[SCAM] BC Game closed account with my winnings! >$90.000

[AHOYBRAUSE]

This is my only account. Once again I always provided all the required documents and my KYC was completely before the big win.

I was ready to meet BC in video, against all your "bets", and I'm ready to meet them again if it would be required. I proof I exist, and I'm the same person that played on BC casino.

As suggested by someone I'm fine meeting BC and someone else neutral from BitcoinTalk if needed.

The questions made from BC were very technical and despiting of maybe answering incompletely or wrong to some of them, they forgot to mention all the questions I answered well and straight.
In case they forgot, I don't play in their site for 5 months aswell. Having someone speak my native language would certainly be beneficial, as it would eliminate the significant language barrier present in this situation.

So in 1st occasion my withdraws were blocked due to my kyc photo was under threat.
Now, 2nd occasion I'm blocked no more because I'm under threat, but because I missed some technical questions about features I never used, in a casino that I don't login for 5 months, talking on a foreign language.

I believe it is a wrong decision.

What ridiculous liar you are, your only account, hahaha.
You are a professional con artist, trying to use this forum to blackmail several casinos.
Here you used fake kyc, somewhere else you use your "gambling addiction" for several casino to try to get refunds.

But whatever you are writing here, all your threats with lawyer or whatever will bring you absolutely nothing.
You are a confirmed multi accounter, here in this forum as wall as at bc, that's all everybody need to know.

You can give up, all your lies and posts will bring you nothing, you just look more ridiculous and pathetic.

[holydarkness]

Can I at least ask them to show evidences accordingly to their terms of service, of any failure from my side? We are talking about over $90.000 claim, so I'm not asking too much. More than "interpretations", physical evidences supported by their terms.

[CC: JollyGood]

It's actually explained by them in between-lines, and been explained to you by me [in form of educated theory] throughout the entire thread, sealed by BC.Game Support's report of the video call.

Initially, they suspected that your "mom" is performing KYC under duress, of which our suspicion gets stronger and stronger as the case and posts on this thread gets further and you show questionable traits, like the cluelessness of what "under duress" is about, that you basically has zero knowledge of your situation and surroundings when you took that KYC picture.

But, to be short, from BC side, and about what violation you did, they suspected you trying to circumvent a restriction they put on you [the son], be it account limitation, self exclusion, account ban, falsifying ID, and the likes, that your mom shows duress because she performed that KYC against her will, i.e. you forced her.

Bottom line,
What violation you did: a possible attempt to circumvent account limitation and providing fake KYC.
Physical evidence: the video call, where the "real player" [the mom] basically clueless about the game she's been playing for a while.
What terms in the ToS related to it: I have them safely stored for you in my gallery, but I believe it'll be best to start make that lawyer of yours useful. Here's the link to their ToS, I believe he can ventured a very-well-educated guess of what violation you did.

[Joana226]

But, to be short, from BC side, and about what violation you did, they suspected you trying to circumvent a restriction they put on you [the son], be it account limitation, self exclusion, account ban, falsifying ID, and the likes, that your mom shows duress because she performed that KYC against her will, i.e. you forced her.

That makes no sense, because my account is closed but not his account. We don't live together, and his account isn't limited so why would he make a new account in my home in my name, if he could play on his own account?
Can you consider this? Also he never played Big Win but me.

No one forced me to create any account. In that scenario I would appeal for help during a video call, no?

I waggered over 13 million USD. I got lucky and BC refuses to pay those winnings.

Everything beyond that is debatable, but if you look at the facts I exist, I have an account in my name, I played and won.
I have never even switched devices with any other player. In India BC.Game is very popular as you may know and it is normal for several adult family members to have accounts.

My son wouldn't be mentioned in this conversation if the interview had not been in another language.

[holydarkness]

I want to take a neutral stand here and still give @Joana226 the benefit of the doubt!

Personally if I was asked about any other sportsbook or casino am registered with about their incentive features and the alike, I don't think I would be able to answer because I don't take advantage of them, unless I do then they have the right to ask questions related to this.

Secondly, if a translator was available I don't understand why the son got in the picture, which also puts Joana226 in a bad position and saying there is a language barrier doesn't sit well here as your English is above average !

Lastly, just to be deliberate...@BC.game were any questions relating to deposits,games played, coins used asked just to ensure this is the account holder you having the KYC interview with because these are the basic questions that really need to be asked, unless they avoided the most obvious questions as they might suspect user rehearsed this part, hence the extra questions otherwise $90K is alot of money and hope something can be worked out to close this chapter.
**Once revised all accounts including family linked accounts should all be closed/banned to end the business relationship**

I am quoting BC's findings below, so people reading this discussion can get the context easier.

I believe when BC said that OP is uncertain, unable to answer, and unfamiliar with features like game types, cashback and recharge, and the VIP levels, they're referring to OP's own details, which she should have been familiar if she really operates the account herself.

For example, I assume the question were like: what VIP level are you on, what games were you playing, can you describe in short what game was it and how do you played it, how many multipliers are available for [name of game], on which game did you win the big prize [that's being the root of issue here], things that are not too technical that someone that's not a gambling-geek will not be able to answer, yet technical and specific enough that an individual operating the account will be able to, as the question is specific and related to their activities.

As for the translator, I think they prepared him, in case she needed help, or even perhaps the interviewer himself is the translator, he speaks the language, but before they can let the OP knows that they speak the language [or have someone present who speak the language], upon realizing that the son is leading and dictating answers, which made them suspicious of the extent of her knowledge regarding the account, they refrained from telling her, in concern that the son became aware that their attempt to cheat the interview [by him [the actual account operator] supplying answer to her [the clueless someone else]] and instead they just let the interview rolled in, with the translator supplying them with what the son actually said, as they'll get a broader --and more true in nature-- understanding of OP's situation.

Suppose they let her know that they understand the language and know that the son is supplying information, having her to answer on his behalf, OP probably will end the conversation soon and walled up, saying the internet connection was poor and it ended by itself, or refused to take the video call any further with their invented reason, while the son prepared her with broader knowledge of the account.

Following a detailed review of the complaint and subsequent video KYC verification, we have concluded that the individual presenting the complaint lacks direct knowledge and familiarity with our platform and its various features. During the verification process, it was evident that the respondent relied on assistance to answer basic questions related to gameplay, VIP levels, cashback schedules, and site-specific terminologies.

Key observations include:
- Uncertainty and inconsistency in identifying game types and features, with reliance on external prompts to answer questions about the platform's games and VIP levels.
- Lack of knowledge concerning transactional details, such as recharge icons and cashback timing, further indicating unfamiliarity with the platform's operational aspects.
- Dependence on a secondary individual for information, who appeared to have direct knowledge of the account and its activities.

Based on these findings, we have reasons to believe that the person presenting the complaint is not the genuine player or account holder but was attempting to represent the account without adequate knowledge or authority. This conclusion is reinforced by the need for external prompting and the incorrect responses to standard operational queries of our platform.

We take matters of account security and representation very seriously and must ensure that all activities and complaints are genuinely and accurately presented by the actual account holders. Therefore, we cannot proceed with the claims or requests made in this complaint as it fails to meet our verification standards.

Edit: Additionally, the individual prompting the user in the video call (self-identified as the son) has documents linked to another ID on our platform (ID: 25022188), with KYC-supported documents belonging to a different user. It is reasonable to infer that the individual operating these accounts is indeed the son, who has previously submitted misleading information and incorrect KYC details twice.

But, to be short, from BC side, and about what violation you did, they suspected you trying to circumvent a restriction they put on you [the son], be it account limitation, self exclusion, account ban, falsifying ID, and the likes, that your mom shows duress because she performed that KYC against her will, i.e. you forced her.

That makes no sense, because my account is closed but not his account. We don't live together, and his account isn't limited so why would he make a new account in my home in my name, if he could play on his own account?
Can you consider this? Also he never played Big Win but me.

No one forced me to create any account. In that scenario I would appeal for help during a video call, no?

I waggered over 13 million USD. I got lucky and BC refuses to pay those winnings.

Everything beyond that is debatable, but if you look at the facts I exist, I have an account in my name, I played and won.
I have never even switched devices with any other player. In India BC.Game is very popular as you may know and it is normal for several adult family members to have accounts.

My son wouldn't be mentioned in this conversation if the interview had not been in another language.

Umm... your son doesn't live with you? So he just happened to be there during the video call to... translate?

[BabyBandit]

Following a detailed review of the complaint and subsequent video KYC verification, we have concluded that the individual presenting the complaint lacks direct knowledge and familiarity with our platform and its various features. During the verification process, it was evident that the respondent relied on assistance to answer basic questions related to gameplay, VIP levels, cashback schedules, and site-specific terminologies.

Key observations include:
- Uncertainty and inconsistency in identifying game types and features, with reliance on external prompts to answer questions about the platform's games and VIP levels.
- Lack of knowledge concerning transactional details, such as recharge icons and cashback timing, further indicating unfamiliarity with the platform's operational aspects.
- Dependence on a secondary individual for information, who appeared to have direct knowledge of the account and its activities.

Based on these findings, we have reasons to believe that the person presenting the complaint is not the genuine player or account holder but was attempting to represent the account without adequate knowledge or authority. This conclusion is reinforced by the need for external prompting and the incorrect responses to standard operational queries of our platform.

We take matters of account security and representation very seriously and must ensure that all activities and complaints are genuinely and accurately presented by the actual account holders. Therefore, we cannot proceed with the claims or requests made in this complaint as it fails to meet our verification standards.

Edit: Additionally, the individual prompting the user in the video call (self-identified as the son) has documents linked to another ID on our platform (ID: 25022188), with KYC-supported documents belonging to a different user. It is reasonable to infer that the individual operating these accounts is indeed the son, who has previously submitted misleading information and incorrect KYC details twice.

This reply is pure darkness. WTF? I am not on any side here but this is shocking and terrible and this must get to stop, most important for the future for all players safety! What the F are you doing seriously?
Stop trying to put light on irrelevant things. This case is about this account and not any other accounts.

You don't have the right to act this way and you know it! You just change reasons until you will find one that will holds so you can keep the money yourself for the company party.
You cant demand your customers to know anything about your platform's games and VIP levels & cashback timing. Me personal gamble a lot every week and I don't have any clue about things like that.
Also, it's impossible to know when you exactly deposited. And what you believe is irrelevant it's what you can proof that is relevant same as in a court. Yes OP don't know a lot about your website, but please ask this to every user you have and see how many that will answer the same way. I can assure you it's many!

As I said I am not on OP's side I am on the right side and what you doing is wrong. Are you broke or what is the problem? Why cant you pay out a winning when the customer have done EVERYTHING you asked for and even more? So what if the mom get help from hers son? That is only positive and not any negative. Have you any proof that the soon is the one that has playing? No. The mom is the holder of the account, the mom did all the KYC and the video call, she can do a video call again. That's is more then enough to be able to get hers winnings paid out. As I said I would count myself as a quite big gambler and I gamble often, but I have NO clue about bonuses, when they are paid out or any technical stuff about the website I play on. I got more important things in life then research on a online casino. as I said. ask every user you have this questions and we see how many that will give you the same answer as OP did. Trust me it will be a lot! Should them also get their account locked? Of course not. We are humans and individuals.
Soon I will contact some people that actually have the power to withdrew your license and make them look into this case (So people with a judgment actually can step in and make a decision since you are unable to do it yourself) because now this have gone to a case where OP is right to his/hers winnings and you are actually wrong and not paying them out. And I think you also would agree on that is the best thing? That a 3-RD party can come and make a decision here so right will be right and wrong stay wrong. I guess you have nothing to hide.

And of course you have right to think and suspect what you want, but you cant make a decision based on what you think or suspect! It's what you can proof a decision should be made! Not what you think, I am glad you people don't work in a court. The only thing that is important is what you can proof, not what you believe!
 
And yes I am very disappointed to see casinos act this way, it destroy the fun for so many people and the whole online gambling community, this is not what it should be about it should be fun and we all should be one big family! With shit like this you getting afraid to win big because you know it will be some made up problem from the casinos side, so sad.

And one thing I can promise you, acting the way you do only make you lose customers and income instead of saving any $90K but I guess your to blind to see that.
Why don't just act right and work on getting a good reputation instead?? Imagine how many more customers you would have and how much more money you would make if you plaid the honest way.

Again, good luck to both parties and I hope this get solved the way it should and looking at what have been posted here to this date the right thing is to cash put OP's winnings but if she/he has cheated of course he/she should not be able to get the winnings paid out, but you have zero proof that this would have happen. BC.GAME stop destroying the online gambling reputation, we all should be one family and enjoy gambling what you doing now is destroying everything just everything for everyone not only for OP. It's sad.  


-------------
Best regards
BabyBandit

[Joana226]

Umm... your son doesn't live with you? So he just happened to be there during the video call to... translate?

As you may know, $90.000 may be not much to you, but here it is a life changer. We had the whole family here waiting for it.

And he speaks a bit better english than I do. So accordingly to you, my son could give me the right answers to the questions, no? Isn't it questionable the fact that the two of us couldn't answer it correctly?

What is your explanation for the fact that he wouldn't know the answer for all the questions? would there be a 3rd person controlling him aswell?

Suppose they let her know that they understand the language and know that the son is supplying information, having her to answer on his behalf, OP probably will end the conversation soon and walled up, saying the internet connection was poor and it ended by itself, or refused to take the video call any further with their invented reason, while the son prepared her with broader knowledge of the account.

Think for yourself. If it was to be cheat, the son could be simply listening the questions and answering on chat so I could read the answers loudly. No?
This prove the interview was genuine from my end. I have nothing to hide but unfortunatly I'm not pro in english as you are, neither pro in this casino. As you can see I barely got bonus and no, I don't know the VIP Level - I don't need to know that for deposit and playing, right?

It you were my son, wouldn't you do it "smarter" considering you would own the account etc? wouldn't you use a private communication channel between us for example?

This case is turned in a movie when it is simply proven scam from BC not paying the winnings. I don't get. How many more different accusations will be? without any evidence but "with reasons to believe"?
Based on these findings, I have reasons to believe that BC is scamming me not paying my winnings.

[holydarkness]

Umm... your son doesn't live with you? So he just happened to be there during the video call to... translate?

As you may know, $90.000 may be not much to you, but here it is a life changer. We had the whole family here waiting for it.

And he speaks a bit better english than I do. So accordingly to you, my son could give me the right answers to the questions, no? Isn't it questionable the fact that the two of us couldn't answer it correctly?

What is your explanation for the fact that he wouldn't know the answer for all the questions? would there be a 3rd person controlling him aswell?

Suppose they let her know that they understand the language and know that the son is supplying information, having her to answer on his behalf, OP probably will end the conversation soon and walled up, saying the internet connection was poor and it ended by itself, or refused to take the video call any further with their invented reason, while the son prepared her with broader knowledge of the account.

Think for yourself. If it was to be cheat, the son could be simply listening the questions and answering on chat so I could read the answers loudly. No?
This prove the interview was genuine from my end. I have nothing to hide but unfortunatly I'm not pro in english as you are, neither pro in this casino. As you can see I barely got bonus and no, I don't know the VIP Level - I don't need to know that for deposit and playing, right?

It you were my son, wouldn't you do it "smarter" considering you would own the account etc? wouldn't you use a private communication channel between us for example?

This case is turned in a movie when it is simply proven scam from BC not paying the winnings. I don't get. How many more different accusations will be? without any evidence but "with reasons to believe"?
Based on these findings, I have reasons to believe that BC is scamming me not paying my winnings.

Ahh, I see. Yes, it will be quite reasonable if the whole family were there in anticipation of the... winning, instead of just asking your son, specifically him, to be present at the interview because you require him to translate. As for your question about, "What is your explanation for the fact that he wouldn't know the answer for all the questions? would there be a 3rd person controlling him aswell?", I will say I couldn't answer this, given I have not witnessed what transpires during the interview and the length of what he know and what he did not.

While for being smarter by using a chat, yes, I will say that'll be logical, if you didn't know that a person speaking the language was present at the interview. Which, I believe, is the reason why BC refrained mid-way from letting their translator take over or informing you that they have someone speaking the language that can facilitate the interview, because when people don't think the other side understand what they talked about, they lowered their guard and let things known, which otherwise they'll keep for themselves and be more careful, if they know their counterpart knows what they're talking about. So yeah, I suppose if BC started the video conversation by informing you that they speak your language, there is a probability that you'll resort to chatting the answer. But given you don't think they understand what you said to your mom, you assume they'll think you simply translating it instead of dictating answers.

But let's not eliminate the doubt. BC.Game Support, can you tell us please, in one or two examples, what kind of answers that he supplied to his mother that make you sure he dictated answer to her about the technicalities of her account instead of simply translating?

[AHOYBRAUSE]

Following a detailed review of the complaint and subsequent video KYC verification, we have concluded that the individual presenting the complaint lacks direct knowledge and familiarity with our platform and its various features. During the verification process, it was evident that the respondent relied on assistance to answer basic questions related to gameplay, VIP levels, cashback schedules, and site-specific terminologies.

Key observations include:
- Uncertainty and inconsistency in identifying game types and features, with reliance on external prompts to answer questions about the platform's games and VIP levels.
- Lack of knowledge concerning transactional details, such as recharge icons and cashback timing, further indicating unfamiliarity with the platform's operational aspects.
- Dependence on a secondary individual for information, who appeared to have direct knowledge of the account and its activities.

Based on these findings, we have reasons to believe that the person presenting the complaint is not the genuine player or account holder but was attempting to represent the account without adequate knowledge or authority. This conclusion is reinforced by the need for external prompting and the incorrect responses to standard operational queries of our platform.

We take matters of account security and representation very seriously and must ensure that all activities and complaints are genuinely and accurately presented by the actual account holders. Therefore, we cannot proceed with the claims or requests made in this complaint as it fails to meet our verification standards.

Edit: Additionally, the individual prompting the user in the video call (self-identified as the son) has documents linked to another ID on our platform (ID: 25022188), with KYC-supported documents belonging to a different user. It is reasonable to infer that the individual operating these accounts is indeed the son, who has previously submitted misleading information and incorrect KYC details twice.

This reply is pure darkness. WTF? I am not on any side here but this is shocking and terrible and this must get to stop, most important for the future for all players safety! What the F are you doing seriously?
Stop trying to put light on irrelevant things. This case is about this account and not any other accounts.

You don't have the right to act this way and you know it! You just change reasons until you will find one that will holds so you can keep the money yourself for the company party.
You cant demand your customers to know anything about your platform's games and VIP levels & cashback timing. Me personal gamble a lot every week and I don't have any clue about things like that.
Also, it's impossible to know when you exactly deposited. And what you believe is irrelevant it's what you can proof that is relevant same as in a court. Yes OP don't know a lot about your website, but please ask this to every user you have and see how many that will answer the same way. I can assure you it's many!

As I said I am not on OP's side I am on the right side and what you doing is wrong. Are you broke or what is the problem? Why cant you pay out a winning when the customer have done EVERYTHING you asked for and even more? So what if the mom get help from hers son? That is only positive and not any negative. Have you any proof that the soon is the one that has playing? No. The mom is the holder of the account, the mom did all the KYC and the video call, she can do a video call again. That's is more then enough to be able to get hers winnings paid out. As I said I would count myself as a quite big gambler and I gamble often, but I have NO clue about bonuses, when they are paid out or any technical stuff about the website I play on. I got more important things in life then research on a online casino. as I said. ask every user you have this questions and we see how many that will give you the same answer as OP did. Trust me it will be a lot! Should them also get their account locked? Of course not. We are humans and individuals.
Soon I will contact some people that actually have the power to withdrew your license and make them look into this case (So people with a judgment actually can step in and make a decision since you are unable to do it yourself) because now this have gone to a case where OP is right to his/hers winnings and you are actually wrong and not paying them out. And I think you also would agree on that is the best thing? That a 3-RD party can come and make a decision here so right will be right and wrong stay wrong. I guess you have nothing to hide.

And of course you have right to think and suspect what you want, but you cant make a decision based on what you think or suspect! It's what you can proof a decision should be made! Not what you think, I am glad you people don't work in a court. The only thing that is important is what you can proof, not what you believe!
 
And yes I am very disappointed to see casinos act this way, it destroy the fun for so many people and the whole online gambling community, this is not what it should be about it should be fun and we all should be one big family! With shit like this you getting afraid to win big because you know it will be some made up problem from the casinos side, so sad.

And one thing I can promise you, acting the way you do only make you lose customers and income instead of saving any $90K but I guess your to blind to see that.
Why don't just act right and work on getting a good reputation instead?? Imagine how many more customers you would have and how much more money you would make if you plaid the honest way.

Again, good luck to both parties and I hope this get solved the way it should and looking at what have been posted here to this date the right thing is to cash put OP's winnings but if she/he has cheated of course he/she should not be able to get the winnings paid out, but you have zero proof that this would have happen. BC.GAME stop destroying the online gambling reputation, we all should be one family and enjoy gambling what you doing now is destroying everything just everything for everyone not only for OP. It's sad.  


-------------
Best regards
BabyBandit

I really expected you to be better and know better than to support this multi account scammer.

Kind of disappointed because I know why you post this nonsense.

Guess when it’s about money integrity flies out the window ( you know exactly what I mean). How anybody can still support this filthy guy given all the evidence  of multiple accounts with multiple scam accusations provided recently is beyond me. You are either to blind, too lazy to read it or just to ignorant for reasons I cannot go further into here ( I wish I could but I’m a man of my word ).

No words, really.

[BabyBandit]

Following a detailed review of the complaint and subsequent video KYC verification, we have concluded that the individual presenting the complaint lacks direct knowledge and familiarity with our platform and its various features. During the verification process, it was evident that the respondent relied on assistance to answer basic questions related to gameplay, VIP levels, cashback schedules, and site-specific terminologies.

Key observations include:
- Uncertainty and inconsistency in identifying game types and features, with reliance on external prompts to answer questions about the platform's games and VIP levels.
- Lack of knowledge concerning transactional details, such as recharge icons and cashback timing, further indicating unfamiliarity with the platform's operational aspects.
- Dependence on a secondary individual for information, who appeared to have direct knowledge of the account and its activities.

Based on these findings, we have reasons to believe that the person presenting the complaint is not the genuine player or account holder but was attempting to represent the account without adequate knowledge or authority. This conclusion is reinforced by the need for external prompting and the incorrect responses to standard operational queries of our platform.

We take matters of account security and representation very seriously and must ensure that all activities and complaints are genuinely and accurately presented by the actual account holders. Therefore, we cannot proceed with the claims or requests made in this complaint as it fails to meet our verification standards.

Edit: Additionally, the individual prompting the user in the video call (self-identified as the son) has documents linked to another ID on our platform (ID: 25022188), with KYC-supported documents belonging to a different user. It is reasonable to infer that the individual operating these accounts is indeed the son, who has previously submitted misleading information and incorrect KYC details twice.

This reply is pure darkness. WTF? I am not on any side here but this is shocking and terrible and this must get to stop, most important for the future for all players safety! What the F are you doing seriously?
Stop trying to put light on irrelevant things. This case is about this account and not any other accounts.

You don't have the right to act this way and you know it! You just change reasons until you will find one that will holds so you can keep the money yourself for the company party.
You cant demand your customers to know anything about your platform's games and VIP levels & cashback timing. Me personal gamble a lot every week and I don't have any clue about things like that.
Also, it's impossible to know when you exactly deposited. And what you believe is irrelevant it's what you can proof that is relevant same as in a court. Yes OP don't know a lot about your website, but please ask this to every user you have and see how many that will answer the same way. I can assure you it's many!

As I said I am not on OP's side I am on the right side and what you doing is wrong. Are you broke or what is the problem? Why cant you pay out a winning when the customer have done EVERYTHING you asked for and even more? So what if the mom get help from hers son? That is only positive and not any negative. Have you any proof that the soon is the one that has playing? No. The mom is the holder of the account, the mom did all the KYC and the video call, she can do a video call again. That's is more then enough to be able to get hers winnings paid out. As I said I would count myself as a quite big gambler and I gamble often, but I have NO clue about bonuses, when they are paid out or any technical stuff about the website I play on. I got more important things in life then research on a online casino. as I said. ask every user you have this questions and we see how many that will give you the same answer as OP did. Trust me it will be a lot! Should them also get their account locked? Of course not. We are humans and individuals.
Soon I will contact some people that actually have the power to withdrew your license and make them look into this case (So people with a judgment actually can step in and make a decision since you are unable to do it yourself) because now this have gone to a case where OP is right to his/hers winnings and you are actually wrong and not paying them out. And I think you also would agree on that is the best thing? That a 3-RD party can come and make a decision here so right will be right and wrong stay wrong. I guess you have nothing to hide.

And of course you have right to think and suspect what you want, but you cant make a decision based on what you think or suspect! It's what you can proof a decision should be made! Not what you think, I am glad you people don't work in a court. The only thing that is important is what you can proof, not what you believe!
 
And yes I am very disappointed to see casinos act this way, it destroy the fun for so many people and the whole online gambling community, this is not what it should be about it should be fun and we all should be one big family! With shit like this you getting afraid to win big because you know it will be some made up problem from the casinos side, so sad.

And one thing I can promise you, acting the way you do only make you lose customers and income instead of saving any $90K but I guess your to blind to see that.
Why don't just act right and work on getting a good reputation instead?? Imagine how many more customers you would have and how much more money you would make if you plaid the honest way.

Again, good luck to both parties and I hope this get solved the way it should and looking at what have been posted here to this date the right thing is to cash put OP's winnings but if she/he has cheated of course he/she should not be able to get the winnings paid out, but you have zero proof that this would have happen. BC.GAME stop destroying the online gambling reputation, we all should be one family and enjoy gambling what you doing now is destroying everything just everything for everyone not only for OP. It's sad.  


-------------
Best regards
BabyBandit

I really expected you to be better and know better than to support this multi account scammer.

Kind of disappointed because I know why you post this nonsense.

Guess when it’s about money integrity flies out the window.
No words, really.

I am not supporting anyone and BC.GAME is wrong here as the evidence that exist right now and if you cant accept that two individuals can see things in a different way that's up to you.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

I really expected you to be better and know better than to support this multi account scammer.

Kind of disappointed because I know why you post this nonsense.

Guess when it’s about money integrity flies out the window.
No words, really.


I am not supporting anyone and BC.GAME is wrong here as the evidence that exist right now and if you cant accept that two individuals can see things in a different way that's up to you.

There is SO much evidence against this guy, you yourself know it for 1000% yourself because of the reasons I already spoke about.

OP is a blackmail scammer moving from casino to casino trying a sob story to get losses back ( and opening a scam accusation thread ) and when he wins and gets called out (investigated) for his bullshit he opens a scam accusation as well.

If you think he should get paid you are insane.
Seems like you are just another clown that will do anything for some empty promise, you know what I mean.
Shame on you and good bye scam supporter.

[Woodie]

What benefit of a doubt?
This person CLEARLY is ghostigura2, who had another scam accusation thread here in this forum for his other account at bc. And he even got paid 1000$ and then lost it again and made the next scam accusation because of his gambling addiction.
Look at the connections of the accounts, only a blind person would not see it.

So this case matured from a photo of duress during the KYC process itself to failing it coupled with multi accounting...

Just out of curiosity, does BC.Game allow same members of the family to play on its platform, Yes or No?

And in this instance nothing has been mentioned of any bonus abuse, or say arbitrage gambling  one that gets most  players banned...and in this scenario does the player have any chance of getting a dime off their account or everything will be confiscated??

You guys should stop giving this person any reason to continue his scam, really.

Do you realise that had this KYC gone through, this user would have gotten paid  

Btw, that's why I mentioned in my earlier posts that BC.game cuts ties with all family members linked to the OP as the business relationship has gone sour as one party tries to take advantage of the other.


Edit:

I am quoting BC's findings below, so people reading this discussion can get the context easier.

I believe when BC said that OP is uncertain, unable to answer, and unfamiliar with features like game types, cashback and recharge, and the VIP levels, they're referring to OP's own details, which she should have been familiar if she really operates the account herself.

For example, I assume the question were like: what VIP level are you on, what games were you playing, can you describe in short what game was it and how do you played it, how many multipliers are available for [name of game], on which game did you win the big prize [that's being the root of issue here], things that are not too technical that someone that's not a gambling-geek will not be able to answer, yet technical and specific enough that an individual operating the account will be able to, as the question is specific and related to their activities.

If questions came as you have described them, the legitimate account holder should have answers off the top of their head , guess things aren't looking good for the OP.

Watching from the terraces .

No further comment from me after this  

[AHOYBRAUSE]

What benefit of a doubt?
This person CLEARLY is ghostigura2, who had another scam accusation thread here in this forum for his other account at bc. And he even got paid 1000$ and then lost it again and made the next scam accusation because of his gambling addiction.
Look at the connections of the accounts, only a blind person would not see it.

So this case matured from a photo of duress during the KYC process itself to failing it coupled with multi accounting...

Just out of curiosity, does BC.Game allow same members of the family to play on its platform, Yes or No?

And in this instance nothing has been mentioned of any bonus abuse, or say arbitrage gambling  one that gets most  players banned...and in this scenario does the player have any chance of getting a dime off their account or everything will be confiscated??

You guys should stop giving this person any reason to continue his scam, really.

Do you realise that had this KYC gone through, this user would have gotten paid  

Btw, that's why I mentioned in my earlier posts that BC.game cuts ties with all family members linked to the OP as the business relationship has gone sour as one party tries to take advantage of the other.


No further comment from me after this  

First of all, I knew this KYC call would never go through because I have the confirmation that HE is not the account holder. And on a call you can find this out very easy, just with simple questions. OP does this for a living but he still acts like an amateur. Proof is how he handles all his account here in our forum.
Are real pro would have prepped the ID person for every question ( that what I also spoke about with bc support when I suggested them to do such a call) . Yet this poor woman didn't even know the basics of the site. 

Also, if you think this person is OP's mother then  . Seriously?
So pretending to be that person in the ID before here in this forum and basically lying to everyone from the beginning is normal behaviour?

He has COUNTLESS accounts, not just "family members" . This guy is a wannabe pro. He operates so many accounts on bitcointalk alone, there are much more than those at least 5 here.

[BC.Game Support]

The events during the video call verification highlight potential concerns about KYC abuse happening because someone is being forced. The scenario was as follows: During the video call, which was meant for verification, the conversation was in English. However, the person, supposedly the account holder's mother, couldn't respond in English. Her son stepped in, saying he would translate, and started talking to her in Tamil. This happened while our Tamil-speaking colleagues, there for documentation, were present.

The son's role in supposedly translating the conversation raises red flags, particularly when you consider his mother's apparent lack of knowledge about her own account. This situation suggests that the son, or maybe another individual, could be pressuring or forcing the account holder to take part in the KYC process, not of her own free will. Such circumstances suggest the account is at risk of being used for purposes other than its intended use, which would be a form of KYC abuse and violates BC.GAME’s terms of service.

Furthermore, the account's previous freezing due to indications of threat or being classified as 'under duress' adds to the seriousness of the situation. This history, combined with the recent observations during the verification call, including the son having to prompt his mother about specific games—without any clue from her side, he specifically mentioned "Crash" and detailed types as "Classic/Trenball," along with color sequences "Green > Red > Yellow"—highlights the forced participation of KYC abuse.

[Joana226]

The events during the video call verification highlight potential concerns about KYC abuse happening because someone is being forced. The scenario was as follows: During the video call, which was meant for verification, the conversation was in English. However, the person, supposedly the account holder's mother, couldn't respond in English. Her son stepped in, saying he would translate, and started talking to her in Tamil. This happened while our Tamil-speaking colleagues, there for documentation, were present.

The son's role in supposedly translating the conversation raises red flags, particularly when you consider his mother's apparent lack of knowledge about her own account. This situation suggests that the son, or maybe another individual, could be pressuring or forcing the account holder to take part in the KYC process, not of her own free will. Such circumstances suggest the account is at risk of being used for purposes other than its intended use, which would be a form of KYC abuse and violates BC.GAME’s terms of service.

Furthermore, the account's previous freezing due to indications of threat or being classified as 'under duress' adds to the seriousness of the situation. This history, combined with the recent observations during the verification call, including the son having to prompt his mother about specific games—without any clue from her side, he specifically mentioned "Crash" and detailed types as "Classic/Trenball," along with color sequences "Green > Red > Yellow"—highlights the forced participation of KYC abuse.

Please share the call so everyone can see how wrong you are and judge. Why was it in English then and not in my language as I requested?
So you prefer having a translator from my side that isn't a translator than speaking my native language? I wouldn't need assist of anyone if it was in tamil. Do you consider the answers you got were manipulated multiple times since it was translated two times?
I give you my permission to show everyone the video call. I have nothing to hide and everyone will see that Im not under threat.

So I assume that BC made a claim on the relevant authorities for abuse, right? You have all my data, please share evidence of that in case you did.

Also I request you to share what specific term of kyc I violated, as you stated.

[Lakai01]

[...]
I am not supporting anyone and BC.GAME is wrong here as the evidence that exist right now and if you cant accept that two individuals can see things in a different way that's up to you.

I'm sorry to say it so directly, but that's absolute nonsense. If you had followed the thread here, you would know that OP has already been proven to be multi-accounting (that alone would be enough to block his account), he originally rejected the offer of a video call immediately (we now know why) and he is still receiving support from proven KYC sellers here in the thread.

KYC on a platform like BC.Game is not an "oh, it'll be fine" thing. The platforms themselves are legally responsible for approved KYC data. So if BC.Game has even the slightest suspicion that the KYC data might not be correct, they MUST refuse to verify the account. Otherwise, as already mentioned, they themselves are liable to prosecution in the event of a case, and no platform takes this risk.

You also have to keep this in mind: BC.Game pays out significantly higher amounts every day than the 90k we are talking about here. So why should they refuse to pay out here if everything is legal?

[...]

BC.Game has already explained why they refused KYC verification, and this will not change even if the video is published.

[holydarkness]

The events during the video call verification highlight potential concerns about KYC abuse happening because someone is being forced. The scenario was as follows: During the video call, which was meant for verification, the conversation was in English. However, the person, supposedly the account holder's mother, couldn't respond in English. Her son stepped in, saying he would translate, and started talking to her in Tamil. This happened while our Tamil-speaking colleagues, there for documentation, were present.

The son's role in supposedly translating the conversation raises red flags, particularly when you consider his mother's apparent lack of knowledge about her own account. This situation suggests that the son, or maybe another individual, could be pressuring or forcing the account holder to take part in the KYC process, not of her own free will. Such circumstances suggest the account is at risk of being used for purposes other than its intended use, which would be a form of KYC abuse and violates BC.GAME’s terms of service.

Furthermore, the account's previous freezing due to indications of threat or being classified as 'under duress' adds to the seriousness of the situation. This history, combined with the recent observations during the verification call, including the son having to prompt his mother about specific games—without any clue from her side, he specifically mentioned "Crash" and detailed types as "Classic/Trenball," along with color sequences "Green > Red > Yellow"—highlights the forced participation of KYC abuse.

Thank you for clarifying this, that a staff who speaks the language is being present, to minimize the possibility that you draw a baseless conclusion that the son is leading and supplying answer. With someone speaking the language, I think it is safe to assume you made your findings [that the mother is clueless and the translation is not a simple translation but also consist of prompts] not from a guess but rather from an understanding what actually transpired between the two.


OP, instead of grasping at straws and ask for things that you know very well BC can't provide here due to the privacy policy, do you perhaps more interested in explaining why your son need to prompt you and supplying you details while you --the one who operates the account-- seems clueless about the details of your own accout?

[Joana226]

The events during the video call verification highlight potential concerns about KYC abuse happening because someone is being forced. The scenario was as follows: During the video call, which was meant for verification, the conversation was in English. However, the person, supposedly the account holder's mother, couldn't respond in English. Her son stepped in, saying he would translate, and started talking to her in Tamil. This happened while our Tamil-speaking colleagues, there for documentation, were present.

The son's role in supposedly translating the conversation raises red flags, particularly when you consider his mother's apparent lack of knowledge about her own account. This situation suggests that the son, or maybe another individual, could be pressuring or forcing the account holder to take part in the KYC process, not of her own free will. Such circumstances suggest the account is at risk of being used for purposes other than its intended use, which would be a form of KYC abuse and violates BC.GAME’s terms of service.

Furthermore, the account's previous freezing due to indications of threat or being classified as 'under duress' adds to the seriousness of the situation. This history, combined with the recent observations during the verification call, including the son having to prompt his mother about specific games—without any clue from her side, he specifically mentioned "Crash" and detailed types as "Classic/Trenball," along with color sequences "Green > Red > Yellow"—highlights the forced participation of KYC abuse.

Thank you for clarifying this, that a staff who speaks the language is being present, to minimize the possibility that you draw a baseless conclusion that the son is leading and supplying answer. With someone speaking the language, I think it is safe to assume you made your findings [that the mother is clueless and the translation is not a simple translation but also consist of prompts] not from a guess but rather from an understanding what actually transpired between the two.


OP, instead of grasping at straws and ask for things that you know very well BC can't provide here due to the privacy policy, do you perhaps more interested in explaining why your son need to prompt you and supplying you details while you --the one who operates the account-- seems clueless about the details of your own accout?

That is simply not true. I asked for my son help to translate, once the meeting would be in english - just that. I asked the meeting to be in my language and they denied it. Also they didn't provide any translator for myself and they agree with that.
BC.Game is accusing me so I require them to show evidences. I'm the victim of the accusation, so they should proof their point of view with evidences.
They omissed all the questions I was able to answer correctly. This is why I suggested to have this meeting with a 3rd party present to judge it.

I'm not clueless about my account, don't be fool or bias! I provided a lot of information! I don't know what my son tells or not to them - because I dont speak english - so I can't be responsible for that. Get me someone that speaks my language and I don't need anyone to help me saying how do I play on crush or bigwin, or to deposit. Now, dont ask me things about bonus or vip because im not familiar with that.

Isn't 90.000 USD worth of a public trial? or a 3rd entity present on it? and an official translator? In my understanding I answered all the questions.

So concluding BC.Game can stop everyone account saying the very same they said to me without showing any evidence and you will be happy with this, is it?
What if it were you? what else can I do?

What part of terms tells that the player need to study their terms IN ENGLISH and all their features to do an exam?

[AHOYBRAUSE]

That is simply not true. I asked for my son help to translate, once the meeting would be in english - just that. I asked the meeting to be in my language and they denied it. Also they didn't provide any translator for myself and they agree with that.
BC.Game is accusing me so I require them to show evidences. I'm the victim of the accusation, so they should proof their point of view with evidences.
They omissed all the questions I was able to answer correctly. This is why I suggested to have this meeting with a 3rd party present to judge it.

I'm not clueless about my account, don't be fool or bias! I provided a lot of information! I don't know what my son tells or not to them - because I dont speak english - so I can't be responsible for that. Get me someone that speaks my language and I don't need anyone to help me saying how do I play on crush or bigwin, or to deposit. Now, dont ask me things about bonus or vip because im not familiar with that.

Isn't 90.000 USD worth of a public trial? or a 3rd entity present on it? and an official translator? In my understanding I answered all the questions.

So concluding BC.Game can stop everyone account saying the very same they said to me without showing any evidence and you will be happy with this, is it?
What if it were you? what else can I do?

What part of terms tells that the player need to study their terms IN ENGLISH and all their features to do an exam?

He keeps making a fool of himself.
This is like a sketch comedy show with the worst comedian of all time.
But hey, at least he is persistent in his efforts, just not consistent with his story, hahaha.

You see how he suddenly adds mistakes in his spelling, he must think we are stupid.

You also make those mistakes while telling the real story to other people?

This guy doesn’t fail to amaze me every single time. Pure comedy.

[Lakai01]

BC.Game is accusing me so I require them to show evidences. I'm the victim of the accusation, so they should proof their point of view with evidences.
They omissed all the questions I was able to answer correctly. This is why I suggested to have this meeting with a 3rd party present to judge it.

I think you are misjudging the situation here. In a KYC procedure, you are obliged to prove that you are actually who you claim to be. If you fail to do so, the other party MUST refuse to approve the KYC - otherwise they may be liable to prosecution, for example if it turns out that the money was used for money laundering (which of course I am not accusing you of).

No platform takes this risk, not even an exchange. If the exchange/casino/... has even the slightest suspicion that someone else could be behind the account, they must refuse KYC approval. The penalties for a KYC that is too lax or incorrectly issued are exorbitantly high here in Europe and would, for example, exceed your winnings many times over.

The fact that BC.Game even gave you an extra round with a video call here is to their credit, not many other platforms would have done that.

[Joana226]

BC.Game is accusing me so I require them to show evidences. I'm the victim of the accusation, so they should proof their point of view with evidences.
They omissed all the questions I was able to answer correctly. This is why I suggested to have this meeting with a 3rd party present to judge it.

I think you are misjudging the situation here. In a KYC procedure, you are obliged to prove that you are actually who you claim to be. If you fail to do so, the other party MUST refuse to approve the KYC - otherwise they may be liable to prosecution, for example if it turns out that the money was used for money laundering (which of course I am not accusing you of).

No platform takes this risk, not even an exchange. If the exchange/casino/... has even the slightest suspicion that someone else could be behind the account, they must refuse KYC approval. The penalties for a KYC that is too lax or incorrectly issued are exorbitantly high here in Europe and would, for example, exceed your winnings many times over.

The fact that BC.Game even gave you an extra round with a video call here is to their credit, not many other platforms would have done that.

What is the risk for their here?
Ok, I got your point of view. Now can you make an effort to try to put in my position? Imagine that I'm saying the truth and I'm the owner of the account. Imagine that argue about a photo wrongly - once again there is nothing wrong with my photo.

Even playing your game, why would a mother be warmed or threatned by a son to receive over 90000 usd?
How stupid would be being present on a video meeting without knowing the basics of casino?

I'm ready to make any further verification if needed. Once again I would prefer to have a 3rd person impartial to be present, or at least them to release their evidences.

Imagining that I'm saying the truth, what else can I do right now? Shall I open a claim on askgamblers right now? Are they allowed to check casino evidences at least?