BC.game asking me to lose intentionally, then confiscating funds ---> RESOLVED!

[GekkeBelg]

ANJ: Operators may not limit stakes without “legitimate reasons”

If article L. 121-11 is violated, operators can be fined up to €1,500, which could be increased to €3,000 if the violations are repeated.In addition, offenders could receive two years in prison and a fine of €300,000.ANJ concluded that operators cannot refuse bets from a player, unless the operator has a legitimate reason as designated under article L. 121-11 of the French Code of Consumption. This means that an operator could argue that it has a legitimate reason not to accept a sports bet from a patron.Legally defined legitimate reasons include refusing to allow a minor, someone who has self-excluded or an excessive bettor to gamble.

That is a text from the French Gambling Association. What does that have to do with Curacao Licensed sportsbooks?

[1714689459]

1714689459

[1714689459]

1714689459

[1714689459]

1714689459

[1714689459]

1714689459

[icopress]

Since OP is satisfied with the outcome, I can't support the flag anymore and will therefore delete my support for it. The negative feedback for the casino will remain until the backlog of unresolved accusations has been resolved.

In this case, you need to update the reference information since it now points to this thread.

[Pmalek]

<Snap>

ANJ is the French gambling regulator. It's irrelevant in this discussion what other regulatory bodies do with or against casinos that they regulate. Some countries and their national regulators ban online gambling, but you can't cite them and their opinions for this matter either. 

In this case, you need to update the reference information since it now points to this thread.

Yes, that makes sense. holydarkness posted a list of open and unresolved cases. I will link to that instead.

[icopress]

Yes, that makes sense. holydarkness posted a list of open and unresolved cases. I will link to that instead.

Man, now I see. But as far as I understand now it should be a neutral tag since now it is not accurate. I see that all the cases in which the “arbitrators” you mentioned were involved were resolved.

BC.game asking me to lose intentionally, then confiscating funds by GekkeBelg | resolved | mBTC88
BC GAME LOSES DISPUTE AGAINST ME - AND STILL DOES NOT PAY MY WINNINGS by Jannn [a continuation to this thread] | resolved | $3,409
BlockDance B.V., BC.Game and its Fraudulent “Operator Verifier” by earlypaco | resolved | $7,111
BC.Game cancelled my bonuses and locked my account with $100k+ USD balance by -god- | unresolved | $250,000
BC.Game - can't withdraw 7.97 BTC by dplay | resolved | BTC7.97

As for the last case of “God”, judging by the statement of BC.Game and the comments of other people, it seems obvious to me that he is abusing public trust. in the sense that in the confusion, some could perceive his claim as legitimate, especially since there were no answers from BC for some time.

I have never seen any project solve such a large number of unsolved cases in such a short time, but users are not always right and I am inclined to think that this is one of such cases.