Hi, first of all, I congratulate your decision to voluntarily take their self-exclusion offer. It took an enormous strength to fight with yourself. I hope you can keep it up, and remember that helps are all around, there are so many people care about the situation you currently have.

Second, if I may help clarify the situation happened to you to the best of my knowledge regarding 30 days waiting period for withdrawal, this is one of their policy for a withdrawal for locked account with amount greater than 50 USD, that it'll be done manually by their staff after the waiting period. So, it is not just you, in a sense that they specifically made it difficult to you, other people that applies for self-exclusion also faced this policy.

Now, third, regarding voiding your balance for the reason of "abusing staff", I will have to agree that it sounds odd. In fact, I don't think there is a clause on their ToS saying about this [not that I check to confirm]. Please give me a few time to reach to Razer through PM and invite him here to get a better hold of the situation. He might be able to sort it out.

Meanwhile, I am reuploading the images for visibility:

Well, IMO, one of the probable contributing factor of the situation happened to you, why one account was blocked and the other does not, aside from several other factor previously mentioned, is probably this. You're contacting several staff at once, through both mails, that you seems aren't even sure which email you use to reply who.

Remind me again, have you tell any of the staff to also self-exclude your second account when your first one got excluded?

I'll reach to their representative and invite him here once we get more details on OP's case. Inviting them here right now will probably be quite pointless as there is nothing that can help anyone better understand what happened. Their representative is quite responsive and helpful in solving cases against them, so I believe once invited [with enough reason to declare this as a case] they can give insight on what happens. For that to happen, though, OP need to give more details.

Do you mind completing the story with proof and more details? Preferably in below format.


Once they're completed and we get more understanding of what happened to you, I'll invite Betcoin's representative here so they can see the case from their side and hopefully it's just a misunderstanding and they'll solve it for you.

Kindly re-read the thread once again, OP's account got frozen because he tried to bypass account restriction by having second [or multiple other ones] account. Both sides touched this topic and OP admitted that he knows-didn't-know that one of his family member got restricted a while back.

And I think we can guess who is twisting story here, given there are several discrepancies and inconsistencies in OP's side of story.

Umm... you're reaching through multiple ticket and different support agent at once? And we wonder why things got tangled. And no, I don't think the images is from different accounts, both are from d***e@gmail.com, shown below in blue box.

Fortunately, its not the case of "stealing" in the sense the casinos rob player's fund. In many [big] casinos, they are more than happy to refund the initial deposits if the abuser is not on net profit. When the abuser is in profit [from their cheating activities], the fund will be confiscated, consider it as a way to "reimburse" the loss suffered by the casino from the abuses. So, I don't think it's "stealing", no?

Ok, now I got even more bewildered. Do I... read things wrongly and there is an explanation behind the time difference or is the screenshot edited? The email on both image below is the same email, right? How does the first one timestamped 20:16 and the other one 22:17?




For reference the original link to those images are as below:
https://i.imgur.com/jXTDPEa.png
https://i.imgur.com/PMc6we0.png

That shouldn't be the problem, the suspension of activities on their platform due to the sanction are limited to the people residing in Russia and Belarus. Unless you can't provide a concrete evidence that you're accessing and currently residing in Bulgaria, the limitation shouldn't be applied to you.

What's the last thing they said to you regarding this matter?

Pure curiosity, why is it not legal from the perspective of law? Both parties entered a binding agreement, the user violated one or two or even more clauses on the agreement, of which they're agreed with the consequences and outcome for said breach of agreement.


This is the importance of taking every case on this board with case-by-case approach, because on several cases, the casino seems vague and weaponize their ToS, on half other, the accusers are the ones questionable because their story are full of hole.

Sorry for being a bit unclear. I am referring to withdrawal page from your account on the exchange, where you send your fund to be deposited to the anonymous-casino. If they suspect you a double-spend, unless I'm wrong, there should be two withdrawals made from that exchange in a relatively short time.

Cases against them on this sub-board usually tackled by Razer, not rollbitcom. I'll send him a PM to inform him about this one, though I personally think it's rather... pointless, the story here is rather a clear violation.

---

So, which one is it? You didn't know he was banned until Rollbit told you, or you already know before then? Quite a different narrative you have.

Eh? This case is not solved yet and your compliance team is still verifying? I thought with OP being from non-sanctioned country and he supplied your team with supporting documents, it can be easily tackled, especially as your team expedited his ticket. Is there other things that your team needed from OP or other steps currently they undergo?

I have to re-read your screenshots and try to read between lines, arrange the puzzle, etc. to be sure I am not missing something, yet I still can't find any statement from them that they're agreed to you bypassing their account ban, or to reopen the first account.

Closest I can find is this, the one you ask [with your first account] after your self-exclusion whether your account got any restriction. There is nowhere on that email chain you state to them that you ask because you have two accounts, or that account  was initially restricted.



Maybe you can supplement us with this screenshots of them allowing you to have second account and reopening your first one?

First of all, the reason is quite specified enough, "no reason" will imply they did not give you any explanation. Second, your main account was suspended and you create another account to get away with the suspension? You do aware that we goes further and further south with your case, right?

I think I find some discrepancy in your story? On the quoted post itself [marked in red], it shows how the statement did not match. You initially said it was closed for no reason, and then it's because you asked for it yourself?

And further, according to the narrative and screenshots you provide, you asked for self exclusion on 3rd of February 2024 from your new account, D***A@gmail.com.

Ahh... my apology, I should have add, "according to them", I forgot about that part... which only add more line on the list of their discrepancies, next to how the taint rating initially shows a low score, and then they claimed that according to their detection system, it's 100% tainted.

Anonymous-Casino itself is not new, it's been around for more than three years, has their own ANN and their own [inactive] representative, which make that edited post quite interesting, because LTC Casino out-of-nowhere-ly announced and promoted them by editing their own old post.

And, suppose they are both managed by same team, you missed the third platform that's also managed and owned by same people,

PM sent. I somewhat doubt they'll come here and address their relation with A-C, though. I also noticed --after sending them the PM-- that the issue has been brought to their awareness through posts on their ANN.


It's the banner. The original post had a banner.

I initially wanted to send their representative a PM, another invitation to revisit this case and see whether to support or oppose the flag based on their reaction and/or development of the case after the PM. But I will refrain to do so, or anything at all, until I hear more from you about this. Please keep us updated.