SCAM!!! AdkinsBet scammed me for amount of 196 mBTC in completely blatant way

[NotATether]

Closing accounts is entirely at your discretion. If you want to close an account for whatever reason, nobody should tag you for that. However:

close your account and confiscate the funds if

This is the part that can make or break a reputation. You shouldn't confiscate funds for anything less than cheating (for instance abusing bugs). And even then, you should be very careful as confiscating funds is a killer for online reputations.

It doesn't have to be that complicated to reimburse people if their accounts have to be terminated. All they'd have to do is return any balance and winnings that is still in the account. And they have to discuss with each customer via email individually to work out a way to return the money to them, since sending them back to depositing addresses is risky. What if the customer threw it away, or they used multiple deposit addresses?

[1715143509]

1715143509

[AdkinsBET]

Our terms and conditions state that an account can be closed if our company is put in a bad light

maybe remove that rule on your term(the highlighted part) since a lot of members will absolutely misinterpret that and will think that it is a way of silencing them if they had a bad experience and complained here in the forum.

Closing accounts is entirely at your discretion. If you want to close an account for whatever reason, nobody should tag you for that. However:

close your account and confiscate the funds if

This is the part that can make or break a reputation. You shouldn't confiscate funds for anything less than cheating (for instance abusing bugs). And even then, you should be very careful as confiscating funds is a killer for online reputations. If this would ever happen, I like the way Stunna handled this:

This user in question was linked by fingerprint to a user who defrauded PD out of a significant sum of money. Given that, their account had a flag on it before they even made a deposit. We asked for ID and the user provided an identity we believed wasn’t theirs. We wanted to have a phone call with them to try and clear this up and after many delays they agreed. It was clear they had found a non-involved girl talk to us who didn’t seem to know anything about primedice or bitcoin. That violated our terms but obviously that isn't why we held the withdrawal, we held it for the reason originally stated.

I'd like to stop this right here and make clear that this is not a matter of money but rather a matter of principle. I'm happy to donate at minimum the funds involved in this claim to a charity of the community's choosing. The trust of this community is not something we take for granted and is why we elected to post here to further explain this unusual situation.

As stated earlier, there has been a major misunderstanding at the moment between the compliance department and the indirect communication to the forum representative.
There was too much communication between them, which meant that information was not transferred correctly. We are busy with the accounts. The account has NOT been closed because he has violated the terms and conditions through comments on the forum. As mentioned earlier, accounts are only closed when people make false accusations. This user has not made any false accusations,You can dispute about the truth, but the fact is that this user had the right to post his accusation, as he is seeing things from another perspective than we are.
An example in which we would close accounts if there is a user with no transactions or only 5 mBTC, and is posting an accusation that he was scammed for 300 mBTC while there was not any related criteria for this, for example if he would have made a bet with 5 and he would have lost that. Tomorrow I will speak with my colleagues from the compliance and we will revise the terms to make things more clear.
We do apologize for the misunderstandings. I hope to give you an update tomorrow to everybody's satisfaction.

Ray

[ongkok87]

I do not judge but I have the feeling something is wrong with this user Realscout, upon his posting history. Since Royse777 is close friends with Realscout, I think it is not really reasonable how Royse is talking here.
He is not objective at all. I remember what happened with Betnomi with the users passport!

Post from Realscout, maybe he can explain to us what this supposed to mean?



Quote:

Hello! I'm looking for a somebody who knows cricket mechanics well or used to play cricket. I need a person who will go to the matches and bet afterpoints, Im gonna be responsible for the techincal part (accounts, money etc) and provide all instructions to a person who goes to the matches. If it is about you text me, I will pay a lot for kinda simple work.

[AdkinsBET]

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

[AB de Royse777]

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

Why it's obvious that everything you are trying to avoid the bet that was place in the match of Ruberta Carballes - Raberta Ortega to make it lose or void so that nothing goes further from this bet?

To sum up what we have:
1. Attemp to accuse in multiaccounting
2. Attempt to connect to some 'group of cheaters'
3. Switching the bet
4. Voiding the bet becaue odds was 'wrong' and false statement about broken chain
5. Banning for other user's post (here it is btw https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5308700.msg56076019#msg56076019)

You switched the same bet - reason number 3 for OP.
You voided the same bet because odds were wrong - reason number 4
You then said the chain broken or something since the same bet was voided - extension of reason number 4 from OP

So now we have another claim which is use of VPN and again it just to avoid the bet placed on Ruberta Carballes - Raberta Ortega?

How many more reasons we are expecting that are on the way? I do not think many people will even believe any reference that will come from your system like showing IP or such things because you have already done a lot to believe that you are capable to change your database.

Yesterday there was a guy who caught red-handed, and he could avoid it if he would just admit that he wanted to do the scam and apologize that he will never do it again  but instead he gave one after another lie to establish his first lie as a truth. A lie is a lie and a lot of other connections will prove it a lie. It's now obvious that you are doing the same as that user from yesterday.

Who is your provider?
Another question, who do the KYC for you?

[actmyname]

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

That's weird, because the ToS didn't have those absolute anti-VPN rules back then. What in the hell are you talking about, Ray?! What ToS violation did he break apart from simply using his VPN? Why are you applying ToS from January 4th onto someone that hasn't played since December?

More importantly: did you tell players that you changed the ToS and have them agree to the new terms?

[JollyGood]

If you are saying that you made the OP whole again by sending his deposit back but not his winnings then that is something that is something the majority of the community here will not be able to accept as an appropriate outcome. Kindly reconsider.

Maybe the way forward in this case would be to simply send the full winnings to the OP and then enforce your newly updated terms and conditions regarding your VPN policy strictly enough to stop users depositing funds and stop users signing up when VPNs are used therefore you cannot use VPN as an excuse when users want to withdraw.

I hope you reassess the situation, pay the OP what he is owed then we can all move forward.

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

[BTCGOLD]

If you are saying that you made the OP whole again by sending his deposit back but not his winnings then that is something that is something the majority of the community here will not be able to accept as an appropriate outcome. Kindly reconsider.

Maybe the way forward in this case would be to simply send the full winnings to the OP and then enforce your newly updated terms and conditions regarding your VPN policy strictly enough to stop users depositing funds and stop users signing up when VPNs are used therefore you cannot use VPN as an excuse when users want to withdraw.

I hope you reassess the situation, pay the OP what he is owed then we can all move forward.

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

I find this very interesting to read. If major betting sites such as Fortunejack, Stake and Sportsbet only return the deposit and not the winnings, then everyone agrees to this solution and write that the sites are in their right.
When Adkinsbet opts for this solution, it is suddenly not accepted by the community. Thought DT members were on the forum to give an honest opinion and they could be trusted, but more and more I started to get the feeling these accounts are used now trying to pressure Adkinsbet to force them to pay the full amount. I can not imagine this is the way DT members should act.
The fact that Royse is involved in every Adkinsbet topic is also a very strange thing. His friend has a problem, and Royse is trying to solve this by asking his DT friends to give them a red card and want to pressure them with this.

[imutlinda]

I do not judge but I have the feeling something is wrong with this user Realscout, upon his posting history. Since Royse777 is close friends with Realscout, I think it is not really reasonable how Royse is talking here.
He is not objective at all. I remember what happened with Betnomi with the users passport!

Post from Realscout, maybe he can explain to us what this supposed to mean?



Quote:

Hello! I'm looking for a somebody who knows cricket mechanics well or used to play cricket. I need a person who will go to the matches and bet afterpoints, Im gonna be responsible for the techincal part (accounts, money etc) and provide all instructions to a person who goes to the matches. If it is about you text me, I will pay a lot for kinda simple work.

So what you are trying to say is that realscout is involved in criminal activities and royse777 is being part of this as well?

[realscout]

I do not judge but I have the feeling something is wrong with this user Realscout, upon his posting history. Since Royse777 is close friends with Realscout, I think it is not really reasonable how Royse is talking here.
He is not objective at all. I remember what happened with Betnomi with the users passport!

Post from Realscout, maybe he can explain to us what this supposed to mean?



Quote:

Hello! I'm looking for a somebody who knows cricket mechanics well or used to play cricket. I need a person who will go to the matches and bet afterpoints, Im gonna be responsible for the techincal part (accounts, money etc) and provide all instructions to a person who goes to the matches. If it is about you text me, I will pay a lot for kinda simple work.

So what you are trying to say is that realscout is involved in criminal activities and royse777 is being part of this as well?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5290408.msg56118071#msg56118071 please stop trolling finally

[realscout]

We were already working on your case to solve it, but you decided to slender Adkinsbet indirectly on the forum. We told you that this is something that can not be accepted.
This is also clearly written in our terms:

In the following conditions, your account may be closed by us, and will be viewed and evaluated individually by case. We reserve the right to suspend your account without notice, which will remain suspended until complete investigation of the matter. Adkinsbet remains the right to confiscate the funds if one of the terms will be violated. You commit to completely comply with all of Adkinsbet 's inquiries into such activities. We may opt to upload or close your account and confiscate the funds if one of the following conditions apply:
If you have more than 1 registered account with Adkinsbet.
If the name registered on your Adkinsbet account does not match the name on the required statement from your address and or ID card. Of course, we take into consideration that all countries have different ways of express names.
If a player causes image damage to the website (Any direct / indirect accusation through any possible communication channel (e.g. forum, Email, telephone or other communication channels). This could include spreading false information, false accusations and intentionally / repeatedly putting Adkinsbet in a negative daylight.

really? but look at the last messages u said that i allegedly forced my friend to accuse u and that u ban me and ingored me afterwards. now u say that u were working on the case. i can delete the post and rename the thread at any time actually. but it doesnt look like u are really doing anything

https://imgur.com/a/SBki1Vn

u havent answered anything since then, like u stopped answering on the broken chain case

i havent received any reply since i sent that message. and i didnt use vpn why should i use it if i can open website directly?

[realscout]

Aha so that is the big secret. You are doing courtsiding, and you admit it by yourself!
That is pure cheating!

could u reread my first post please. i mentioned it there as well. u can just look at the markets i bet on there

and courtsiding is dead nowdays tho

[JollyGood]

The fact that Royse is involved in every Adkinsbet topic is also a very strange thing. His friend has a problem, and Royse is trying to solve this by asking his DT friends to give them a red card and want to pressure them with this.

I did not check every AdkinsBET so am not sure what is exactly going on with them and have no idea who is posting in those threads (not a good sign if there are many scam accusations against them) so cannot comment on whether Royse777 is posting in them or not but from what I can recall this is the only one I have posted in.

For your information, there is no DT manipulation going on here. I cannot speak for other DT members but Royse777 has not asked me collude with him in order to pressure AdkinsBET therefore your allegation is disingenuous at the least.

If you are saying that you made the OP whole again by sending his deposit back but not his winnings then that is something that is something the majority of the community here will not be able to accept as an appropriate outcome. Kindly reconsider.

Maybe the way forward in this case would be to simply send the full winnings to the OP and then enforce your newly updated terms and conditions regarding your VPN policy strictly enough to stop users depositing funds and stop users signing up when VPNs are used therefore you cannot use VPN as an excuse when users want to withdraw.

I hope you reassess the situation, pay the OP what he is owed then we can all move forward.

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

I find this very interesting to read. If major betting sites such as Fortunejack, Stake and Sportsbet only return the deposit and not the winnings, then everyone agrees to this solution and write that the sites are in their right.
When Adkinsbet opts for this solution, it is suddenly not accepted by the community. Thought DT members were on the forum to give an honest opinion and they could be trusted, but more and more I started to get the feeling these accounts are used now trying to pressure Adkinsbet to force them to pay the full amount. I can not imagine this is the way DT members should act.
The fact that Royse is involved in every Adkinsbet topic is also a very strange thing. His friend has a problem, and Royse is trying to solve this by asking his DT friends to give them a red card and want to pressure them with this.

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

That's weird, because the ToS didn't have those absolute anti-VPN rules back then. What in the hell are you talking about, Ray?! What ToS violation did he break apart from simply using his VPN? Why are you applying ToS from January 4th onto someone that hasn't played since December?

More importantly: did you tell players that you changed the ToS and have them agree to the new terms?

Thank you for your input in to this matter. I think actmyname addressed the issue you raised. Applying terms and conditions to someone who did something long before the updated terms were introduced is just not correct.

[BlackFor3st]

If you are saying that you made the OP whole again by sending his deposit back but not his winnings then that is something that is something the majority of the community here will not be able to accept as an appropriate outcome.
~snip

Can you explain to everyone on the forum why it is always a great solution for all major bookmakers, that they then pay back the money from the deposit?
Then when Adkinsbet wants to refund the deposit, it will not be accepted all of a sudden.

[JollyGood]

ToS have been violated after the activity on his 2nd deposit(usage of VPN). We decide to refund the deposit from the 2nd deposit (37 mBTC).
The player has been contacted also on his Email. After this, we consider the case solved.

That's weird, because the ToS didn't have those absolute anti-VPN rules back then. What in the hell are you talking about, Ray?! What ToS violation did he break apart from simply using his VPN? Why are you applying ToS from January 4th onto someone that hasn't played since December?

More importantly: did you tell players that you changed the ToS and have them agree to the new terms?

Here was my reply to the same question from BTCGOLD and it applies to you too.

Thank you for your input in to this matter. I think actmyname addressed the issue you raised. Applying terms and conditions to someone who did something long before the updated terms were introduced is just not correct.

If you are saying that you made the OP whole again by sending his deposit back but not his winnings then that is something that is something the majority of the community here will not be able to accept as an appropriate outcome.
~snip

Can you explain to everyone on the forum why it is always a great solution for all major bookmakers, that they then pay back the money from the deposit?
Then when Adkinsbet wants to refund the deposit, it will not be accepted all of a sudden.

[BlackFor3st]

I can no longer see the previous conditions, but if I remember correctly, it was also very clear that you were not allowed to use a VPN to mask your location. Conditions violated, so reason for account closure. What's weird about that? We have seen that example at dozens of sites. The sites are always in the right, except for Adkinsbet, who has to pay for everything and the conditions and the VPN suddenly play no significant role.
I would advise you to think twice before you write something.

[JollyGood]

I think it is a good step forward by AdkinsBET to return the deposit but now they should consider paying the outstanding (or disputed) funds to the OP too. I do not see it being in any way helpful or of benefit to AdkinsBET to drag this out.

If they have made their final decision which is they will not pay the disputed funds then they should post here stating as far as they are concerned the issue is closed.

I can no longer see the previous conditions, but if I remember correctly, it was also very clear that you were not allowed to use a VPN to mask your location. Conditions violated, so reason for account closure. What's weird about that? We have seen that example at dozens of sites. The sites are always in the right, except for Adkinsbet, who has to pay for everything and the conditions and the VPN suddenly play no significant role.
I would advise you to think twice before you write something.

[NotATether]

If you are saying that you made the OP whole again by sending his deposit back but not his winnings then that is something that is something the majority of the community here will not be able to accept as an appropriate outcome.
~snip

Can you explain to everyone on the forum why it is always a great solution for all major bookmakers, that they then pay back the money from the deposit?
Then when Adkinsbet wants to refund the deposit, it will not be accepted all of a sudden.

Look of it from a different angle, if someone were to make bets and lose them, would it also be OK for sportsbooks to pay back the losses too? It makes as little sense as not paying out winnings.

Money that's not in your account is not yours, so it doesn't matter how much you initially deposited: If you have X amount of bitcoin right now, you are entitled to receive back X bitcoins fully. Doesn't matter if they came from canceled/suspicious/multiaccounting/VPN bets or whatever.

[actmyname]

Here are the archives for the Terms and Conditions if anyone is curious.

I outlined the very noticeable differences in this post, so I won't do the same thing again.Current ToS
Previous ToS, snapshotted on December 20th of an October 29 updateDon't invoke Terms and Conditions that people have not agreed to and don't change them without having people agree to them. That kind of behavior is unacceptable.

[numanoid]

Here are the archives for the Terms and Conditions if anyone is curious.

I outlined the very noticeable differences in this post, so I won't do the same thing again.Current ToS
Previous ToS, snapshotted on December 20th of an October 29 updateDon't invoke Terms and Conditions that people have not agreed to and don't change them without having people agree to them. That kind of behavior is unacceptable.

Did they typo the date of updated ToS? It stated for current Tos last updated on Jan 4th, 2020. While previous ToS was updated on Oct 29th, 2020