[SCAM] Sportsbet.io seized my profits

[actmyname]

"you violated the ToS, therefore it's your fault!"

Do you honestly believe otherwise? If so, why?

I create a website dedicated for gambling. Outlined within the ToS are a few clauses that allow me to arbitrarily freeze player balances, all fit under one nice long section. One of them is based on if I have suspicion that they are using multiple accounts or money laundering. Another is simply, if at my discretion, I determine that you or your account is detrimental to the conduct of my business. I use this to freeze player balances when they win. When questioned, I respond that they violated the ToS by stating that they violated the section containing those clauses. I do not provide any evidence and then state, "we'll return the deposit though."

Fair, or not fair?

[saturent]

[I create a website dedicated for gambling. Outlined within the ToS are a few clauses that allow me to arbitrarily freeze player balances, all fit under one nice long section. One of them is based on if I have suspicion that they are using multiple accounts or money laundering. Another is simply, if at my discretion, I determine that you or your account is detrimental to the conduct of my business. I use this to freeze player balances when they win. When questioned, I respond that they violated the ToS by stating that they violated the section containing those clauses. I do not provide any evidence and then state, "we'll return the deposit though."

Fair, or not fair?

That is literally what is happening with Sportsbet.io.

Not fair at all.

[Degens]

[I create a website dedicated for gambling. Outlined within the ToS are a few clauses that allow me to arbitrarily freeze player balances, all fit under one nice long section. One of them is based on if I have suspicion that they are using multiple accounts or money laundering. Another is simply, if at my discretion, I determine that you or your account is detrimental to the conduct of my business. I use this to freeze player balances when they win. When questioned, I respond that they violated the ToS by stating that they violated the section containing those clauses. I do not provide any evidence and then state, "we'll return the deposit though."

Fair, or not fair?

That is literally what is happening with Sportsbet.io.

Not fair at all.

Check out non custodial smart contract based sportsbooks, where the operator never has custody of the player's funds.

Only issue is they don't accept bitcoin, as they tend to be ethereum based. Degens.com is one such example.

[nutildah]

When questioned, I respond that they violated the ToS by stating that they violated the section containing those clauses. I do not provide any evidence and then state, "we'll return the deposit though."

Fair, or not fair?

Wrongdoing isn't necessarily the same thing as "not fair," but in my eyes, it is fair because the user agreed to those terms of service upon registration, and their deposit was returned so they didn't actually lose any money. It's an open market and the player has the choice to use other sportsbooks in the future. If players feel treated unfairly by Sportsbet then surely they will switch to their competitors, resulting in the loss of business for Sportsbet.

In this instance - as many of the sudden influx of others as of late - no wrongdoing was done by Sportsbet. If Sportsbet's terms of conditions are deemed to be "unfair," the free market will sort it out.

[saturent]

It's fair because the user agreed to those terms of service upon registration, and their deposit was returned so they didn't actually lose any money. It's an open market and the player has the choice to use other sportsbooks in the future. If players feel treated unfairly by Sportsbet then surely they will switch to their competitors, resulting in the loss of business for Sportsbet. In this instance - as many of the sudden influx of others as of late - no wrongdoing was done by Sportsbet, and the free market will sort it out.

It is not fair since I did not violate any ToS and they do not even provide evidence to proof these accusations, not even a single specification/clarification besides several automated emails.

As far as I am concerned, they would allow me to lose as much money as I would be willing to deposit, but by the time of withdrawing some profits, then problems start, right? Where do you see the fairness here? I do not see any.

They are in their absolute right to shut my account when they have a "suspicion" of a breach on their ToS, I could agree on that.

However, the whole balance from the account should be returned to me since it was won legitimately, and having a "suspicion" does not mean that something wrong is actually happening.

I did not do anything, and no evidence is given to proof otherwise.

Returning the balance (whole) as it was when it was frozen, is the most fair thing I can think of.

And even more when I only had these tiny profits. We are not talking of several BTC on profits, we are talking about 0.021btc, which is ridiculous.

[mindrust]

It is fair because you did violate their ToS by not violating anything.

They simply didn't like you.

[saturent]

It is fair because you did violate their ToS by not violating anything.

They simply didn't like you.

That makes perfect sense to me as to be the main reason, since no better clarification has been given.

[actmyname]

Wrongdoing isn't necessarily the same thing as "not fair," but in my eyes, it is fair because the user agreed to those terms of service upon registration, and their deposit was returned so they didn't actually lose any money

I want you to consider the two states of reality from before OP deposited to after OP was returned money.

Prior to deposit: No bets have been made. Balance is X.
After return: Bets have been made. Balance is X.

The fact that Sportsbet.io accepted bets means that they were willing to take the player's money in the case of a loss. Given that the player has instead won, the casino is now instead liable to pay up. Unfortunately, due to them using their arbitrary ToS, they are able to quote a clause that gives them absolute discretion and they are able to essentially nullify the player's wins.

Now imagine this. X:

I offer you a bet. If you win, I freeze your winnings and return your deposit. If you lose, I take your money. I cover details allowing me to arbitrarily freeze balances if I consider you a negative to my casino in a clause outlined within the ToS. You agreed to this. I can now act accordingly to everyone else who agrees to the ToS, because of course, contracts are all-encompassing and if you were too stupid to read it then you deserve to get scammed. Lol, what a bunch of newbie dimwit losers for me to take advantage of by documenting binding legal contracts. They can do nothing about it. That's because rules are rules, and if you accept it then you're vulnerable to every small part of the clauses.

[saturent]

I want you to consider the two states of reality from before OP deposited to after OP was returned money.

Prior to deposit: No bets have been made. Balance is X.
After return: Bets have been made. Balance is X.

The fact that Sportsbet.io accepted bets means that they were willing to take the player's money in the case of a loss. Given that the player has instead won, the casino is now instead liable to pay up. Unfortunately, due to them using their arbitrary ToS, they are able to quote a clause that gives them absolute discretion and they are able to essentially nullify the player's wins.

Now imagine this.

I offer you a bet. If you win, I freeze your winnings and return your deposit. If you lose, I take your money. I cover details allowing me to arbitrarily freeze balances if I consider you a negative to my casino in a clause outlined within the ToS. You agreed to this. I can now act accordingly to everyone else who agrees to the ToS, because of course, contracts are all-encompassing and if you were too stupid to read it then you deserve to get scammed.

And the nightmare for me was to be a whole week anxiously waiting for a resolution to knowing what would happen, mainly, to my deposit.

The uncertainty from the whole issue was horribly stressful.

Sent them many emails and no specific answer was ever given.

Instead, I received 3 automated replies, each every 24-48hours.
After these, I had to wait more than 4 days for another reply (the one stating the reimbursement of my deposits, the one I had been wishing to receive since the start. I went through a very bad week waiting for it... no F's about costumer care were ever given by Sportsbet.io).

Really bad experience.

[nutildah]

I want you to consider the two states of reality from before OP deposited to after OP was returned money.

Prior to deposit: No bets have been made. Balance is X.
After return: Bets have been made. Balance is X.

The fact that Sportsbet.io accepted bets means that they were willing to take the player's money in the case of a loss. Given that the player has instead won, the casino is now instead liable to pay up. Unfortunately, due to them using their arbitrary ToS, they are able to quote a clause that gives them absolute discretion and they are able to essentially nullify the player's wins.

Now imagine this.

I offer you a bet. If you win, I freeze your winnings and return your deposit. If you lose, I take your money. I cover details allowing me to arbitrarily freeze balances if I consider you a negative to my casino in a clause outlined within the ToS. You agreed to this. I can now act accordingly to everyone else who agrees to the ToS, because of course, contracts are all-encompassing and if you were too stupid to read it then you deserve to get scammed.

The player apparently made at least 50 bets, some of which were wins and some of which were losses. So the net amount won is what he is claiming to be the "amount scammed." Of course I disagree with the word "scam" here because that implies a net monetary loss, which didn't happen no matter how you frame it. Its arguable that he was scammed out of his time or the money he could have been up by placing the same bets elsewhere (if that was an option).

In your scenario, you're describing a sportsbook that I simply wouldn't play at, but I don't think Sportsbet sees their decisions as "arbitrary." You see them as arbitrary.

This is what it looks like when Sportsbet is actually trying to dissuade players that cost them money, and not because they were violating Terms of Service:

Some bookies don't want you at their site no more. My account at Sportsbet is limited to ridiculously low amounts, I have no price boost anymore, even my max bet button is gone. They want to get rid of me and achieve that by making my account unusable. If multi-accounting was allowed, they couldn't get rid of me (or not that easy), since I could just open new accounts all the time. This is industry standard and they have all the right to do it. I am ok with it, though it's a bit annoying always I must confess, but nothing I can do.

Ty also has a great point about how most casinos/sportsbooks view multi-accounting:

There is multi-accounting and multi-accounting, this is the bottom line. If you are multi-accounting, but always lose all your money, then you are allowed to multi-account. If you are multi-accounting and winning, then you will be a victim of T&C's.
I am 100% sure that every casino/bookmaker knows about a lot of players doing multi-accounting at their sites - and they are fine with it, as long as it's giving them profits. If these players start to win, hit a bigger parlay or request a withdrawal, they can always user their power-tool, so this is a worthwhile, nearly risk-free, business, where you can never prove the operators being guilty.

Sportbet's behavior here is pretty standard in the industry. I had to forfeit casino winnings once because I forgot I had opened another account there years earlier, never activating the bonuses from either. But the casino put 2-and-2 together and used ToS as an excuse to take my winnings. I was pissed, but technically I did violate their ToS, so I accepted it and moved on.

Ultimately its up to the player to find a new casino/sportsbook if they feel they have been treated unfairly or wronged. I draw the line at using ToC to confiscate deposit balances, which is one of the main differences between a scam and non-scam bitcoin gambling operation, exchange, wallet service, etc.

Not that I think you forgot it was an option, but if you really feel strongly that Sportsbet is in the wrong then you should support whatever flags against them you think are most adequate.

[mindrust]

tldr;

don't play at sportsbet.io if you are a winner.

you can play as much as you want if you are a loser. 

[JollyGood]

I agree with this simply because the ToS clearly state what Sportsbet can do if they even suspect anything untoward going on. Does that allow them to misuse the ToS to steal funds? Well it allows the facility for them to do it but that does not mean they will do it.

If Sportsbet or any other casino mass-scam or selective-scam their users then surely people will walk away and allow the casino to slide in to obscurity. I just fail to see this as a scam by Sportsbet. What I see is them taking a strong stance against users they feel are trying to cheat them. Where they have made a real mess of things is by not freezing accounts of users as soon as they suspect them of cheating. By allowing those users to play and effectively lose funds is tantamount to morally indefensible conduct by Sportsbet if they then stop those users they suspect of cheating from withdrawing funds.

A user is effectively signing up of their own accord to ToS they were never forced to accept. If those users did not like the ToS offered or enforced by Sportsbet they should sign up to other casinos - simple.  They should review the ToS other casinos offer beefore signing up but will notice virtually all of them have identical clauses.

When questioned, I respond that they violated the ToS by stating that they violated the section containing those clauses. I do not provide any evidence and then state, "we'll return the deposit though."

Fair, or not fair?

Wrongdoing isn't necessarily the same thing as "not fair," but in my eyes, it is fair because the user agreed to those terms of service upon registration, and their deposit was returned so they didn't actually lose any money. It's an open market and the player has the choice to use other sportsbooks in the future. If players feel treated unfairly by Sportsbet then surely they will switch to their competitors, resulting in the loss of business for Sportsbet.

In this instance - as many of the sudden influx of others as of late - no wrongdoing was done by Sportsbet. If Sportsbet's terms of conditions are deemed to be "unfair," the free market will sort it out.

[actmyname]

In your scenario, you're describing a sportsbook that I simply wouldn't play at, but I don't think Sportsbet sees their decisions as "arbitrary." You see them as arbitrary.

I'm describing Sportsbet.io.

Check the Terms and Conditions.

17. Cancellations, Suspensions and Closure
17.1.    Without restricting our ability to rely on other remedies that may be available to us, we may suspend and/or terminate your account, cancel any outstanding bets and/or confiscate any or all funds in your account at our absolute discretion if:
(i) we suspect that you are engaging in money laundering, illegal or other fraudulent activity while using our Website; or
(ii) we suspect that you are depositing funds which have been obtained unlawfully or in a clearly and seriously debase manner; or
(iii) we obtain evidence that you are part of a betting syndicate where several parties are involved in placing bets in order to evade the Sportsbook Rules, these Terms and Conditions or any other rules of Sportsbet.io; or
(iv) we determine that you are using any device, robot, spider, software, routine or other method (or anything in the nature of the foregoing) to interfere or attempt to interfere with the normal proper functioning of our services, any relevant device(s), software, the Website, the casino games, the sportsbook and betting information or any transactions offered on the Website and in particular will not employ or make use of any artificial intelligence or other system (including machines, computers, software or any other automated systems) designed specifically to defeat the Sportsbet.io systems; or
(v) we determine that you are colluding or attempt to collude with other players in order to defraud Sportsbet.io or its customers;
(vi) we determine that you are breaching any term of these Terms and Conditions;
(vii) we determine that you are acting in a manner that is detrimental to the conduct of our business.
17.2.    You acknowledge that Sportsbet.io shall be the final decision-maker as to whether you have violated rules, terms or conditions in a manner that results in suspension or permanent barring from participation in our Websites.

https://archive.is/veb99#selection-1367.0-1385.231

[saturent]

The player apparently made at least 50 bets, some of which were wins and some of which were losses. So the net amount won is what he is claiming to be the "amount scammed." Of course I disagree with the word "scam" here because that implies a net monetary loss, which didn't happen no matter how you frame it. Its arguable that he was scammed out of his time or the money he could have been up by placing the same bets elsewhere (if that was an option).

If I had lost my deposits, they would have allowed me to keep on playing more and more. Few seconds to register, deposit and play, but then more than a week to just recover my deposit. How does this even make any logical sense to you?

They always have the upperhand here. What would have happened if I had lost all my deposits? Surely they would have never frozen the account, I wouldnt have ever been accused of breaking the rules, and Sportsbet.io would have allowed me to keep on playing more.

It is not like the player can freeze from the casino what he has already lost when he suspects the casino is cheating/abusing him in some way, and then walk away.

Even if I lose it all, I accept it and move on. Why cant they accept that after winning a few bets legitimally, the profits from those belong to me? Where is the fairness?

And if they suspect I violated their ToS, where is the evidence? Not even a simple clarification has ever been given!

[nutildah]

In your scenario, you're describing a sportsbook that I simply wouldn't play at, but I don't think Sportsbet sees their decisions as "arbitrary." You see them as arbitrary.

I'm describing Sportsbet.io.

Check the Terms and Conditions.

I don't see the word "arbitrary" there.

If I had lost my deposits, they would have allowed me to keep on playing more and more. Few seconds to register, deposit and play, but then more than a week to just recover my deposit. How does this even make any logical sense to you?

This is standard for most casinos and sportsbooks. Sportsbet is no different in this regard. It's not "fair," and it certainly benefits their business more than if they were to demand KYC from the getgo and check for multi-accounting before betting began, but good luck finding a sportsbook with competitive odds that doesn't do this, and let me know when you do find one.

[JollyGood]

I made a post about this earlier which captures why their ToS trumps everything a user might allege against Sportsbet: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54893685#msg54893685

1- Sportsbet state in their ToS:

12. BONUS RULES
12.1 General
12.1.1 Bonuses are available at our discretion and we reserve the right to restrict the availability of any bonus to any player at any time.
12.1.2 Fraudulent or multiple entries will not be accepted, neither will entries made in breach of these Standard Promotional Terms or the specific promotional terms.
12.1.3 Some of our Bonuses may be offered to you on a complimentary basis or when taking part and completing promotions through the website.
12.1.4 All promotions are not available to players using an e-wallet when depositing funds.
12.1.5 Players who are Self-Excluded are not eligible to receive any bonus. Players that Self-Exclude during the course of bonus qualification or after a Bonus Token has been placed but before any winnings (Cash or Bonus) were accumulated, will not be eligible to receive any winnings (whether as Cash or as a Bonus Token)
12.1.6 Only one Bonus offer per player, per household, per shared computer and shared IP address unless otherwise stated. We do not allow “Multiple Accounts”. Player account details will be determined by any or all combination of name, mailing address, email address, computer (serial), IP address, payment (deposit/withdrawal) method used and any other form of identification.
12.1.7 By accepting any of our bonuses, you agree to adhere to these Bonus Rules and any applicable rules made available to you before or when accepting a Bonus with us. You must also comply with our full Terms and Conditions at all times.
12.1.8 We reserve the right to withhold any Bonus, associated winnings whether from cash or bonus wagers if believed that the offer has been abused and/or where the terms of the offer are not fulfilled, or any irregular betting patterns are found including collusion, and this decision is final.

2- The rules are clearly stated in the footer of the Sportsbet website

3- By signing up to the Sportbet website, all users are confirming they agree to and will abide by the ToS that are clearly stated beforehand therefore all users are aware of which type of contract they are getting in to before they are signing up

4- The most important of these rules is 12.1.8 because it clearly states Sportbet have the right to effectively withhold any winnings or bonuses if they believe they have reason: "We reserve the right to withhold any Bonus, associated winnings whether from cash or bonus wagers if believed that the offer has been abused and/or where the terms of the offer are not fulfilled, or any irregular betting patterns are found including collusion, and this decision is final."

5- Sportsbet ToS do not state that in the event of them implementing clause 12.1.8 they are under any obligation to justify their findings to the suspected fraudster or to a third party such as various members of this forum. Sportsbet are also bound by European data protection laws as stated in their ToS (5.1 and 5.3):



5. CONFIDENTIALITY

5.1 We will take reasonable and appropriate measures to ensure that Your personal information as disclosed to Us shall remain confidential. We will not disclose Your personal data or betting information unless required to do so by any applicable laws and regulations, court order, the relevant gaming and law enforcement authorities or other than as set forth in these Terms and Conditions. It is also Your responsibility to keep Your personal information confidential.

5.3 We will process Your personal data in accordance with Data Protection Act 2018, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2018, other relevant legislation and regulation and Our Privacy Policy.


6- The OP has claimed he is innocent. From what is seems on the surface the OP is saying that he is ready to comply with KYC and sent it to Sportsbet but they rejected it as 'failed'.

In my opinion the bottom line in this situation is this:

Sportsbet concluded beyond reasonable doubt the OP conducted in activity that breached their ToS and they are under no obligation to explain to anybody why they came to that conclusion. They also stated it was not as simple as it being based on multiple accounts from the same IP address. Furthermore they went on to state they will not state what their security protocols are as they will give an obvious advantage to those that try to defraud them.

All existing Sportsbet users and all future new sign ups have to accept their accounts could be frozen at any point without a fully explained justification and they could lose all their winnings but will probably get back their initial deposited funds providing they have not been spent. The OP has protested his innocence but that has not stopped Sportsbet from coming to the same conclusion that their ToS were breached.

==================

Having said all this, there are two main points of concern for me that Sportsbet and other betting websites implement on a wide scale:

1- I do not know why Sportsbet asked for KYC when they knew it would definitely not be enough. Even if the KYC is valid and even if they have a video call to ascertain identity of the user but he is linked with multiple accounts and breach of ToS then why would they ask for KYC?

2- Why do all these issues of multiple accounts come up after a user wins an amount or tries to withdraw - Sportsbet and other websites should have algorithms that start freezing accounts as soon as multiple accounts and breaches are detected because it means as long as users in breach of the ToS are depositing crypto and spending it losing on bets it remains a non-issue but as soon as a win or withdrawal takes place it triggers a breach of ToS

[saturent]

This is standard for most casinos and sportsbooks. Sportsbet is no different in this regard. It's not "fair," and it certainly benefits their business more than if they were to demand KYC from the getgo and check for multi-accounting before betting began, but good luck finding a sportsbook with competitive odds that doesn't do this, and let me know when you do find one.

No worries, I do not need to find the "perfect" sportsbook, as there is none.

Nonetheless, I have seen many other casinos/bookers that accussed a player of multiaccounting and shut their account. But then, they reimbursed the WHOLE account balance as it was when the account was frozen, no exception. And not after one week.. mainly after 24h, only.

My sole mistake was to trust Sportsbet.io ethics. Nothing else.

[saturent]

1- Sportsbet state in their ToS:

12. BONUS RULES
12.1...

Honestly, I do not even care about these bonuses.

Occasionally, I used one of those boosters on a small bet and only because it was popping up on my slip all the time, otherwise, I would not even bother.

Therefore, these ToS do not apply on my case at all.

[Degens]

1- Sportsbet state in their ToS:

12. BONUS RULES
12.1...

Honestly, I do not even care about these bonuses.

Occasionally, I used one of those boosters on a small bet and only because it was popping up on my slip all the time, otherwise, I would not even bother.

Therefore, these ToS do not apply on my case at all.

"Perfect" sportsbook would be non custodial. Where the book never has possession of your funds.

Check Degens.com as it uses smart contracts that are audited. It's 100% KYC free. So there is no 'multi account' issues. And nobody at Degens can touch your money.

Centralized sportsbooks won't exist for long IMO. Non custodial, decentralized books fixes all the dozens of problems cited about sportbet etc.

[suchmoon]

shill piece

Get lost.