Resolved Casino La Vida witholding balance of 1232GBP after 5 weeks of stalling

[slottymcslot]

Hi guys

On June 27th, I signed up to Casino La Vida. On June 28th, I requested a withdrawal of 1232GBP. The same day I asked to supply ID/documents, standard, so I sent my UK driving licence, UK passport and a recent bank statement.

July 2nd, I was asked to send a 2nd mailed document. The same day, jsut a short while later, they instead asked for notarised documents. I had certified copies of my ID on file of my passport/driving licence, which I sent. For anyone who doesn't know what a certified copy is here is a description on the UK governments website:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

A week passed and I heard nothing, so I spoke with someone who said they had an error with their system, and could I send again and they would review my documents within an hour. I duly did so, then was immediately emailed telling me they had a backlog and it would take longer than anticipated.

Eventually, July 21st, receipt and acceptance was confirmed. However on July 26th, I received a request for another utility bill, with the email quoting the words:

"We do require a document, that was received via post, at your residence, to prove your address.

We do apologize for the inconvenience, however, if the casino security team are not happy with a document, a withdrawal will not be paid before an alternative is presented.

If your are absolutely unable to provide a different document, you will be able to request a bank statement from your bank and have them mail it to you. This should, and normally does, suffice."

I then sent a statement of a DIFFERENT bank account. So now, Casino La Vida had been sent copies of my passport and driving licence and passport, certified copies of my passport and driving licence, and two different bank statements.

They THEN asked for ANOTHER document, and said a mobile phone bill would suffice. At great trouble I acquired one, as I am on a iphone contract with O2 and as standard they don't give them out, I had to give up a lot of time to fight tooth and nail to get it.

THEN, July 30th, I get this:

"Thank you for your time and efforts with sending in your verification documents. According to the feedback from our Player Security Department, they require the following NOTARIZED copies:

- Color copies of the front and back of your passport or ID notarized by your local authority before sending them

We kindly request from you to please scan and e-mail these documents to the following e-mail addresses: [email protected]

I can see that this has been a lengthy and frustrating process for you and I would like to resolve it for you right away, however, in order for me to speed up this process I urgently need these documents from you."

At this point I'd had enough and was about to post on here but I again sent my certified copies to try and sort this (they were originally sent July 2nd), which would be "reviewed in the next 24-48 hours". 4 days later, nothing, so I sent a general email to them detailing the whole process. I also messaged the Casino La Vida rep on here. A few hours later I receive this:

"Thank you for contacting Casino Support.

Your feedback is greatly appreciated and i do hope that this mail finds you well.

Sadly, this account was locked by our Player Security Team due to Irregular playing behavior, which has lead the casino withholding cash-ins and/or confiscating all winnings.

Please contact us again, should you have any further queries.

Best Regards"

LOL. So why lead me on a merry dance for 5 weeks? Why slow me down at every turn and ask for documents that cost money to acquire? Not that I would've accepted their decision if this was their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd email (basically before they asked for documents which cost the consumer) but this is jsut not acceptable.

Unfortunately for me, I did not know Casino La Vida were under new ownership, ownership I have a chequered past with. Due to the non-transparency of their ownership at the time I signed up I didn't know they were Fortune Lounge/Digimedia. If I did, I wouldn't have signed up to another casino of theirs. I only knew once they emailed me asking for documents. Here is my issue with them in the past:

https://sussexmskpartnershipeast.com/forum...ating-over-4000gbp-in-winnings.59961/?t=59961

This is why I'm posting here and not PAB'ing. They're jsut not going to pay with a PAB process. I messaged the rep hoping to get a resolution, but it's clear they flagged me of an AP of some type. But they led me in circles for 5 weeks, wasted my time, attempted to waste my money (they didn't like when I sent certified docs (which you can get done free of charge from a policeman for example) instead of notarised) - when I supplied every possible document they could ask for, they hit me with the usual spirit of the bonus stuff.

I am not going to waste Max' time chasing up another PAB for me with the same group - he helped me greatly in the past and I don't want to abuse that. I didn't know Digimedia owned Casino La Vida, if I did, I wouldn't have signed up, just as I haven't freshly signed up to any of their casinos this year (I did give them the benefit of the doubt on my earlier issue with them and played a bit more). I have now compiled a full lsit of 30+ casinos owned by this group and will be 100% sure I don't signup to any of them again.

You want to hit me with a catch all anti-AP or whatever rule? Fine, do it right away. I'll still fight you with your licencing body, and report to the ASA/Trading standards/UKGC, but I wouldn't be posting here detailing a very unfair timeline of treatment. Clearly, they are purposefully taking a hard line with me and seemed to have done so since I requested a withdrawal, with their constant rebuttals. What I will not have is my time, and potentially my money wasted. At least not without telling people about it. If they want to come on here and start posting details of my game history, go ahead. I played slots in a way that they have been very public about "disliking" - but this is what you get when you don't have clear Ts and Cs. That's why I don't play slots there anymore. Sadly, their ownership was not clear and thus, how was I supposed to know? Many companies such as BGO are happy to take my business the way I play slots, with clearly defined max/min bets. Anyway, I'm rambling, The main crux/gripe of this for me is they asked for NOTARISED documents when they had no intention of paying me anyway (it seems). That is jsut not on.

If they're trying to make an example out of me, they went the wrong way about it.

C'est La Vie, Casino La Vida.

slottymcslot

PS I appreciate I will not have sympathy in some quarters, and perhaps even flamed. nonetheless, I still feel extremely aggreived at this.

 

[vinylweatherman]

You should PAB.

They are not "officially" the same group at all, and a PAB would be very helpful in establishing the true nature of any interconnections they may have.

The excuse about "Irregular play" is total bullshit on their part, else this would have been their FIRST excuse for non payment, not their last ditch defence once you had jumped through that impressive array of hoops.

There is some other reason for non payment that they are not prepared to give out, so a PAB is what it is going to take to get to the bottom of it. There is no way it would have needed all these documents to establish that you were the player involved in the previous case, and at a time before Palace Group and La Vida changed ownership (with the change at palace group at least not having been formally confirmed).

Digimedia are also about to pull out of the UK, so there is no incentive for them to keep their UK players happy, and no long term prospect of them being able to win back any monies they have paid out to a UK player either.

Betway seem to have split away from Palace Group to become independently operated again. They WILL be getting a UK license, and Digimedia are set to pass their UK player base over to them.

When it comes to UK players deciding where to play next, getting to grips with these changes is going to be very helpful.

 

[slottymcslot]

You should PAB.

They are not "officially" the same group at all, and a PAB would be very helpful in establishing the true nature of any interconnections they may have.

The excuse about "Irregular play" is total bullshit on their part, else this would have been their FIRST excuse for non payment, not their last ditch defence once you had jumped through that impressive array of hoops.

There is some other reason for non payment that they are not prepared to give out, so a PAB is what it is going to take to get to the bottom of it. There is no way it would have needed all these documents to establish that you were the player involved in the previous case, and at a time before Palace Group and La Vida changed ownership (with the change at palace group at least not having been formally confirmed).

Digimedia are also about to pull out of the UK, so there is no incentive for them to keep their UK players happy, and no long term prospect of them being able to win back any monies they have paid out to a UK player either.

Betway seem to have split away from Palace Group to become independently operated again. They WILL be getting a UK license, and Digimedia are set to pass their UK player base over to them.

When it comes to UK players deciding where to play next, getting to grips with these changes is going to be very helpful.

Hi Vinyl

Thanks for your response. I think I have as well as I possibly could have detailed, given reasons why they are being "difficult" with me. I've probably already broken the rule for being able to PAB on this matter, and my opinion is the casino would give the hand to the face treatment on this anyway. If I am in fact wrong, it's cost me over a grand. If they're pulling out of the UK market, just.. ugh.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi Vinyl

Thanks for your response. I think I have as well as I possibly could have detailed, given reasons why they are being "difficult" with me. I've probably already broken the rule for being able to PAB on this matter, and my opinion is the casino would give the hand to the face treatment on this anyway. If I am in fact wrong, it's cost me over a grand. If they're pulling out of the UK market, just.. ugh.

The earlier case was them enforcing a 6x max withdrawal term, not about doubts as to your identity or claims of irregular play. The case also highlighted that Palace Group were not prepared to do what it takes to remain accredited by supplying an active rep who could deal with player issues.

La Vida is a different casino, currently accredited and with a rep. If they too are no longer prepared to deal with PABs or other player issues through being part of Palace group in some way, we need to know, and a PAB is how this can be discovered.

You have proved your ID to them, they have not claimed that you have broken any specific terms, therefore under the standards of accreditation they should pay you, even if they then decide to boot you. If they decide not to cooperate any longer, they may as well join palace group in the "reservation".

Max will be the ultimate judge as to whether you have broken the rules for being able to PAB, you should have asked him earlier rather than assuming that a PAB would be out of the question. You would have had a better chance with a PAB before posting the details of the case than now. There is also eCogra. You could complain about the ridiculous documentation requests and why you had to go through all this before they noticed any signs of this "irregular play" that would have voided the winnings regardless of any issues with the documentation.

 

[suzecat]

The earlier case was them enforcing a 6x max withdrawal term, not about doubts as to your identity or claims of irregular play. The case also highlighted that Palace Group were not prepared to do what it takes to remain accredited by supplying an active rep who could deal with player issues.

La Vida is a different casino, currently accredited and with a rep. If they too are no longer prepared to deal with PABs or other player issues through being part of Palace group in some way, we need to know, and a PAB is how this can be discovered.

You have proved your ID to them, they have not claimed that you have broken any specific terms, therefore under the standards of accreditation they should pay you, even if they then decide to boot you. If they decide not to cooperate any longer, they may as well join palace group in the "reservation".

Max will be the ultimate judge as to whether you have broken the rules for being able to PAB, you should have asked him earlier rather than assuming that a PAB would be out of the question. You would have had a better chance with a PAB before posting the details of the case than now. There is also eCogra. You could complain about the ridiculous documentation requests and why you had to go through all this before they noticed any signs of this "irregular play" that would have voided the winnings regardless of any issues with the documentation.

This whole thing feels more like a casino trying to "encourage" the OP to reverse and lose.

 

[dunover]

Judging by the old Ruby Fortune issue (where you were eventually paid) do you think this delaying is out of spite, or a result of another issue? It seems very unfortunate that you keep getting asked for notarized ID, which is unusual for UK players. You can still PAB, all you've done is detail your issue and as long as there is no further factual comment other than banal posts keeping us up to date I can't see a problem.
IF these 2 casinos are related closer than we are aware of, then maybe they can use the notarized ID you already sent if you haven't moved or changed any details.

 

[fun4all]

This whole thing feels more like a casino trying to "encourage" the OP to reverse and lose.

I think its far more than that now they have just confiscated the win after all the requests complied with.

 

[Jasminebed]

I think you should PAB. These issues are not a misuse of Maxd's time, you may bring as many PABs against accredited casinos as you need to.

First, you must contact the rep for Casino LaVida here, and see if he can resolve this issue for you. Give him a reasonable amount of time, at least a week I suggest.

If that doesn't get your payment re-instated and paid, then PAB. Don't post further about your issue except perhaps to say you have made a PAB.

 

[Balthazar]

Unfortunately for me, I did not know Casino La Vida were under new ownership, ownership I have a chequered past with. Due to the non-transparency of their ownership at the time I signed up I didn't know they were Fortune Lounge/Digimedia.

So you're saying that the RedFlush group (La Vida) has been acquired by Fortune Lounge? Can we have a source here please?

La Vida always finds a way to be some kind of PITA but they always end up paying. They aren't rogue or dishonest (they are even accredited here) but they are old school, which means that they aren't part of the "fast, smooth and easy" new kind of casino.

Rep's name is Redflush Host

 

[fun4all]

So you're saying that the RedFlush group (La Vida) has been acquired by Fortune Lounge? Can we have a source here please?

La Vida always finds a way to be some kind of PITA but they always end up paying. They aren't rogue or dishonest (they are even accredited here) but they are old school, which means that they aren't part of the "fast, smooth and easy" new kind of casino.

Rep's name is Redflush Host

Yeah I have never seen or heard of Red Flush not paying or doing anything at all that anyone could consider bad. I always considered them safe to play at. For this reason I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt here and would love to hear their reasoning.

 

[suzecat]

I think its far more than that now they have just confiscated the win after all the requests complied with.

That sucks!!! If it were me, I would PAB.

 

[mattsgame]

So you're saying that the RedFlush group (La Vida) has been acquired by Fortune Lounge? Can we have a source here please?

This is one of a few threads around here. RED FLUSH & FORTUNE LOUNGE

 

[slottymcslot]

Hi guys

I will respond to your posts later (thanks in advance for them) - I'm really not sure what to do. I did however receive this email today from First Web casino:

Dear x,

Thank you for sending us your Casino Authorization Documents for your First Web account, xxx.

This is just a short letter confirming that all documents have been received and approved. Please contact us if you have any questions.

That's interesting since I never sent any documents to First Web. Until I saw this at the bottom of the email:

Digimedia Ltd, of Villa Seminia 8, Sir Temi Zammit Avenue, Malta, is authorized and licensed by the Lotteries and Gaming Authority of Malta. License numbers LGA/CL1/542/2008 and LGA/CL3/542/2008 were both issued on 16 June 2010

So a casino I absolutely know 100% weren't Digimedia when I signed up back in 2013, are now sending me emails confirming receipt of documents when I didn't send them. Casino La Vida wouldn't accept mine for 5 weeks despite a barrage of documents and interaction. Just what is going on?

 

[maphesto]

Just what is going on?

Hi again Slotty! The thing is that many MG casino groups have lately joined the Digimedia group and are using their license together. They do not tell us which ones who share support etc. but they have nowadays much closer connections than they had when you signed up.

To your issue, I suggest you ask both the LaVida rep and First Web rep about this!

It seems like they actually approved your docs at LaVida and answered from the First Web support.

Good luck!

 

[Balthazar]

This is one of a few threads around here. RED FLUSH & FORTUNE LOUNGE

Just did a quick Google search and....

I don't know if I'm allowed to post this (if not please remove) considering that it's from the infamous AussiDave but that's a heck of an interesting read:

Outdated URL (Invalid)

 

[slottymcslot]

Hi guys

I THOUGHT I had contacted the rep already, I contacted Wayne:

https://sussexmskpartnershipeast.com/forums/members/20172/

Yet you guys linked me to "Rithen", here:



Should I contact Rithen too? Wayne has not been online since July 24th, so he hasn't seen my message yet. I originally thought he had seen my message, as a few hours later my account was locked etc., and that he wouldn't be helping me, hence why I started this thread. That seems like a coincidence in retrospect and didn't correlate.

I am very grateful for your responses. I will give the rep(s) a chance to respond to me. I jumped the gun a little bit in posting this public thread so I'd better not say anything more on the subject for now.

SMcS

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi guys

I THOUGHT I had contacted the rep already, I contacted Wayne:

https://sussexmskpartnershipeast.com/forums/members/20172/

Yet you guys linked me to "Rithen", here:



Should I contact Rithen too? Wayne has not been online since July 24th, so he hasn't seen my message yet. I originally thought he had seen my message, as a few hours later my account was locked etc., and that he wouldn't be helping me, hence why I started this thread. That seems like a coincidence in retrospect and didn't correlate.

I am very grateful for your responses. I will give the rep(s) a chance to respond to me. I jumped the gun a little bit in posting this public thread so I'd better not say anything more on the subject for now.

SMcS

Both are equally valid contacts.

If Wayne has gone AWOL as a result of the changes, it seems no one bothered to tell Bryan so that the information provided to members could be updated. I am pretty sure Rithen is still around as part of the CS team. This of course assumes that the changes will not result in job losses amongst the CS teams with all CS being handled by the main Fortune Lounge team.

 

[slottymcslot]

Both are equally valid contacts.

If Wayne has gone AWOL as a result of the changes, it seems no one bothered to tell Bryan so that the information provided to members could be updated. I am pretty sure Rithen is still around as part of the CS team. This of course assumes that the changes will not result in job losses amongst the CS teams with all CS being handled by the main Fortune Lounge team.

Hi Vinyl

Thanks for your response, I guess it was a dumb question, of course I should message Rithen. I will do so now.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Just did a quick Google search and....

I don't know if I'm allowed to post this (if not please remove) considering that it's from the infamous AussiDave but that's a heck of an interesting read:

Outdated URL (Invalid)

Unfortunately, he has an axe to grind, a very big one, and he was banned from here for not being balanced and impartial. He seems to have a double agenda, one of which is trashing this site, even if the other is exposing rogue dealings in the industry.

His info on eCogra is outdated, and much of what he regards as negative about eCogra changed for the better when there was a management buyout that removed their dependency on big companies like Microgaming and Cassava.

He is right about the secretive nature of the consolidation into Digimedia, and the fact that some players have been mislead, even suffered, as a result of believing the lie that the individual parts were completely independent.

It's still not clear how Palace group are involved, even if they are, but the word is that when Digimedia pulls out of the UK later this month, the UK players will be passed/sold to Betway, which was part of the Palace Group until recently. This does suggest some kind of business connection between Digimedia and Betway (Palace Group?), although it could be one of those one off deals like we saw between some Microgaming casinos and Jackpot Capital when Microgaming pulled out of the US.

 

[dunover]

Unfortunately, he has an axe to grind, a very big one, and he was banned from here for not being balanced and impartial. He seems to have a double agenda, one of which is trashing this site, even if the other is exposing rogue dealings in the industry.

His info on eCogra is outdated, and much of what he regards as negative about eCogra changed for the better when there was a management buyout that removed their dependency on big companies like Microgaming and Cassava.

He is right about the secretive nature of the consolidation into Digimedia, and the fact that some players have been mislead, even suffered, as a result of believing the lie that the individual parts were completely independent.

It's still not clear how Palace group are involved, even if they are, but the word is that when Digimedia pulls out of the UK later this month, the UK players will be passed/sold to Betway, which was part of the Palace Group until recently. This does suggest some kind of business connection between Digimedia and Betway (Palace Group?), although it could be one of those one off deals like we saw between some Microgaming casinos and Jackpot Capital when Microgaming pulled out of the US.

Roxy Palace is now boasting it's 'UK Licensed' but in their words 'licensed for UK players' on their site. Mmmm..

 

[chayton]

I jumped the gun a little bit in posting this public thread so I'd better not say anything more on the subject for now.

If you can't edit your first post, maybe you could try reporting your own post to see if one of the mods can temporarily hide it or add spoiler tags or something...?

 

[fortunelounge]

Response - RedFlush Host

Hi slottymcslot,

I am investigating your query with the Risk and Banking Team and will be responding very shortly.

I do apologize for the delay in getting back to you.
Thank you for your patience while I review all the information on your query.

regards

Rithen

 

[fortunelounge]

Hi,

We have reviewed slottymcslot’s account and, apart from breaching our term 14 regarding irregular playing behavior, we found several discrepancies in the documents that were provided.

After requesting notarized documents (something we do not ask for unless it is absolutely necessary), we found irregularities in these documents as well. All attempts to contact the solicitor who notarized the documents were unsuccessful as the number did not belong to that person.

Unfortunately due to all discrepancies and irregularities, this account was locked and the winnings confiscated.

I have communicated this to the slottymcslot via a PM as well.

Regards

Rithen

 

[slottymcslot]

Hi,

We have reviewed slottymcslot’s account and, apart from breaching our term 14 regarding irregular playing behavior, we found several discrepancies in the documents that were provided.

After requesting notarized documents (something we do not ask for unless it is absolutely necessary), we found irregularities in these documents as well. All attempts to contact the solicitor who notarized the documents were unsuccessful as the number did not belong to that person.

Unfortunately due to all discrepancies and irregularities, this account was locked and the winnings confiscated.

I have communicated this to the slottymcslot via a PM as well.

Regards

Rithen

I'm replying here publically, because what Rithen just replied to me was astounding:

1st false accusation:

"Employing a betting strategy by which high value bets are placed on games where the weighting contribution towards play through requirements is less than 30% (video poker, card games, table games), then decreasing the best size to lower than half of the prior "

Only slots were played.

2nd:

"Observations of playing patterns such as the playing for deliberate minimum risk, equal, zero marginal or hedge betting may not be considered as playing in the appropriate spirit for the purposes of meeting bonus wagering requirements."

Spirit of the bonus..

3rd:

"Placing single bets whereby the wager consists of the majority of the total available balance and the bonus balance contributing to a significant portion of that balance"

Stayed well within the maxbet rule.

"Based on our document review process, the documents you had provided were flagged for further review due to discrepancies within them
We had requested for notarized documents and the documents we received were not acceptable as it has not met the requirements for official notarization of documents"

Certified docs. Accompanying link to explain what a certified doc is.

"As part of the investigative process, our Risk Team had attempted to contact the solicitor used for notarizing the documents however it went to another person altogether"

It was done by a lawyer. Maybe it went to their office? Why not ask me? Why not ask for me to get it certified somewhere else? I assure you, I am who I am and willing to do whatever to prove it, just not pay for notarised documents, when certified is the same thing, and can be acquired free, FROM A POLICEMAN no less.

And finally..

"Based on this investigation carried out by the Risk and banking teams, we have closed your account and confiscated all winnings on the account.
The account will remain closed indefinitely and no new accounts will be allowed to opened/played on by yourself with our group of casinos.
We have also submitted this information to the industry shared negative database.

We consider this matter closed and final. There will be no further correspondence on the matter.
You are welcome to escalate the matter to the Gaming industry regulator via their website: www.ecogra.com"

So I have been shared to the industry negative database, for what??????? You couldn't get the lawyer who certified my ID on the phone? This is absolutely astounding!!!!!!!!

Max and "maphesto" (probably Bryan too) have access to my real name, I would ask it's not published here but they can go ahead and google it and see what they come up with. I am no fraud.

 

[Tirilej]

Wow, say no more. Please go on and PAB right away.

 

[slottymcslot]

Max has told me I can PAB, which I will do today (and abide by the rules after this post, thanks Max). In the meantime I would just like to say that I strongly advise the casino that mistakenly accusing someone of fraud (without giving a chance to prove otherwise and let's face it, passport, driving licence, 2 bank statements and a phone bill should suffice) and then putting them on an industry wide blacklist is probably not the wisest practice. I now have to cease all my online gaming (which is all 100% legitimate - I also play poker, and this creates a big problem if I'm on some mysterious blacklist) as I'm not even sure what I have been added to, but it doesn't sound good and is maybe something that a gaming company could refer to to not pay me legitimate winnings (+deposits)

 

[slottymcslot]

I also want to add (and this is the final thing I'll say publically) the solicitor (lawyer) who certified my documents added his solicitors # on there, so it is easy to look it up on any legal database. The solicitor is also not private and works for the UK government. By typing the address the solicitor wrote on the copies into google, this information would confirm that. If they match the phone number supplied on the certified copies to the address, they would see the solicitor supplied his direct work number - it's a big department so maybe it changed. There is also a main switchboard number that I found in 20 seconds with google. CLV didn't try too hard. However I am going to double check the direct number given on the certified copy to see if it did indeed change

If indeed they think these are "fake" as I seem to be accused of, then Casino La Vida should contact the relevant authorities.

OR they could call the number listed, and if the individual is not available to leave a message with a name and number so they could call you back. You know, rather than calling me a fraud and "industry wide" blacklisting me.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I also want to add (and this is the final thing I'll say publically) the solicitor (lawyer) who certified my documents added his solicitors # on there, so it is easy to look it up on any legal database. The solicitor is also not private and works for the UK government. By typing the address the solicitor wrote on the copies into google, this information would confirm that. If they match the phone number supplied on the certified copies to the address, they would see the solicitor supplied his direct work number - it's a big department so maybe it changed. There is also a main switchboard number that I found in 20 seconds with google. CLV didn't try too hard. However I am going to double check the direct number given on the certified copy to see if it did indeed change

If indeed they think these are "fake" as I seem to be accused of, then Casino La Vida should contact the relevant authorities.

OR they could call the number listed, and if the individual is not available to leave a message with a name and number so they could call you back. You know, rather than calling me a fraud and "industry wide" blacklisting me.

You should go back to the solicitor and tell them that according to La Vida, he/she is a fake, and a negative entry has been made on an industry wide database about this. Since the entry has been made on an industry wide database, the solicitor can now take action for libel (you'll have to pay his fees of course). You could also make a complaint under data protection laws about incorrect data being processed about you that amounts to a libellous record having been lodged with a third party database (would be cheaper).

When you PAB, make sure you let Max have the same number so that he can make his own decision as to whether the casino is right to claim it's a fake belonging to another person.

A solicitor should know damn well that if they notarise a document, the recipient of said document is likely to want to get hold of them to verify the matter, so would make sure that they put the correct number on the notary seal. As well as making a confirmation call, the solicitor themselves would need to be licenced to practice so that they show up on the database of practicing solicitors, so it's no good getting a friend to do it an pretend to be a solicitor when the casino phones him. The casino probably suspects that you did just get a friend to do it, and the plan fell apart because you didn't expect the casino to actually phone the number to double check. It is actually a criminal offence to impersonate a solicitor, just Google "Wonga", it's amazing how many people don't actually realise this, including the board of directors at Wonga.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

They are not going to explain the nature of the discrepancies on the documents, but the solicitor could probably guide you as to where you went wrong, such as not being on the electoral roll, or not getting documents updated when moving house.

 

[batman555]

555

xhttp://neverfold.ru/showthread.php?t=61979&page=3

 

[The Dude]

xhttp://neverfold.ru/showthread.php?t=61979&page=3

Not helpful. Please give a synopsis. Thank you.

 

[batman555]

555

I got the prize in this casino with great difficulty after two weeks. Requested a large number of documents. After that, said my Russian passport invalid. ugly casino distressed payments. It is better not to play there. Withdraw more than EUR 1 000 hard

 

[slottymcslot]

Hi guys

I'm here to report that I received full payment of my balance from Digimedia Ltd. today without comment. I'd like to wholeheartedly thank Bryan and Max who between them are responsible for helping me recover over 5300GBP in deposit/winnings over 2 cases this year. I'm personally very fortunate that this site exists.

There are still several issues with this situation unrelated to the PAB which M+B really went out of their way to solve for me (1 - a list of sites owned/associated with Digimedia that I am banned from playing hasn't been supplied, 2 - information about the "industry shared negative database" I was placed on hasn't been supplied nor whether they have taken me off it, and 3 - a retraction of libelous/DofC statements et al) - Hopefully this information is shortly forthcoming. Either way, I'll be contacting Digimedia to try to get a resolution to these matters.

Once again, thank you very much to everyone involved with Casinomeister and this forum!
slottymcslot

 

[The Dude]

Glad to hear. I think I was able to convince them you are a real person not some scammer with faked IDs and bogus notarized docs.

I hope that the rest gets cleared up as well. They should be able to remove you from any black list since you had not done anything wrong. Hopefully they will follow up on this soon.

 

[dunover]

Hi guys

I'm here to report that I received full payment of my balance from Digimedia Ltd. today without comment. I'd like to wholeheartedly thank Bryan and Max who between them are responsible for helping me recover over 5300GBP in deposit/winnings over 2 cases this year. I'm personally very fortunate that this site exists.

There are still several issues with this situation unrelated to the PAB which M+B really went out of their way to solve for me (1 - a list of sites owned/associated with Digimedia that I am banned from playing hasn't been supplied, 2 - information about the "industry shared negative database" I was placed on hasn't been supplied nor whether they have taken me off it, and 3 - a retraction of libelous/DofC statements et al) - Hopefully this information is shortly forthcoming. Either way, I'll be contacting Digimedia to try to get a resolution to these matters.

Once again, thank you very much to everyone involved with Casinomeister and this forum!
slottymcslot

This is the one disadvantage of 'blacklists' as here in the UK you have a right to see files held by third parties either under the FoIA or the DPA - of course IF you're aware the file actually exists.........when they are held offshore it makes things considerably more difficult if not impossible. It would also be interesting to me (and Vinyl no doubt ) to find out which sites ARE actually owned/associated with DM.

 

[slottymcslot]

This is the one disadvantage of 'blacklists' as here in the UK you have a right to see files held by third parties either under the FoIA or the DPA - of course IF you're aware the file actually exists.........when they are held offshore it makes things considerably more difficult if not impossible. It would also be interesting to me (and Vinyl no doubt ) to find out which sites ARE actually owned/associated with DM.

Hi Dunover

Since they paid me, I will give Digimedia an appropriate amount of time in regards to the outstanding issues out of courtesy. As a start however, I'll be contacting the relevant bodies (LGA, Microgaming) to see what's going on with this and then go from there. It's probably for the best I don't post any further on this issue for now until Digimedia contact me personally regarding the outstanding issues and their status, as an unsatisfactory resolution (for me) has further implications.

Cheers
slottymcslot

 

[slottymcslot]

Glad to hear. I think I was able to convince them you are a real person not some scammer with faked IDs and bogus notarized docs.

I hope that the rest gets cleared up as well. They should be able to remove you from any black list since you had not done anything wrong. Hopefully they will follow up on this soon.

Hi mate

Let's hope, it would save a lot of headaches

As for headaches, I plan to drink a nice bottle of red tonight, courtesy of the funds you recouped for me, it's your fault in the morning

I'll let you know what transpires with the other stuff (and if an amiable resolution is reached I am more than happy to post about it here and put this to rest), but thank you (and Max) for your help, maybe I'll have to think up ways of how to publicise my PAB success stories here!

Cheers
slotty

 

[vinylweatherman]

Glad to hear. I think I was able to convince them you are a real person not some scammer with faked IDs and bogus notarized docs.

I hope that the rest gets cleared up as well. They should be able to remove you from any black list since you had not done anything wrong. Hopefully they will follow up on this soon.

They seem to have made some basic errors with their initial investigation, including the claim that the solicitor's number was false (belonging to a completely different person). How can players trust that they will be dealt with fairly if such basic errors can occur during the process of vetting notarised documents.

They also mentioned that discrepancies in the original documents triggered this whole debacle, yet now it would appear that there were no actual problems with the documentation, just insufficient skills in the security department in dealing with the different types of documents being received.

There are plenty of discrepancies in Digimedia's own "documentation", yet this is somehow OK because they are "industry", not players. This has lead some players to erroneously conclude that casino B is dodgy because it appears they are run by the same people as a known dodgy casino A. Just like the dodgy player would, the casinos here seem intent on further obfuscation as to which casinos are included in the brand "Digimedia", from which they sought to ban the OP, and which other players would like to avoid for their own reasons.

At present, it also seems that they would rather pull out of the UK completely rather than face the transparency that is required of a UK licence holder. If Digimedia were to remain in the UK market, the question of a complete list of all Digimedia properties would be answered by accessing the UKGC public databases of licence holders.

 

[fortunelounge]

Finalized Response

Hi All,

We have re-opened the investigation based on new information that was provided to us.

During our review we were able to verify that solicitor with the name however we have yet to confirm that validity of the documents with him.
Also based on all the other supporting information provided, we have decided to re-open the player‘s casino account, and process the withdrawal accordingly.
The account will remain open and available for the player to login and play on.

Thank you to all those that assisted and special thanks to the Administrators of the Forum for their input.

slottymcslot – you have been emailed by the Banking Team with regards to the processed withdrawal.

Regards

Rithen

 

[aceking123]

Hi All,

We have re-opened the investigation based on new information that was provided to us.

During our review we were able to verify that solicitor with the name however we have yet to confirm that validity of the documents with him.
Also based on all the other supporting information provided, we have decided to re-open the player‘s casino account, and process the withdrawal accordingly.
The account will remain open and available for the player to login and play on.

Thank you to all those that assisted and special thanks to the Administrators of the Forum for their input.

slottymcslot – you have been emailed by the Banking Team with regards to the processed withdrawal.

Regards

Rithen

hi rithen have you moved from fortune lounge casinos ?? ?

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi All,

We have re-opened the investigation based on new information that was provided to us.

During our review we were able to verify that solicitor with the name however we have yet to confirm that validity of the documents with him.
Also based on all the other supporting information provided, we have decided to re-open the player‘s casino account, and process the withdrawal accordingly.
The account will remain open and available for the player to login and play on.

Thank you to all those that assisted and special thanks to the Administrators of the Forum for their input.

slottymcslot – you have been emailed by the Banking Team with regards to the processed withdrawal.

Regards

Rithen

A review should not have been necessary in order to verify the solicitor. There is a standard procedure for this, and the information provided on the seal of the document should have been sufficient. Despite the resolution, you still have a solicitor who is "livid" about being branded a fraud by your company.

Something went seriously wrong here in the procedures for validating documents that have been certified by a solicitor. Unless this is addressed, it could happen again, and a peeved solicitor can do far more damage to your company than the odd player who gets branded a fraud.

If you have yet to contact this solicitor to check the documents, then you have left him still thinking your company has branded him a fraud and entered the details for this on a third party database. Any other player who is asked to get their documents certified could also face the same issues.

There is still a question as to how you could have got it so wrong about the phone number being fake, yet now seem happy to accept that it was genuine. It also reopens the wider debate about casinos who claim to have phoned players for verification and failed to get through, yet when the player checks his incoming calls record, there is no record of there having been a missed call from casino security.

I suspect that shoddy internal communications are the root cause, one department offloading the responsibility for making the call to another, with this other department failing to actually carry out the task. The first department then interprets no feedback as meaning the call was made and verification failed. Instead of passing bits and pieces between departments, there should be a single team that oversees the whole process, and has first hand knowledge of what procedures have actually been attempted, and the result.

I have suffered this with Red Flush too, a query being passed to marketing by CS with a promise that someone will get back to me, and it often doesn't happen - complete shambles with internal communications!