clear to the caisno that the intent was there, which would see the deposits would be charged back regardless at a later date.
The differing details for the same player between the two accounts was the reason that the player was asked about the cards and addresses for verification between casinos. It's understandable that people move house or have expired credit cards, but as a matter of KYC we need to ensure that everything is in order as a responsibility to our customers.
Either way, this would be a lose lose situation for the casino, if we had paid out the win, we'd get notified of chargebacks down the line, so the player would walk away with their deposits over time ($2,065) AND the win amount ($646). So the justifyable decision was taken to refund the deposits only and close the players account due to the risk posed by this player, and for her love of charging back her deposits at online casinos.
Taking all the above into account, the decision of the casino will not change and there will be no further action on this complaint. The player states they have copies of the commincations, as do we. It's all recorded for both ours and players security should it every be called upon, as in this situation for example. The ban is in effect indefinitely across all our sister casinos no and in the future.