JustBit.io scamming again so much for No KYC for Crypto

[SmartGold01]

most casino often say no KYC but when there is a huge winning this same casino or gamble site would still asked for your details to enable you make withdrawal.

The casino never pretended to be a "no-kyc casino and OP didn't hit a big win.
OP, I didn't play at justbit before but as far as I can see, your accusation is not valid. The casino didn't scam you or steal anything from you. They just asked you to verify your identity. As you already know, this is something they have the right to do, as per their ToS which you have agreed to. So what's your complaint all about?

But wait a moment..
why is most people always afraid of kyc knowing too well that such casino /gambling site do require kyc does it mean they aren't reading their ToS before signing up in those site?
Op needs to lock this thread since is a wrong accusation because no scam, if he do carry out the kyc he might be allowed to make his withdrawal without any issues, however we should be very mindful on how we quickly rushed to accused site especially when not having patient with their requirements.

[1714670778]

1714670778

[1714670778]

1714670778

[1714670778]

1714670778

[1714670778]

1714670778

[Pmalek]

I mean I dont mind giving ID but giving ID to some random casino that can then be potentially used for fraud...
The whole point in playing crypto is to get away from that endless circle of documentation and giving some random place enough details to steal your identity!!

That's becoming a thing of the past. More and more services will be asking for KYC because that's what regulators require them to do. The big and flashy we don't require KYC is usually followed by a terms and conditions apply notification in small letters or some other note hiding the obvious. And then when you go and read it in more detail, you find out that you are giving them the right to ask for any documents they need if you want to withdraw your money.

Was aware, but those t&cs also exist on other casinos where I have withdrawn thousands and thousands without being bothered once.

In that case, all I can suggest is stay with the casinos you have a positive experience with and avoid jumping from site to site, especially if you are doing it for the welcome offers and bonuses that are almot impossible to obtain anyways due to the ridiculous wagering requirements.

I prefer a casino that;
1. Asks a client for KYC the very first moment they want to make a deposit if they are really serious about their KYC/AML Policies. Not only applying it when they make a win.

Me too, but the crypto community doesn't want that. I made a poll somewhere in the gambling section. The results showed that people don't want to do KYC immediately after registration and prefer doing it only if they are asked later. These are the results of that.

2. Returns all the client's funds (deposits and winnings) and close the account if he refuses to perform KYC verification.

You are not going to get your winnings. That would then defeat the purpose of their KYC request. They freeze your funds so that you have to undergo KYC, not turn them down and still get paid.

[holydarkness]

But wait a moment..
why is most people always afraid of kyc knowing too well that such casino /gambling site do require kyc does it mean they aren't reading their ToS before signing up in those site?
[...]

OP's main issue here is the marketing made by justbit. On their site, they give a banner where KYC is not required [see below]. It was a "clever" marketing because, in a way, it's an open statement. "No KYC", as long as you follow their condition, they're still allowed [as the players agreed] to ask for it when they deemed it.

[Mahdirakib]

Deposit $50 crypto, win $300 for withdraw, Apparently "security team" need ID against money laundering!! Who launders $50 only.

A licensed casino with the identity verification rules mentioned in the terms may request the user to complete the verification at any withdrawal amount. Casino just show an excuse to request the KYC documents, which isn’t true in most of the cases. The only way to get your withdrawal is to complete the KYC verification.

Still banner on homepage "No KYC for Crypto", they are scammers and thieves

It is true that JustBit is running their business with a misleading information on their homepage. Unfortunately, you won't be able to do anything as the rules of the terms are the main source for a casino to take steps against the user. You have submitted a complaint on Casino Guru with your issue, where you have introduced yourself as a resident of the United Kingdom. You are responsible for the inconvenience if it is true. Because, JustBit doesn't accept the players from the United Kingdom, and it is mentioned in their terms. Your complaint: Justbit Casino - Player's crypto withdrawal has been delayed.

They're owned by "Casbit Group, N.V.", the same company that own "0xBet" [no, not related to 1xBit], so in all technicalities, they're also under this representative, though I can understand if the contract for the said representative didn't cover "representing justbit" under his job desc.

You will notice a lot of casinos under the same company, but those could be operated by individual owners and team members. That's why the representative of 0xBet has said that. FYI, there are more casinos under Casbit Group, N.V. company. Another example, don't be surprised with the number of casinos under DAMA N.V. company.

[Pmalek]

<Snip>

He said that the value of his balance is $300 on Bitcointalk, on CasinoGuru he mentions $400. Perhaps it will go up to $1000 on AskGamblers. But seriously, the amounts don't matter.
You are correct that Justbit.io doesn't allow players from the United Kingdom to use the site. It's the player's responsibility to ensure whether or not they can rightly play there. If he is from the UK, I doubt they will release his winnings.

On the other hand, I have just tried accessing the casino using a VPN and different IP addresses. Some other banned countries, besides the UK, include the USA, France, and Germany. Very typical of Curacao-licensed casinos.

Here are the results:
- The site displays a notification and doesn't allow you to access it if you are using a German, French, or US IP.
- The site displays no notifications and you can freely access it with a UK IP. I tried two different ones, and both worked.

This is far from ideal, and there should be an IP block if a particular region is banned from playing. Still, every individual is responsible in following rules and laws themselves.

[LEVSKI7]

This site is a scam
this scheme is now very popular in Germany and Austria.
if you lose the deposits you hire a lawyer and he sues the sites for offering gambling without a license for the country. you win for sure and get your money back
the fault lies entirely with the site, the user is not responsible

[bitbollo]

@OP: beside marketing claims, have you checked their online reputation? or just have a read of their ToS?
How did you end up on this site and why did you initially want to trust and entrust to a first deposit?

[logfiles]

Me too, but the crypto community doesn't want that. I made a poll somewhere in the gambling section. The results showed that people don't want to do KYC immediately after registration and prefer doing it only if they are asked later. These are the results of that.

Almost all of us here hate KYC but if a platform must apply it then it should be done right as soon as one signs up just like most centralized exchanges do. Some casinos are using KYC verification to their advantage. Lose all the bets, and they won't care if the Bitcoins are dirty or not  , win one bet and try to withdraw then all of a sudden, they need to know who you are and where the money comes from.

Maybe most of the community members were/are ignorant about what's going on.

You are not going to get your winnings. That would then defeat the purpose of their KYC request. They freeze your funds so that you have to undergo KYC, not turn them down and still get paid.

It doesn't defeat the purpose of KYC. What defeats the purpose of the KYC or AML policies is not enforcing it from the very beginning before a user deposits anything. By denying the client winnings, the casinos are giving themselves a bit of an advantage and to me, it's not right.  If the same client lost, they wouldn't care.

[Mahdirakib]

- The site displays no notifications and you can freely access it with a UK IP. I tried two different ones, and both worked.

So, there is a loop in the geo-blocking system of JustBit. OP's last post has been made public on Casino Guru today, where he has said this

Please note I play from Brazil not UK. I have updated my residence country my work vpn was active still signing up to submit complaint it registed me as UK (dual citizenship, I'm resident in Brazil, working for uk company)

OP use UK VPN for his work, maybe he has played at JustBit while his work VPN was active. OP also mentioned that he has dual citizenship. Perhaps, the casino has asked him to complete the KYC verification for his IP address. I think the casino will allow the OP to withdraw his account balance (deposit and winnings) if he can prove his citizenship in Brazil through the KYC verification. Moreover, JustBit is partially responsible for the inconvenience as their geo-blocking doesn't work properly.

[Pmalek]

It doesn't defeat the purpose of KYC. What defeats the purpose of the KYC or AML policies is not enforcing it from the very beginning before a user deposits anything. By denying the client winnings, the casinos are giving themselves a bit of an advantage and to me, it's not right.  If the same client lost, they wouldn't care.

There are even traditional fiat online casinos that work similarly and allow you to start playing after signing up without performing KYC. You can find them by searching for a keyphrase like "no verification" casinos. Despite that, there will come a time when they will ask you for KYC. That could be when you want to withdraw, or if you deposit and wager above a certain threshold, etc.

OP will have to perform KYC if he wants his money. It's as simple as that. When I said that releasing the money without him undergoing identity verification defeats the purpose of it, I meant in this particular case, not generally. Justbit wants more information about the player. As Mahdirakib showed in his post above, it looks like OP made a mistake and played with an active VPN with a UK IP. They now want to know who he is, where he lives, and what territory he played from.

Should they have verified all this with a proper KYC at the beginning, sure. But crypto players don't want the traditional way of online gambling. 

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

Deposit $50 crypto, win $300 for withdraw, Apparently "security team" need ID against money laundering!! Who launders $50 only. More like they dont want to pay winnings, have had 3 withdraws from them no problem before, now they go for the KYC demand! Still banner on homepage "No KYC for Crypto", they are scammers and thieves

Wait a moment, before you can consider them scammers, have you first reason along to their request that you needed to provide them all necessary informations, KYC is what can be place demand on at any time as long as you're trying to make withdrawals, this has nothing to do with AML yet, you will just have to go through their normal procedures, if they are suspecting for KYC then it has to be in a more advanced way than you're seeing, and they wouldn't engage that unless your account was connected to a fraudulent transaction or you have a huge sum for withdrawal.

[holydarkness]

[...]

You are not going to get your winnings. That would then defeat the purpose of their KYC request. They freeze your funds so that you have to undergo KYC, not turn them down and still get paid.

It doesn't defeat the purpose of KYC. What defeats the purpose of the KYC or AML policies is not enforcing it from the very beginning before a user deposits anything. By denying the client winnings, the casinos are giving themselves a bit of an advantage and to me, it's not right.  If the same client lost, they wouldn't care.

Granted, many casino probably use KYC to turn a situation in their favor, most likely perhaps small and questionable casino [I think this one included]. But bigger ones mostly use them fairly, to identify someone and prevent further abuse by tying an identity to some findings [IP, username, etc.]

Though I can't recall the name and the detail of the case [I think it's rollbit?], I remember there was a case where a casino refund user's deposit because he refused to do KYC. Not the winnings, as that'll defeat the purpose of the KYC/AML, like Pmalek said, but I think it's kinda fair that they returned the original fund.

As for why they didn't enforce KYC from the very beginning, one casino explained that they're always threading between legal compliance imposed into them by the govt. and the privacy of their user. Thus, they didn't enforce it until it's necessary, mostly when a ToS is brached, for the purpose explained above, and/or large sum of fund is being involved.

[Pmalek]

...but I think it's kinda fair that they returned the original fund.

That's the way it should be. It's not their money, it belongs to the player, and the player has a right to get it back if they don't want to verify their identity for whatever reason. But to get the winnings, which includes the casino's money, they will have to agree to their request. By signing up and accepting the T&C, they are governed by those rules. KYC is a part of it.

As for why they didn't enforce KYC from the very beginning, one casino explained that they're always threading between legal compliance imposed into them by the govt. and the privacy of their user. Thus, they didn't enforce it until it's necessary, mostly when a ToS is brached, for the purpose explained above, and/or large sum of fund is being involved.

It also depends on the regulator and license the online casinos posses. Cucaraco is the least strict gambling license. I think casinos regulated by the United Kingdom Gambling Association must carry out the KYC procedure during registration and before the players start to play. Maybe Malta's MGA license is similar.

[coolcoinz]

Any site for multiplying money or guaranteed profit is good to be real and therefore a scam. From Deposit $50 crypto, win $300 for withdrawal, you should have made sure that they were scammers, and even if you were able to withdraw, you have helped them rob another investor who may deposit more and not be able to withdraw. .

That's correct. Also, promoting as non-KYC site and requesting KYC is scamming through false advertising. They know this is going to attract people who somehow cannot do KYC anywhere else because they're underage, or live in a country where gambling is banned, or don't have a valid ID, or their documents would have to be translated. Then this casino gets that person's money and asks for KYC. If they do it, the casino returns the money, if not - keeps it. Even if only 10% of players fail to do KYC it's free money for the scammers.

This is 100% planned by the casino, so I'd stay away from it.

[Pmalek]

That's correct. Also, promoting as non-KYC site and requesting KYC is scamming through false advertising. They know this is going to attract people who somehow cannot do KYC anywhere else because they're underage, or live in a country where gambling is banned, or don't have a valid ID, or their documents would have to be translated. Then this casino gets that person's money and asks for KYC. If they do it, the casino returns the money, if not - keeps it. Even if only 10% of players fail to do KYC it's free money for the scammers.

I am not defending false advertisement but I also don't agree with what you just said. If you are underaged, then you aren't supposed to gamble. It's against the rules of online casinos and most probably against the law in the country you live in. If you live in a country where online gambling is against the law, you are breaking the law by gambling. If you don't have an ID, then we are probably going back to the first issue where you are underaged and shouldn't be gambling.

This is 100% planned by the casino, so I'd stay away from it.

You can't possibly know that. OP has said that he used a UK VPN that he needs for his work while he was gambling at Justbit. Most casinos don't allow the use of VPNs or similar software that mask the original IP. Plus, the UK is a prohibited territory on Justbit. How can you be surprised that the casino wants to check who they are dealing with in such a situation?

Criticizing a casino for false advertising and at the same time justifying or explaining that a player might have lied, broken the law, the casino rules, and masked his geo location doesn't go hand in hand. It's all wrong.

[LEVSKI7]

Hambach sees a legal article published by German civil law expert Professor H Köhler as a way forward. There are only three factors that should cause an operator to return a player's losses, Professor Koehler argues.
All losses incurred by minors must be reimbursed, and players who can prove they were misled by a brand pretending to be licensed will be eligible. Gambling sufferers will also be able to claim recovery if they can provide medical evidence of their condition.


So far, the lawyers manage to return the money for the bettors who lose it on unlicensed sites. But it may change and with only 3 reasons to force them to return it

[coolcoinz]

I am not defending false advertisement but I also don't agree with what you just said. If you are underaged, then you aren't supposed to gamble. It's against the rules of online casinos and most probably against the law in the country you live in. If you live in a country where online gambling is against the law, you are breaking the law by gambling. If you don't have an ID, then we are probably going back to the first issue where you are underaged and shouldn't be gambling.

That's the important part. The casino doesn't have the right to punish you for breaking your local laws and confiscate your money because of that. Imagine that you live somewhere in Africa and they ban bitcoin there. Suddenly a casino located in Virgin Islands steals your money because they found out you're breaking your local law. This is ridiculous.
 

You can't possibly know that. OP has said that he used a UK VPN that he needs for his work while he was gambling at Justbit. Most casinos don't allow the use of VPNs or similar software that mask the original IP. Plus, the UK is a prohibited territory on Justbit. How can you be surprised that the casino wants to check who they are dealing with in such a situation?

I'm talking about advertising as a non KYC casino and demanding KYC from a user. Something like that is 100% planned by the casino to steal money from users who will get tempted by this advertising because they value privacy.
If he was banned for VPN use, it's a different story.

[holydarkness]

I am not defending false advertisement but I also don't agree with what you just said. If you are underaged, then you aren't supposed to gamble. It's against the rules of online casinos and most probably against the law in the country you live in. If you live in a country where online gambling is against the law, you are breaking the law by gambling. If you don't have an ID, then we are probably going back to the first issue where you are underaged and shouldn't be gambling.

That's the important part. The casino doesn't have the right to punish you for breaking your local laws and confiscate your money because of that. Imagine that you live somewhere in Africa and they ban bitcoin there. Suddenly a casino located in Virgin Islands steals your money because they found out you're breaking your local law. This is ridiculous.
[...]

Eh? But they do have the right to "punish" those who break the local laws being mentioned above, it's part of their compliance, and it's been stated on the Tos that the user agreed, that they acknowledge they are not underaga, nor accessing from restricted country.

[Pmalek]

That's the important part. The casino doesn't have the right to punish you for breaking your local laws and confiscate your money because of that.

Actually, the terms and conditions of many casinos state that you are required to abide by the laws and regulations in your territory as well. Many terms also make it clear that you aren't allowed to use the casino services if you live in a country that bans gambling or specifically online gambling/offshore gambling, etc. 
 

I'm talking about advertising as a non KYC casino and demanding KYC from a user. Something like that is 100% planned by the casino to steal money from users who will get tempted by this advertising because they value privacy.

When the OP signed up, it was no-KYC. He made two successful withdrawals without identifying his identity. The days of no-KYC licensed casinos are over. It's possible up to a certain degree and then they'll want to know who is behind the account.

On the other hand, if OP stopped using the casino following his second withdrawal, it would have remained a no-KYC experience for him. Unfortunately, it didn't. 

[coolcoinz]

^
So the rules changed half-way. If the casino is the one that changed the rules, it should allow users who registered before such rule was made to clear their accounts and stop gambling, or undergo KYC.

I bet that many of these people who just want to play a game or two, aren't aware that their money will be confiscated by the casino on the slightest infraction.

If they access a site that advertises as non KYC, they're expecting to see no KYC and if they can't undergo said KYC they expect to have their money returned to them, the way banks do it. If you send money to a bank and the bank decides they no longer want to deal with you, it will return your deposits and close the account. A bitcoin exchange will usually do the same. They will ask you for KYC, if you don't agree to it, they won't allow you to trade, but deposits will be returned to you.

Casinos are so far the only business group that steals deposits. It's especially striking when a casino steals deposits from users that did not break any rules ( so there was no access from a restricted country, no account sharing) but they don't want to undergo forced KYC.