Hey Jannn, Apologies, there was a slight mixup on my end due to an oversight. I've edited my previous post to reflect this from the team: UPDATE: My mistake, please ignore the previous message. I just got an updated response that as the bonus funds were wagered (i.e. the welcome package terms were accepted), the real money conversion will be unable to be processed.
Hello UserU, fine brother. Wanted to ask them since the bonus have been wagered a little bit and impossible to revoke now: to RE-ADD the free spins from the promo. as they got removed when that REVOKE / UN-REVOKE confusion happened. So if there's some last thing you can do for my friend is to please re-add the free spins ? Thanks. I'm a bit confused. Just to clarify and put everything in writing, your friend is now OK with having to meet the wager requirement and wanted to get the full initial deal [the missing free spins]? |
|
|
|
After discussing with the team, they have agreed to remove the bonus funds, and return your initial deposit (non-bonus). This is provided that you did not spend the latter.
Thank you for the prompt response. My friend told me right now that the money has not been reversed/removed yet from his account. His username is: user-e37eea And his balance is currently: $329.39 So the bonus has to be removed (as per you guys agreement/accordance) from his balance and only his initial deposit should be left (his deposit remains unspent tho) Thanks Give it some time, I believe they'll need to do interdepartmental communication to process this "special case". Ask your friend to check periodically and keep us updated about this. |
|
|
|
Does anyone know what happened to Stunna and did anyone replaced him in bitcointalk?
Last time he logged in in July last year and I think he was very active in forum and helped resolved many issues with customers.
I would not call Stake a scam but maybe they made more strict terms in last few years.
Probably taking a time-off as Stake has a couple of representative for different sectors; marketing by Carollzinha and Symphonized monitoring threads on this board. And yes, someone replaced him in bitcointalk... well, kinda. Symphonized is the one in charge of forwarding every open cases against them to their team.
However, source of funds and source of wealth have nothing to do with the identity and the location of one customer.
[...]
Although source of funds is included in the ToS of most of the crypto sportsbooks, there are sportsbooks that do not ask for source of funds. The rules seem to be the same everywhere, but invoking this rule differs greatly from sportsbook to sportsbook. The AML seems to be nothing more than an excuse looking for a way to take funds. All books seem to have a rollover. If someone is money laundering, it's obvious. They will 1x roll, or a small rollover, for a very large amount. Books in the UK and US ask for selfies but some of these books in CR ask for a video selfie. Your chances of being asked for proof of funds is higher at a book with a license in Curacao compared to the UK or US. It's suspicious when a Curacao book is intrusive for an obvious case where money laundering isn't involved. By taking a look at his deposit amounts and dates, there's no money laundering going on.
This part, I have to agree. Though SoW is a common practice for AML investigation, I don't think OP's case require for such high level of verification. If they suspect him of multi-acc, the standard KYC is more than enough to prove this. They arguably can ask for a video verification [with live video call, not just a selfie] if they doubt the originality of OP's document, but SoW should not be part of this investigation, let alone keep rejecting it. |
|
|
|
I am intrigued by the possibility of your account being hacked. The forum is recently under "attack" of hacker silently co-living with the real owner, where they didn't hold it for ransom or change the credentials so the owner can't access it, they move under the radar by not touching anything and execute their action. One of the recent case is asking for a loan. If you claimed that you never send a PM yet your account got banned for phishing PM... can you check your IP log as per Despairo suggested? Through https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php?I am fascinated by the hacker too as he really had a bad strategy. My account is inactive from past some time and not a good target. Also, I did check the IP logs and I can see very less logs recorded in past month and no wired IP logs at the end of the month. But, I did got an email on 24/12/23 about my password being changed by an unknown IP. I checked it on internet and it shows to be located in UK. Not sure if I can post the IP here, but will keep updated if I find more information. I am sure it's allowed, another user that got his account compromised with this similar "co-living" method posted a list of IP addresses. Censor your own IP, and leave the other that's from the hacker visible. It might help your case by proving that your account got compromised and you're not the one sending those phishing PM. It does appear that he can't via the screenshot provided, but not allowing people to see their outbox seems a bit weird and it's the first I've heard of it. Don't suppose it matters either as the messages were reported.
It's wired, although it is the same from as far as I can remember this forum. Btw, it would be great if you could help me with knowing exactly what type of PMs were sent from my account, if you could PM me some examples it would be an help. I guess you already know as they were reported by some member's here. If we entertain the possibility that your account got hacked and you're not the one sending those PM, wouldn't the content of the PM itself no longer relevant and won't help with your situation, as your primary goal here now will be to prove that you got hacked? |
|
|
|
You mean shuffle-com? The one with this ANN thread? Just to be sure, you're accessing through your personal device and internet, not from any PC on internet cafe and the likes, and you never access the site with VPN? I'll try to notify their representative. Meanwhile, you better edit the opening post with the recommended format and attach some backing evidence. [b][color=black]What happened:: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Scammers Profile Link: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Reference Link: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Amount Scammed: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Payment Method: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Proof of Payment: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]PM/Chat Logs: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Additional Notes: [/color][/b]
|
|
|
|
has your friend tried posting this on casino.guru or askgamblers, they might be able to help. looking at casino.guru, they seem to have resolved issues that have been posted there in the past, but as for askgamblers, I don't any complaints posted against 500.casino yet. or you can wait for the representative to respond here since holydarkness and efialtis has contacted them.
It'll be better to wait a little and see if any of the representative that efialtis and I contacted reaches back and get it solved. Having this case on CG or AG will kinda flood their resolution team with too many "ticket".
[...]
UserU have you read this case?
I send him a PM yesterday, informing him about the issue and this thread. |
|
|
|
Not trying to defend OP, but....
8000 EUR for website is nothing This is exactly what makes your story so hard to believe. Earlier you wrote this: i think i will be first guy who killed himsef over being blocked his own money my luck is really fucked up i got job after 2 year being unemployed worked always below developler average payment It doesn't sounds like the regular payment for this is €8k. If "it's nothing", you wouldn't talk about killing yourself over losing payment for a week. Don't quote long posts.It seems there is a small misunderstanding here due to OP's lack of punctuation mark and English is not his native language, or so I assume. The suicide statement aside, as I think that's him being dramatic, I believe his statement should read like this, 8000 EUR for website is nothing, considering i am full stack onto this. and website, any experienced developler like me, its creatable in under week; considering MOST of website development is patching bugs and maintance and improving UX. that's why website tend to take long time. creating website is easy now, considering i got to code for less than 700 euro a month for this... With what he tried to convey, freely interpreted by me, "EUR 8,000 for website is not that spectacular from a business owner's perspective, since that's a payment for a work for the entire day in a year [thus roughly EUR 700 monthly] patching bugs, maintenance, and improving UX. The website itself is build-able in one week, it's the maintenance that need the hard work, and that's where and why I got paid that amount." But yeah, that contractor must have really trusted him, paying him upfront for a year of work.
It would at least take you some weeks to receive second payment, right? Because you were doing 8000+ Euro job, it would at least take one week, minimum. Didn't you really notice that your wallet wasn't filled the next day? Did you really that blindly decided that it would 100% be sent to your wallet? And only noticed it on 2nd transaction? C'mon man.
It's explained on the snippet of his complaint on best exchange [re-uploaded below]. He saw that it's completed, and as this is not the first time he use FF, he thought everything is good and didn't bother to do anything and proceed with the work.  https://i.ibb.co/HdZ4swM/x8.png |
|
|
|
I am also made aware of this thread through PM. Jannn, if your friend wanted to have an account on this forum so they can have a more direct and open discussion with 500's representative but doesn't want to pay for the evil fee, he can try to shoot LoyceV an email through LoyceVswitzerland@protonmail.com he can help with whitelisting proxyban. A more detailed information can be read here. Meanwhile, for this case, I see efialtis were reaching them through email. I'll try the other way, through PM to their representative. Please give them some time to respond, they're usually quite attentive. |
|
|
|
This seems pretty cool, but whenever I try to visit this promotion page (using my cellphone with google chrome) I get an error and it just sends me to the homepage… Will try tomorrow using a desktop computer but just wondering if anyone else is having the same problem?
Tried to replicate your situation [accessing through mobile with chrome] and I can access them just fine. I didn't submit the form and accessing through incognito, though. Try to do it through incognito or clear your cache, perhaps? Or maybe enable the "desktop site" [through the kebab menu, that three vertival dots], see if it helps? |
|
|
|
[...] Your Stake Account(s), retain all monies in such Stake Accounts and ban You from future use of the Website. This is too intrusive. Source of Funds and Source of Wealth. SoW is one of the standard practice of casino for AML, it's not just stake that ask for this, many other casinos also require the same for their advanced KYC verification. The whole process of this verification and why they keep rejecting things though, is not standard. |
|
|
|
Update: This has been resolved now after I made this post and spoke to Razer (I think he/she is the owner?). Update: My account was finally unblocked and I was allowed to withdraw and continue playing, after providing the required documents and following the steps asked by the customer support. Thanks for the help members of bitcointalk, and shoutout to Razer for helping resolve this issue.
AFAIK, Razer is one of their representative, not the owner, but yeah, he solves a lot of Rollbit's users problem. I see that you've marked it as resolved. Do you mind locking this thread to prevent spam posts? The button to lock a thread is at the bottom left of this page. |
|
|
|
[...] One more thing, it is not my problem. I just gave a suggestion to forum owner. He may see this thread, the responses from members here and take some action if necessary.
Ah well, you can rest assured, then. The forum is quite confident with its position. It is the oldest and biggest forum, the "original" one, they don't mind someone talking about a forum or two. In fact, we even co-exist with some of them. For example, in scam accusations board [where one of the main purpose is to facilitate a dispute], we often refers people to other "forum", an arbitrator or two, when those sites offer a more efficient way to get a resolution for the case. |
|
|
|
[...] 5. Oh, wow! All of it? But I thought you send him a screenshot of analysis that shows the tainted money from darknet is just 2.2%? With 3.1% at best if we consider everything shady as "tainted"? Tsk... tsk... tsk... now now, which one of your employee published that analysis and which one of you is lying?
There are various services for analyzing cryptocurrency funds. Our partners use exclusively analysis services that are used by law enforcement agencies around the world. There are only a few companies that are able to effectively accurately determine the direct connection of funds with an illegitimate source.
We do not use services whose data can be accessed by anyone, as the publicity of the data plays in favor, including for criminals.As predicted, this turns into a cluster of messy quote. Again, learn how to quote. You have sophisticated system [or so it seems] and --I believe-- a powerful tech team, one of them can look into this forum and teach you how quoting works. It's very simple, he won't need more than few seconds. I am tabling other, simpler, things for now [point 1-4] and focus on point number 5. You're saying the analysis you use now came out with a result that 100% of the fund is dirty? Who provide the initial analysis, again? The one with mere 3.1% [at best]? Such an astronomical difference, don't you agree? You sure the analysis given by your partners are the valid one and not a false positive?
[...] If certain addresses are "criminal", and you happen to know about it, why don't you publish a list? [...]
This, I can help answering for them. They've been asked about this on an older thread where they're --similarly-- being questioned quite thoroughly, though their answer is not satisfactionary and, when pursued further, they went full Avatar Aang. Of course, we will not publish the blocking list, since we do not cooperate with cryptocurrency scammers and thieves, we treat them extremely negatively and believe that they bring huge harm to the entire crypto community. Many of our employees have also been hacked and caught in fraud before, so we are well aware of how difficult it can be to recover lost funds.
[...]
[...]
The publication of our blocklist will provide information to criminals that their crime is known, and will help in their laundering. We will not assist criminals in any way. Honest users will be able to provide the necessary data if they have deleted this data purposefully.
|
|
|
|
You don't understand the question, hilariousandco is saying that you can view the list of sent messages even if you are banned. He is not talking about sending a message to anyone on the forum. Obviously, you are unlikely to be able to do that.
It does appear that he can't via the screenshot provided, but not allowing people to see their outbox seems a bit weird and it's the first I've heard of it. Don't suppose it matters either as the messages were reported. I think he actually got blocked from the entire "My Messages"page, because normally, the forum's "address bar" will shows something like below, with its subsection being shown. I don't think we can simply choose "Personal Messages" section, it always followed by a subsection  But his shows like this,  |
|
|
|
Are you sure you can't even view your sent messages once banned? Not sure that's true, but they were the standard hey x i've replied to you here etc.
Yes, I am sure.  I will try sending an email anyways. You don't understand the question, hilariousandco is saying that you can view the list of sent messages even if you are banned. He is not talking about sending a message to anyone on the forum. Obviously, you are unlikely to be able to do that. I think he actually can't. As seen on his screenshot, the "Outbox" is being highlighted instead of "New Message", that's him clicking and accessing the outbox page, and meet the error message.  |
|
|
|
I am intrigued by the possibility of your account being hacked. The forum is recently under "attack" of hacker silently co-living with the real owner, where they didn't hold it for ransom or change the credentials so the owner can't access it, they move under the radar by not touching anything and execute their action. One of the recent case is asking for a loan. If you claimed that you never send a PM yet your account got banned for phishing PM... can you check your IP log as per Despairo suggested? Through https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php? |
|
|
|
Several things that you might want to explain further: 1. How does asking for OP [and his client's] telegram details fit into this investigation of the source of fund? - Information from the messenger may be indirect evidence of honest receipt of funds and disclose some details of the source of funds.2. Why do OP has to be [initially] the one asking his client to provide details and how is it not counterproductive toward an investigation of the legality of fund like what I pointed out here? - In this case, the OP is not the sender of the funds for the order. According to our rules, the sender of funds must provide information about the source of funds.3. How is what he provided from his side is not enough? He proves that he worked for it, got them as a payment. Unless proven otherwise, it's all legal from his side in a sense that he's not involved or have any idea in the said criminal activity. - Since the OP is not the sender of the funds, he has nothing to do with the funds sent to us. If the user had received funds for any service, we would have requested details of the transaction.4. How do you think OP will know that the fund is related to criminal activity instead of being a pure innocent here? Wouldn't considering him ineligible to prove the source of fund as he's not the sender rather contradict the assumption that he's being involved in the activity [which become the reason why you hold his fund, because he knows it's tainted, otherwise, he's clueless, innocent, and the fund should be released to him]? - The availability of complete information about their own counterparties, as well as checking funds for a possible connection with a crime, is a direct responsibility of the services engaged in the exchange of funds. In this case, the OP explicitly said about providing money exchange services on an ongoing basis.
As we have already said, in this case, the OP has nothing to do with the funds sent to our addresses from a legal point of view. When accepting criminal funds to their own addresses, there are other legal consequences for users.5. How much from that fund is marked as tainted? All of it? - Yes, all the funds sent are related to criminal activity. We cannot disclose the details of the incident publicly, as the disclosure of such data may adversely affect the investigationI can see that this conversation will go into a big mess of quote pyramid. So, to prevent that, just ignore all of the text above and begin replying from below the line. And please learn the proper way to quote.
1. And the details like username [which understandably some will prefer to be a private matter] are important on this investigation... how? I am once again bringing your older statement here for everyone's attention: [...]
We do not request KYC, as we value the confidentiality of our customers, but only information about the source of the funds received. seems the exact opposite to me, you're violating the confidentiality of your customer by forcing him to reveal his contact info, and you're not only asking about the source of the fund. 2. Still not explaining about the counterproductive-ness of having OP to ask for his client to provide the info. As mentioned, if we suppose OP did involved in the crime, there's nothing stopping him to work with this client to fabricate that evidence you asked. So...? 3. Thus... innocent? Your words, and I quote, " Since the OP is not the sender of the funds, he has nothing to do with the funds sent to us." 4. Quite contradictive, is it not? " As we have already said, in this case, the OP has nothing to do with the funds sent to our addresses from a legal point of view. When accepting criminal funds to their own addresses, there are other legal consequences for users." So does he have nothing to do with the fund sent to your address or is he involved in it and thus have to face legal consequences? 5. Oh, wow! All of it? But I thought you send him a screenshot of analysis that shows the tainted money from darknet is just 2.2%? With 3.1% at best if we consider everything shady as "tainted"? Tsk... tsk... tsk... now now, which one of your employee published that analysis and which one of you is lying? [...] - So everything they asked for I provided them with, and they still didn't release my money, they sent a screenshot that 2.2% of the money is related to darknet, thats 2.2% from 8000 EUR which is exactly 160 EUR, so for 160 EUR my whole 8000 EUR is freezed ( https://i.ibb.co/7XBtjb4/IQ8jYY.png), and every proof they wanted I gave it to them [...] For reference, the image being mentioned is as below [re-uploaded to talkimg]  |
|
|
|
I will give it a bit more time, but the first signs are not good.
I admire your patience though, you will have to wait for another 2 days according to the timer on askgamblers,  However, it seems the owner or the official representative to this forum hasn't log in for a while and it looks like for them this is already a close book. That case in AskGamblers was closed before with "unresolved" as their verdict, it was reopened as per OP's request. That two days were already an "extra time". And if they really consider this a closed, I really hope they'll reconsider, because it doesn't look good on them with several questions here being unanswered and AG's thread unattended. |
|
|
|
That thing aside, if I may know, does that whistle-blower is the one you mentioned on your previous post approaching you through PM? I assume they use their own account and not chipsgg's? Yes, that's correct. I was approached by someone claiming to be the whistleblower, and they are using their own account. I thought the same person might have approached you and/or Mahdirakib as well. I guess that wasn't the case. Hmm... this is a nice development, but I think we can and should consider his silence [if he never replied to you, and assuming he is the whistleblower] is due to an NDA upon his termination that prohibit him from spilling any more tea on this issue. That's logically what I'll do as a damage control when my company is exposed by one of my [now former] employee. Chipsgg's representative can clear all of these issues [together with several points being asked throughout the thread] if they really interested to clean their reputation, but they don't even bother to answer any [legit] question surrounding this situation or anything related to the nature of their business. |
|
|
|
Funds from our hot addresses are automatically consolidated to our main addresses, as funds are sent from us only from our main addresses. Thus, law enforcement agencies see that the funds have been transferred to the addresses of our service. The funds remain frozen at our addresses, and when the frozen funds are seized by the authorities, they are also sent from our addresses.
It'll be nice if you can reply to all of my questions on post #27, I think it's rather convenient that you always "missed" a post or two that you can't answer, just like what happened on the other thread. That thread has a lot of questions left unanswered too.
[...] For example, you have never disclosed your own location or even stated which jurisdiction you are operating within. [...]
Sechyelles, and they're requesting it because they runs globally. The jurisdiction where they reside itself didn't ask them to provide such information. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
