Bitcoin Forum

I was a member of fortunejack website for years but recently they made some changes and they are becoming very strict with their KYC policy.
After trying to withdraw 10 mBTC to different casino I had to wait for hours and I received email asking me to complete kyc if I want to withdraw my coins.
I tried talking with Ampera Tornike but they ignore all my posts and messages in forum, and I talked with them before about some issues.
Support is acting like bots and they say team randomly decides to ask people for kyc without any explanations.
I know they can do whatever they want and it's justified by their terms, but ignoring and not talking with people is really low from them.

Situation is worse because they started to freeze accounts from people that had verified account with passed verification:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5411165.0

It's strange that this is happening in the same time so I suggest everyone to stay away from fortunejack website.
With or without passing kyc you are at big risk of getting your account frozen, terminated and coins seized confiscated.
I don't know where Tornike is but this new Ampera guy is a joke (it's the same guy)!
If nothing changes this could ruin their reputation in forum.

Why don't you complete KYC first, and if after completing KYC you can't still withdraw, then you can now complain about any inconvenience and attempt to steal from you, as far as i know Fortunejack is not the only casino that requests for verification, if they have changed their policy to include or make it stricter, i feel customers have to comply or choose another casino.
This case does not have enough proof for you to say Fortunejack does steal coins from people, because that is a serious allegation, the op of that topic has not provided strong evidence for any member to verify what they said.
I feel you are jumping into conclusion very fast.

Because this is my right not to complete kyc and they are the one who made it possible for people to use their website like that.
If I wanted to do verification I would use casinos that doesn't give option to avoid kyc.

I can easily show my account having zero balance, nothing showed in transaction history, and I am not some newbie member to made up fantasy claims.
I don't know what else to say than stolen coins when balance is zero and no withdraw transaction.

Have you read their terms and conditions? Every casino likely can ask for KYC anytime as far as I know. I haven't read their terms though but assume this is something noticeable before claiming them. I am not much related to gambling, but I hate too KYC as well. Due to KYC, I have been just using one exchange. What the hell most exchanges require fucking KYC.

1. It's not steal or frozen : You can withdraw the amount after the "KYC".
2. Based on the "Term & Condition" they're required to ask you some "KYC", everyone who are already registered, join and player is agree by "checklist" the T&C coloum.
3. Not only "Fortune Jack", In any CASINO they always ask some "KYC". You can check their Term & Condition, it's a bullshit if they not asking a "KYC" unless you're playing with on-chain gambling (Dice or lottery with a smart contract)

Why need to talk with other support or their team? Is clear what you need is to complete the "KYC", If you asking the reason they can tell you or without tell you the reason why getting a "KYC".

However, based on my speculation/experience <<< It's just speculation.
- Most people who are get "KYC" is from Sportbet Player or there has some abused promotion/multi-account by referring your own account. But, If you not doing abused player at-all most the reason sportbet player always have a high chance getting "KYC" comparing a normal gambling user like Livegames.

Without much emphasise, its not uncommon for users to just agree with T&C even without going through them. Notably, most company T&C are similar and as such, an idea of the formal and the desire to play on a particular platform makes one care less of the T&C one is agreeing to. As much as it could be in there right to demand, I suppose the support should be available to communicate with its customers and clarify repeated issues.

Haven't seen this for a second time, I think it should be a matter of urgency for Fortunejack.com as it could tarnish there image on the forum. I've always known Fortunejack.com to come with a good reputation and I know this isn't something there support can't handle.
Random selection of users might be in line with there policy but, this is disturbing as well as, KYC is not very welcoming amongst crypto enthusiast whom are concerned of there privacy.

It would have been more better should they find users to exhibit some shady behaviour or possibly in some hack attempts rather than randomise the process as OP claims. Not like, that's what Fortunejack.com is doing anyway as, I'm not completely knowledgeable on these claims.

Support should be active and sort out these issues.

Man, notblox1 after years of using casinos I am quiet surprise that you are not aware of the current trend where casinos can ask for KYC any time they feel like. This is not 2014 or 2015 where services were not strict with KYC requirements.

Rule number 1:

By the time you sign up for a casino, be ready for KYC verification at any time. Always confirm this by reading their terms. If you don't like KYC verification, don't sign up  ;)

Whether you ask the support questions and they answer them or not, you are still going to end up verifying the account if you want that withdrawal processed. It's fucked, but that's the trend these days.

You've summed it all up here. There is an unstoppable trend, which I have commented on in other threads and that is to more KYC. There are still casinos that do not ask for KYC under any condition but most may require it.

Information of Crypto Casinos License and KYC requirements
 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5381143.0)

In this future list, the casinos that do not require KYC in any way will practically disappear (there are almost none left) and the ones that say Yes (if needed) will become mostly Yes.


And the trend that will continue in the future.

Casinos were very important in the history of Bitcoin and remain so. They also represented an important privacy space that has been shrinking and will continue to shrink.

@notblox1 are you sure that Tornike is still active fortunejack support because he might leave the job and the reason why he is not answering your even if you have previous discussion. I understand the frustration and I know many user here doesn’t understand your concern because they still didn’t experience your position right now but I undergo this before and I have no choice than to comply because support is not giving shit to my message unless it’s about completing the KYC.

This is sucks way on how casino handle this matter but we have no choice rather than to comply if we really want to out our money. This is charge to experience.

Hello,

It's Tornike here also known as ampera.

Please remind me of your FJ username and I will handle the rest.


Cheers,



-
[OP identified. We'll be replying soon with the decision.]

This is new email I received today:


Since I didn't won any big amount of money ($10k Majestic was very close last week) and I didn't do anything suspicious, I won't pass kyc right now,
and if this is not resolved I will personally terminate my account myself before deadline and stop using Fortunejack.
I hope my 10mBTC will make someone from FJ happy, or just make donation to some people in need.

update:
Now I can't even log in to my account, so how am I suppose to do anything?!

https://images2.imgbox.com/d6/54/nLIMlgis_o.jpg

I think there could be an overlap between what Tornike/ampera stated and the email you received therefore give it a little time and see if Tornike/ampera can sort this out for you.

Given the time between him posting "Please remind me of your FJ username and I will handle the rest" and you receiving the email from the company was less than 2 hours. Did you send a PM to Tornike/ampera to ask if the email was the final word on the matter.

In my opinion the common sense approach from not only FortuneJack but all casinos would be to allow users to withdraw but putting them on alert that future withdrawals would only take place if KYC was passed. That would allow members to withdraw the full amount and not go back to them if they did not want to provide KYC and that would be the fair way forward.

No I am not giving FJ any more time, they sadly proved they can't be trusted at all.
First they ask me for verification, but in same time they didn't allow me to login to my account.
Than I talked with Tornike ampera and my account magically gets open for login again, after that I asked support to terminate my account and donate my coins.
They don't want to do that and they are forcing me to reply to email, and for what? More talking?? Nah.

In the example case the OP was guilty of sending random ID. I don't think it's relevant in your case.

I think you need to help them and give them the time. They are following the usual procedures imo. I mean not letting you to login.

Isn't the KYC shit casinos are doing so much of these days due to licenses? I dislike the way that some casinos go about the kyc process and the fact that it turns into players getting funds confiscated.  I feel like they shoukd have to pay the player his winnings and then ban the account once paid out as long as the win is legit.

I also feel like they should require kyc upon creation of the account. Deposits are disabled on all new accounts until kyc is passed if they are a casino that pushes kyc.

Deposits should also be disabled on all existing accounts until kyc is passed as well. This way Noone can be hit with the bullshit kyc later.

Yes a casino is going to lose customers because if this, but why not be 100% upfront with players vs trying  to fuck them in the end?

Help them how exactly?
Waiting is not going to help to both sides, and I don't care so much about damn 10mBTC.
My coins are being confiscated without any reason, and FJ legal team is scared they could be sued or arrested if they don't have my valuable documents for 10mBTC  or equivalent of $200  :D
All this because they use some third party partner, and they now ask me to trust this third party, no way!
Unknown third party is now in control of FJ.

I didn't even win anything or some big reward, not counting $50 free bet from Majestic7 I won't use, all I wanted is to send this coins to different casino for one bet.

I agree totally with this, it looks like a scam behavior trying to trick and lure people to register and send money.
Roulette should be used in casino games, not for randomly asking members for kyc and seizing their coins.
Let's say I win some big money, I would accept any verification no problem, but out of principle I won't do it for peanut money.
Bottom line, FJ if you want to act like this than stop accepting registration without kyc and than I would know not to use your website.

You guys are off your rockers if you think they should enforce KYC on registration. You both know as well as I that it's simply not possible and will likely never happen.

Not sure why you are so mad @notblox1, as you seemingly don't care about the "peanut money" yet you put up a bunch of warnings and spew this crap while not even having the patience to give them your time, lol.

Either way I'll eagerly wait for you and @yahoo62278 to advocate for this change on a global scale across casinos, fiat and crypto alike, to request KYC upon registration  ::)

If you're really don't like a casino that will ask you KYC in the future, I will say it's better for you to avoid the whole casinos that have a mandatory KYC including the casino you promoted under your signature and also centralized exchanges.

Anonibet, BCHgames, Bitvest, Freebitco.in and 777coin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5381143.0) seems be fine since it's currently no KYC. I have an account on Fortunejack and I trust Fortunejack since I don't ever face any problem, I'm always ready if the casino will ask KYC in the future.

I am not asking for that, but it would be much more fair than this trickery.

I am not mad and I have patience because I talked with them behind the scenes.
I know you are promoting them in forum so you could be a bit bias maybe ;) but I only created one topic and today I added personal text after talking with ampera.
I can always show our conversations, details and proof, but I wont do that because I respect privacy.

I didn't expect you would advocate seizing of customers coins and defending casino without really knowing the whole story ;)
I will repeat, nobody was advocating for global kyc for all casinos.

"advocating seizing of customers coins and defending casino" - yeah right, fuck off!

The one guy you linked to was said to have sent in multiple, different, ID documents which is obviously a big no-no no matter the setting. And then it's you who just refuse to send in KYC because it is "peanuts money" so please do tell me how I'm advocating for seizure of coins when you quite literally above agreed with yahoo about enforcing KYC upon registration because you think it's bullshit that it happens later on.

Thanks for being so polite... I didn't expect this from you, and you are the one being mad here, but I don't know why exactly :)

I say publicly that I won't accept 10mBTC peanut back and FJ can donate them to some good cause, or anywhere they want.

I'm nowhere near off my rocker. I don't know what country you're from but every casino I have ever went in here in USA makes you give your I'd to be scanned and checked. Hence performing kyc basically up front.

I dont think it's too much to ask for a casino to perform their check before allowing someone to gamble vs allowing someone to sign up, play, win huge, and get told fuck you we aren't paying you until after you pass kyc. It just looks shady as hell to do it that way.

If they performed these checks up front, then your scumbags who are trying  to rip off the casino wouldn't get far. Also, your legit customers wouldn't be able to be cheated by the casino because let's face it, some casinos can and will be shady if they can.

I don't think fortunejack is the only one that requires KYC, the truth is that they might be linient about the whole stuff when i user newly register with them but as times goes they will require KYC in other for them to unlock some features for you, i think instead of giving fake details it's better to source for alternative


if this is your first time of performing this function then you'd better get used to the system, most casinos will do that as well except for the ones that are truly KYC free


some of their customer support services are automated with response and the few that converse lively with you eventually do hang up along the line or switch to robot mode with same automated response that can be tiring and frustrating.

I assume you are talking about in store casinos. In UK if you win big then they ask for KYC or you are allowed to go and through away your money.
Even say all clients are checked KYC upfront, in a popular online casino there are thousands of registrations. Not all of them are real. Now, send request to KYC all of the accounts to KYC providers. You are literally asking to waste money. It's not really logical at all. Casinos are business not charity.

They asked for KYC, you denied is that what I am getting from it?
Then why all talk?

If you didn't care about the peanuts, you wouldn't waste 5-10 minutes of your time creating a topic warning people to avoid FJ and including a shady reference in your OP just because you were asked to verify an account by submitting a tie1 KYC, a T&Cs you agreed to when you signed up for an account.


PS: I'm not against anyone filing a formal complaint against a company, but make sure you're not the one breaking the rules before you do.

It was clearly stated in their T&Cs, so I don't understand the confusion, and besides, every centralized and well-regulated crypto or casino service requires you to pass KYC at some point, it's part of security measures, and those who don't want to submit a KYC can clearly stop using centralized platforms and fvk off to avoid drama.

To give some reference of my last post.
Article for KYC.
https://sdk.finance/how-to-choose-a-kyc-provider-part-2/#KYC_tools_pricing

I tried to find the expense but in most of them the pricing are not on their page. You need to contact the sales. But ondato have the pricing idea https://ondato.com/plans-pricing/

So when you are asking for upfront KYC then you are going to pay for all bots and through away multi accounts. Somewhere I read interestingly 40% of the traffic on internet are from bot LOL

This bastard @Hhampuz has already justified FortuneJack seizing 100k euros of my money, which is now a case a very respected lawyer is working on. These are some type of humanoids that luckily God will be sending to hell and I won't have to support them forever.

And for your info, the law where FortuneJack is licensed requires KYC before gambling. This is the only way to prevent underage gambling. I guess they'll be knocking the hell out of them for not respecting that, not to mention that my lawyer will also be knocking the hell out of them for stealing my 100k euros, as he's already done in the past with many other cases.

The only reason to see FortuneJack doing this all of a sudden, just to a few players, is that they're running out of funds and they need another excuse to retain some of the players funds just upon making a withdrawal. Go check their twitter, they've been around for 9 years and they don't even have 20k followers. They should have some serious management issues.

You really need to move on brother. This was the flag you had against FJ (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2957;dt) and I see all DT opposed the flag then giving everyone on Hhampuz can not be justified. Hope your lawyer can help you in fact when anyone lose any money in a casino which they think was unfair they should hire a lawyer even before creating a scam accusation thread in the forum.

The forum seems to become a platform for justifying who should and who should not run a business. It's created to promote bitcoin not to look after who got scammed by which company or service. People ask for free service here. We don't mind but it's not really fair when thing do not go in their favour and they blame it to forum members.

Please don't insult anyone and don't blame him for all your trouble.
I never had any problem with Hhampuz and I don't hold any grudge against him or anyone else.
I knew the risk using Fortunejack, and now I know not to trust them anymore.
I hope FJ legal team is happy.

For people who are acting smart with their comments, I will say again:
FJ forced me to verify for $200, in same time they blocked login access to their website, and refused to terminate my account.
If someone thinks that's ok, I don't know what else to say.

I am not saying it was not in their ToS and I'm not confused. I feel like casinos can use the KYC as a way to not pay a player sometimes and it's pretty shady. If they somehow were able to make a person verify their account prior to making a deposit, then once verified let them gamble and if they win pay them, that would be great. Much better then let them make the account, deposit, win, and not get paid due to some loophole in the casinos favor.

There has to be a better system then what they are doing now because some legitimate players are getting screwed over.

Of course there are abusers who will buy documents and try to cheat, but of your scumbag cheaters might be deterred. IDK my opinion is not necessarily the right opinion and i'm not trying to say fortunejack is a bad place, I would just like to see a better system in place.

Did you meet their 14-day deadline? If no, you'll have to go through the KYC procedure via email in order to gain access to your account, but if that's too much, you can let go of everything. Don't you think referring to the casino as a scammer in your personal text is overkill? It's fine if it helps you sleep. 8)

Not only casinos, but every well-regulated exchange works in the same way. For example, when you sign up on Binance or OKX, the system will not force you to do KYC, but you will be limited to a certain deposit and trade limit; you will only be forced to do KYC if you want to withdraw more than your withdrawal or deposit limit. This system exists everywhere, and anyone who values their privacy should avoid using centralized exchanges or casinos because this is the only way for the government to combat money laundering and other financial crime.

Players with good intentions will have no trouble submitting a simple tie 1 KYC to prove they are not bots and to assist the system in functioning properly.

You had good intentions, but your first comment wasn't nearly as nice as this one. ;D

It's good to know your following up your case with FJ @Paperwallet but lashing out and throwing insults won't solve anything would it? Why not concentrate on providing the needed details/evidence to prove your case. Your energy would be more worth th whole that way.

@notblox1, its a good thing you understood the risk and its a good thing your now getting the responses you did seek from the support team. All these are in line to prove that, the casino is concerned of there reputation and have every desire of solving yaw issues.

I guess you weren't forced to accept a T&C that carried in it terms of further verification if need be!

Mean while am just curious, if your denied access to your account as per login details, how then are you expected to complete KYC. Perhaps your saying its no longer an option on the table following delays to comply?

There is nothing magical about this and I think FJ is doing what they could to ensure they don't compromise there terms and serve there customers better. It would be sad should you leave on a bad note.
In either case, keep up with the team @FJ and do well to scale your options and go with what is bet suited for you as, yaw both have your stakes in this.

This explains that, the need for KYC isn't randomised but triggered by some unusual activities as I earlier speculated. What might be yours @notblox1 to have raised a need for this verification? Maybe am missing it.

I won, I did not lose, it's just that I did not get paid.

This is a good quote. People visiting this forum should have it somewhere in the advertisements that they should have lawyers ready in case they do not get paid by the scam platforms/casinos advertised in this forum. You need to go to court to get paid your winning bets.



I've already done that, you can check the scam accusation thread I created against FortuneJack for 100k euros.

Well I was not trying to solve anything with my last post, I was just communicating and chatting with some people.

-
Hello @notblox1,


Tornike (ampera) here once again. We would love to state the final decision regarding your case. Your account is fully unblocked and in case uploading the documents to complete the KYC procedure, you will be good to withdraw the funds as Fraud and Prevention department has already reviewed the history of the account and everything looks clear so to state again, there will be no problem in withdrawing the funds if deciding to complete the so-called 'Know Your Customer' procedure which was triggered randomly as per Terms of Conditions of FortuneJack. If you decide to do so, just keep us updated here and I will do my best to speed up the process for you.



Kind Regards,

My final decision regarding this case:
I wouldn't use fortunejack ever again even if you gave me a blank check and told me to enter any amount of money I want.
You betrayed my trust and wasted my time during last week, but I am glad everything is done legally and by the books for you.

Your decision based on terms and legal justification for randomly locking accounts and seizing funds from customers who didn't do anything suspicious is simply wrong.
Everyone should be aware or big risks dealing with this casino so  I decided to add fortunejack in my red list of casinos to avoid, and warn people not to use this website at all without passing kyc verification.

At least the company is trying to expedite the process for you if you wish to complete the kyc. As stated I don't agree with when the kyc is normally applied( this goes for all casinos, not just FJ), but they are not currently violating their ToS and you should research before playing as they can kyc a guy at anytime.

Why are you so silly about this whole ordeal? All they did was ask for KYC. If anything it's a good thing that it was triggered on a lower amount rather than on a big win as that, if anything, would be more suspicious no?

In your OP you state "With or without kyc you are at big risk of getting your account frozen and coins seized" which is just wrong. You are talking shit about FJ for reasons unknown considering you claim the amount that they will let you withdraw without issue if you complete KYC, is mere peanuts for such a gambler like yourself.

Jesus christ man, have you lost your mind?

I know they are not violating any rules and I said that myself. :)
I also know that I clearly said that in this case I won't pass any kyc, and asking me to do same thing over and over again wont change my mind.

I really don't know why you are so much upset and triggered, and in same time you are acting as a big time anti-kyc defender  :)
Better show us by example how you really fighting for casinos to stay without kyc.

This is my personal case, I can say whatever I want, and I was very clear when I said more than once that I won't pass kyc and I wont send them any documents.
What for? I sure won't use them ever again, and believe it or not for me it's not all about money, but please repeat $200 peanut word few more times if you want.
I am sure most of other bounty participants would gladly pass this kyc instead of me ;)

Yes @notblox1, idiots and people who try and spread fake bullshit like you have in your OP annoys me, quite a lot actually.

Also I have never claimed to be "anti-kyc", please do point out any time I have and I'll eat my shoe. I have no issue with KYC, I understand that it is a necessary evil for many business within this space for the foreseeable future. Being angry about it and trying to start shit is just silly.

Thanks again for putting me in the same group with idiots and people like me, I don't know what that is.
Nothing I wrote is fake bullshit like you say, and I have no reason to lie, but I am not sure if that is the case for you.
I can see you defending casinos you work with very good, so maybe there is some conflict of interest.

In this topic you exploded and accused me and other manager for asking some kind of kyc for everything:


Anyway, sorry for disturbing your forum zen mode.
All is fine in campaigns, everyone is writing by the script and not disturbing anyone, they are all good with all casinos and all managers.
Perfect virtual world.

I feel for the OP. I know it's basically unavoidable these days, but this KYC bullshit makes my blood boil and it always feels so disingenuous. Without exception, it's framed as some kind of detection of "suspicious" account activity and almost always worded carefully to make it sound like it's for your benefit.

I wish they would just say: "Sorry, bro. Now that we've got some leverage, we've frozen withdrawals until you send us a bunch of really sensitive documents, which we make absolutely no guarantee of being able to keep safe from future data breaches. Unfortunately, we can offer you no insight or reasoning of any kind, just send the documents." because that's what it amounts to and pretending otherwise is just a dishonest waste of everyone's time.

I never tried to multi account or cheat casinos/bookies in any way and I would never willingly submit to KYC on any of those sites. I don't trust them how they store my data and I don't want to be a victim of another leaked/sold database. Still getting shitloads of spam emails because I believed ledger is reputable enough to leave them real mail address. Of course if I managed to hit 10k from Majestic 7, I would risk it and pass KYC.

I am actually one who reads T&C before playing on bookies and I must say they are all more or less copy paste from one to another. They all have a bunch of ambiguous statements like "random KYC" or "selective KYC". Basically nobody asks for KYC but can hit you at any time they decide to do so. This is not fair to the customers but it is industry standard at the moment and we have to live with it. In the end it all comes down to how much particular bookie triggers clauses like that. I have personally used Sportsbet and Stake a lot; Fortune Jack, Nitrogen, Betnomi and wbet 7 in moderate amount and withdrew money from all those bookies without being asked for KYC on any of them. Good rule of thumb for me is to read fine print requirements for withdrawing bonuses and free bets, in my experience that really shows how the bookie treats their customers in the end.

I like most what Stake is doing regarding KYC. They have bonuses for regular users and they are giving double bonuses to users that pass KYC. For me that is a good compromise to painlessly collect KYC data from most users. Don't have inside info to know if it actually gives results but i like to think that it would be my approach if I owned a bookie and wanted to keep tabs on my customers.

Since notblox1 is a member of our campaign, this case has been brought to our attention and we do feel we should chip in on this as well. I apologize for doing it a bit late, but I was away on business trip for a few days and could properly review this only today. I spoke with Trofo and the following is an opinion from both of us as Livecasino representatives and long-standing members of the forum.

After carefully reviewing the case, we decided to stand behind our campaign member. We don’t like the ‘random’ KYC rule (especially since most are done through 3rd parties) and believe that crypto should be kept anonymous as much as possible. We feel that asking for KYC is a fully acceptable practice, but we’d like for it to be done differently and during initial registration or not at all. Therefore, we support any member that shares information about KYC requirements, so the other members can choose where to bet in the future with as much info as possible. After all – most users in crypto want to gamble without ever being asked for ID’s – and we all know that.

With all this being said, we'd like to ask notblox1 to change his feedback for FortuneJack, as well as the initial post in this thread. We do not believe that users are at risk of losing their funds if they do KYC so changing the feedback and initial post to one more precisely describing the danger might be fairer to FJ.

We understand the frustration in such situations but it is really important not to write inaccurate data which can harm a legitimate company, which FJ is proving to be. The ToC serves to protect them and as long as things don’t change for the better, they are within their right to harass the players with selective KYC. When they do, we should explain the situation without using words such as stealing, scam or anything similar.

We do hope that the industry will change for the better and that KYC rules will be more clear and better managed in the future – especially for forum members.

Hi cryptofrka and Trofo.
Anyone can lose money on centralized exchanges even if they pass kyc, and their personal documents can leak, we saw this many times.
There is not so much difference between exchanges and casinos, so it won't be correct for me to say that you can't lose money if you pass kyc to fj.
This is my opinion, but if I start to dig I could find cases of people losing money on casinos with kyc.

I had very bad experience with KYC in past so I don't want to send it everywhere, to some website that ignores me or treats me as cheater without explanation.
I will update my topic and feedback when 14 days given by fj expires and when I see final outcome of this story.
I didn't accuse anyone for scam or stealing, because they did everything by the book, and they plan to confiscate all my coins.

Last week I receved this from fj:


If you want to know the full story don't just read my first post in this topic, read rest of the stuff I wrote.

I find this debate interesting not so much for the specific case of notblox1, which I regret that he is in this situation, but for the general discussion about the implementation of KYC in casinos and when it should be required.


I think so too, but isn't there a contrary trend in casinos? As far as I remember when I registered on the forum in 2017 KYC was not that common. If it is being implemented more and more by casinos I understand that it is a trend that is going to continue and is in line with AML control and laws around the world.


I also understand that this should be the case.


To me this seems like an emotional response. The only reason I think you're saying that is because it would fuck up business. A lot of people who deposit and gamble (losing money in most cases), if they were made to pass a KYC before depositing, wouldn't do it.
 
That it will probably never happen, well, never say never.

Notblox1 is not the only case. We have seen a few in this section, or I would say it is more common in the Scam Accusations section. Sometimes they are cheaters who use that excuse but this of not asking for KYC if people deposit and lose the money and asking for it when they win above a certain amount seems to me at least ethically questionable.

If instead of having a tax haven licence, FJ had a licence from a European country, with the regulator supervising, it would not act in this way. Most likely scenario it would require KYC upon registration.

Statement does not compute.

Umm, that might be an issue of because-->therefore rather than a conflict of interest, so I've no idea why you said that.

If the ToS of a casino that you signed up to play on clearly states that you have to, or might have to, submit KYC docs at any time, there's really nothing to complain about if and when they do ask for those docs--or the consequences that result from an inability or unwillingness to provide them.

Goddamn, I'm starting to miss the wild west days of bitcoin already.

It is absolutely possible to require KYC as a requisite of registration; whether that would be a good thing for a casino (or any other crypto-related business) is another matter.  I think it's an awful idea and strongly oppose it, but it could be done--just imagine if a law were passed mandating it, for example.

But hopefully since you don't have to produce a photo ID when you walk into a physical casino in Las Vegas or anywhere else (in the US at least), regulation by governments won't go that far.

I live in the USA and I have to give my ID everytime I enter the casino. I don't know if that's a mandatory thing all over the USA, but where I live it is mandatory. They don't take your ID to tax you on the gambling but to verify your age and possibly check for warrants. You are the 1 responsible for any taxes on your gambling.

The NO-KYC casinos and sportsbooks are becoming hard to find. I can understand notblox1's frustration in submitting his personal data that will be stored in a server somewhere that can be hacked or accessed by people working in their support. In the past, we have had incidents where customer data has been hacked, and there were cases where staff accessed and stole data from their place of work. I also wouldn't be comfortable with random people having my personal info and knowing how to find me.

But we can clearly follow a trend here. Binance used to be a place where you could withdraw 2 BTC a day and no one asked you anything. It then became a place where you could withdraw $2.000 daily with no KYC. And now you have to do it immediately after you open a new account otherwise you won't be allowed to trade or withdraw your funds. Sadly, that's the reality. You either accept it and play ball, or you go elsewhere.

By signing up to FJ or any centralized exchange or casino we agreed to terms stating they have the right to ask us to verify our identities. And they sure as hell aren't going to do that in the beginning when you create your account because they will lose a lot of money that way.     

Same here in my country physical casino. All casino here is requiring all the players that entering the premises of the casino to provide valid ID before they can enter and play in the casino. This is due to the new regulations for gambling industry. Actually some casino also ask players for show money with specific minimum amount to make sure that they are really playing inside.

---

I know that this KYC in crypto is really a pain in the ass especially  if you are an old time player in the casino but there ToS clearly states this possibility since the beginning so its really hard to make a case here if there’s a ToS that supporting there action that users agreed upon registration.

The only inconvenience and I really understand on this kind of case was if it happened that you have a balance on the casino by the time this random KYC hits the account.

You just summed up perfectly the trend that I have commented on in other threads regarding privacy. We are coming from the far west of Bitcoin, as The Pharmacist has mentioned, and we are heading towards more and more regulation and control.

KYC requirements at crypto casinos are going to become more widespread and tougher in the coming years. Whoever is enjoying casinos without KYC should enjoy it for as long as they can.

And another thing that I think will change in the long run is that of having licenses from tax havens. I played at Pokerstars at a time when it had a license from a tax haven and operated all over the world. Today it has several country specific licenses where if it had not acquired a license from that country it would not be able to operate.

With cryptocurrency casinos it usually happens the same as it used to happen in Pokerstars, although they put in the TOS that they do not accept players from certain countries to cover their backs.

In the past, many gambling sites did not require you to submit any documents. Nowadays it's gotten to the point where every other casino (and now almost every sportsbook) asks for your ID for KYC reasons. There are a few online casinos that are still no-KYC, but their number is very small since centralized entities such as governments and banks want to be able to track all your transactions.
But in my opinion, anonymous gambling (or rather, pseudonymous gambling) is still possible nowadays and I will keep using only gambling sites that don't require KYC info to gamble.

I have mixed opinions about this. I am against regulation in bitcoin but I also think they are a good step forward in crypto gambling to protect both parties. Players and casinos alike. And they will prevent cases like OPs or hundreds of others where people have to go thorough checks to get their money and then it turns out they live in a restricted territory, they are underaged, they have had other banned accounts before, or any other rule violations. If these things had been proven during account registration, there would not be so many complaints.

Damn nicehash hit me with KYC because I haven't used my account in a while!?

"Your account is labelled as inactive. Due to our internal security policy, we instruct our users with sleeping-inactive accounts (accounts that weren’t used for several months) to complete the KYC procedure. This procedure enables us to diligently detect and prevent any malicious or unlawful use or use prohibited by our Terms of Service.”

How the hell does KYC protect my account because I haven't used it in a while?
KYC me because of inactivity?

I'll say it..

THIS IS SELECTIVE SCAMMING!


You know what the last thing Cryptsy did in desperation to slow down withdrawals when the gig was up and they were running out of funds?
Enforce KYC for WDs ofcourse..

Times are tough in the crypto industry.. This selective scamming could be what's saving them from bankruptcy by the skin of their teeth..

And they won't even reply..


If I had many miners on different IPs all over the place looking like a botnet then maybe, but I have only ever had ONE miner on this account!
I have also never used their exchange or anything other than sell a tiny bit of hash..

Pisses me off too..
I haven't KYCd with them.. Yet.. Not sure if I ever will either..

Spent a lot of time earning a tiny bit of satoshis mostly for fun, because I like crypto, and they try to keep it..
As if they didn't make enough off of their cut..

These places know well that most people aren't going to KYC for a few bucks and that's money in their pocket..


This is why crypto is going to shit.. Especially "influential" crypto community members coming to threads like this supporting this BS..
I bet you support all laws everywhere and just want more and more laws all the time don't ya?
Bet ya wish you'd go to jail for not using only your 1 assigned public key too..

OMG people might launder money and avoid taxes!! How EVIL!




Shit isn't even $50!

Oh yeah and now they force me to use 2FA too to even log in and see my not even $50 that my account couldn't even WD if it tried!
["my not even $50" - ahem excuse me.. my account entry on their centralized ledger that says I have something on deposit. - Not your keys, Not your coins!]

You know why?
Another method of selective scamming..
You think if I lose my 2FA I would go through all the BS it takes to get my account back for <$50?
Maybe not.. Many wouldn't..
I'd probably put it off because I'm lazy (just like I am with KYC) and eventually forget about it..
Just another opportunity they use to possibly get to keep your coin!


I liked how coinbase said "your account is quite valuable ... we recommend you use 2FA"..
Ok yeah, probably a good idea to turn that on..

But for <$50?
It's just an unnecessary hassle..



KYC and 2FA...
"He he, lets see how many users don't make it through this maze so we can keep their coins!" (rubs hands together)


I'm with you OP..
This stuff grinds my gears too..
Any excuse not to shell out a single shekel..

Hi buddy. This thread is about Fortunejack. Are you sure this is the right thread to post that? I believe it would be better if you create a thread about nicehash with this post.

This thread is about selective KYC..
It is basically the same exact situation with a different company, and is happening to many many companies, almost all of them, all almost exactly the same way, to likely thousands upon thousands of users across the crypto world, and I can only guess how many users just choose to forfeit their coins instead of jumping through all these hoops...

Much of this discussion is about this topic and the ethics thereof..

Is their some worldwide law forcing all of these companies to do this?
Or did they all just learn a dirty little trick, that some will support, that they can use to keep some percentage of users coins?

No, there is no worldwide law, what we do have are AML procedures and legislation accepted by most countries in the world and an increasing collaboration of all, including many of those that a few decades ago were tax havens with these procedures.

Specifically I believe that in the crypto world this is going to happen more and more, as it is already happening, and I can also believe that in some cases certain sites take advantage of it.

 

This is perhaps fantasy, but if the UN actually had an enforcing body, perhaps they could make rules about crypto currency bridges which exchanges would have to follow.

Their behaviour is highly suspect. By not using your account they triggered a KYC requirement therefore it sounds like another excuse to seize customer funds that are sitting there.

I feel your frustration from the manner in which you expressed it strongly. I have to agree, a very large portion of the KYC implementation is effectively selective scamming because the businesses involved are fairly sure a small number will send KYC documents while a bigger number will let their account and funds be seized.

It is supposed be all about jurisdiction, some websites are operated in place where KYC will be mandatory but many of these websites are not even legally registered as LLC/LTD themselves and their ownership is anonymous yet they use the KYC excuse to happily seize funds. Regarding the 2FA issue, those websites forcing customers are making a mistake they should allow customers to decide their own level of security and in many cases people want to provide as less information as possible to various websites.

With more and more regulation going on in crypto within the mainstream it is different (such as sports sponsorship) because they it will be enforced but the small websites that is using crypto where there is no need or requirement for KYC there should be a heavy movement against it.

If websites ask for KYC upon signing up it is up to the customer whether to join. If the websites asks for KYC after funds have been won/traded/deposited then the customer should be allowed to withdraw them and subsequently have their accounts closed if they do not want to send KYC.

Wouldn't it be funny? It's a forum not a gambling resolution center. Precisely it's bitcointalk not gamblingresolutiontalk. Does this go into your head?

You are not chatting but promoting hate against each others.

If this is for only forum members then you are making different low for a certain community which shouldn't be. But yeah a clear KYC direction for any casino will be good. But mind that casinos are abide by their terms and conditions. These conditions actually made to favor them so they can get away with anything in most of the cases.

In this particular case KYC is not the problem but the OP's denial and making it a big issue to make FJ look bad.

Well, I don't think it's an insult calling him a "humanoid", given this quote below lol
And I am not blaming him for any of my troubles. I am just calling him for what he is.


@BitcoinGirl.Club, to save you the time and effort of being so obsessed about me, since you're a lowlife with nothing better to do, you're now on my ignore list.

Thank you for support.
I am not asking anything from fj, but I am really disappointed with behavior of some bitcointalk members.
Some people probably have mash potatoes instead of brain in their skull, if they don't understand why I started this topic.

It looks like a trick trap to me, but I would understand if this rule was applied for cheaters and people who try to abuse casinos, not for casual gamblers.

It's all legal and done by the books, and fj is not controlling any funds after it goes to their legal team and third party partner.
Nobody ever asked who is this third party partner asking for kyc, but I guess it's nothing...  ::)

I am not trying to make anyone look bad so this is baseless accusation against me,
but you should do something better in your life instead of posting so many times in this topic and supporting random KYC.
Judging by feedback and history you have on your profile you should not be trusted about anything you say.

I'm not going to go through BitcoinGirl.Club's post history but regarding his feedback, he has one positive, one negative (retaliatory) and two neutral ones saying that his account was hacked in the past and returned to its original owner, so I don't know what you see wrong with that.

I wouldn't want us to go too off topic with this. Regarding your case, as I have commented I think there is an unstoppable trend to more and more KYC, but it would be much fairer if you were asked for it at the beginning. As much as it is in the TOS, the fact that certain houses only ask for KYC when you win a certain amount of money does not look good.

My comment was generic, it was not specific to FortuneJack or specific to your situation with them.

If customers are asked for KYC upon signing up it means they are probably going to find resistance but if they allow customers to sign up but implement KYC later it means even if the customers walk away without sending in their private details they will end keeping funds belonging to that customer.

A fair way for all businesses to operate would be allowing customers the option to withdraw funds and close the account if they do not want to send KYC and continue as a customers.

I do expect forum members to have a bit of leeway when it comes to situations like these.
Bitcointalk is a place where these companies market their product in a more direct way - and we are in constant communication with their representatives.

I don't expect us to have a different set of rules - but I do hope that the bookies understand that a person from BTT forum will be less likely to do KYC than a random Joe that saw the ad while shopping.
If I had such an issue with Sportsbet for example, I'd contact Steve for sure and expect him to solve it for me.