Fortunejack - confiscation of my winnings

[holydarkness]

I want proof. I want to see a video of another person passing a live check. Not a screenshot, but a video of him spinning his head in a circle. If they post this video, I will close my complaint. And I will be disgraced in front of the entire forum. I give permission for any of my personal information to be published. But they won't be able to post it, because no one passed a live check. FJ I'm waiting for proof!!

It will be provided on CG. As referenced above, ADante agreed to cooperate on CG and will get your case resolved there. Any evidence that led them to this conclusion, be it a liveliness check, selfie check, or whatever shown on the camera during KYC, I believe they will share it with the mediator, who will verify the claim.

I suggest you to be patient as FJ still have several days left to answer to the mediator's inquiries.

[kerosin48]

FJ:
The Original Poster’s (OP’s) KYC attempt wasn’t successful because different people tried to do the KYC during different attempts.

The first KYC attempt was on Nov 11th, and it wasn’t successful. The reason for this is that the only person seen on the camera did not match the provided identification document. The photo on the document and the person on the camera weren’t the same, so the attempt wasn’t successful. In general, during the KYC, the camera takes multiple pictures, which then transforms into a collage for us, and on Nov 11th, there was only 1 person seen on the camera, and it did not match the person on the document. Since the attempt wasn’t successful, it wasn’t further manually checked.
https://casinoguru-en.com/fortunejack-casino-player-s-kyc-verification-has-failed

- They won't give me my winnings because they took pictures of what was happening in my apartment. They don't care that I did a live check, that I scanned the QR code, that I turned my head around. They just saw on the camera that I don't live alone. And that's enough to not give me my winnings.
It's just incredible

[holydarkness]

FJ:
The Original Poster’s (OP’s) KYC attempt wasn’t successful because different people tried to do the KYC during different attempts.

The first KYC attempt was on Nov 11th, and it wasn’t successful. The reason for this is that the only person seen on the camera did not match the provided identification document. The photo on the document and the person on the camera weren’t the same, so the attempt wasn’t successful. In general, during the KYC, the camera takes multiple pictures, which then transforms into a collage for us, and on Nov 11th, there was only 1 person seen on the camera, and it did not match the person on the document. Since the attempt wasn’t successful, it wasn’t further manually checked.
https://casinoguru-en.com/fortunejack-casino-player-s-kyc-verification-has-failed

- They won't give me my winnings because they took pictures of what was happening in my apartment. They don't care that I did a live check, that I scanned the QR code, that I turned my head around. They just saw on the camera that I don't live alone. And that's enough to not give me my winnings.
It's just incredible

First of all, I am glad that FJ made their reply to CG and put things in motion.

Their explanation on CG is actually longer and more detailed than what's snipped above, and I'll invite the overseer to read the CG thread themselves.

For OP, I think I'll need to assure you that all we can and need to do is wait. ADante provided the mediator with relevant evidences from their side, the KYC on both occasions and the situation surroundings the photo being gathered. I am more than sure the mediator is fair and can pull their own conclusion on what happened.

If the situation is like what you describe, where you're innocent and the root of the problem was just your brother being in the same room as you, then they'll point it out as an invalid evidence. Otherwise, they'll inform us with their findings and conclusion regarding the submitted evidence once they've finished investigating it.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

FJ:
The Original Poster’s (OP’s) KYC attempt wasn’t successful because different people tried to do the KYC during different attempts.

The first KYC attempt was on Nov 11th, and it wasn’t successful. The reason for this is that the only person seen on the camera did not match the provided identification document. The photo on the document and the person on the camera weren’t the same, so the attempt wasn’t successful. In general, during the KYC, the camera takes multiple pictures, which then transforms into a collage for us, and on Nov 11th, there was only 1 person seen on the camera, and it did not match the person on the document. Since the attempt wasn’t successful, it wasn’t further manually checked.
https://casinoguru-en.com/fortunejack-casino-player-s-kyc-verification-has-failed

- They won't give me my winnings because they took pictures of what was happening in my apartment. They don't care that I did a live check, that I scanned the QR code, that I turned my head around. They just saw on the camera that I don't live alone. And that's enough to not give me my winnings.
It's just incredible

I don't think they won't pay you because you don't live alone, that doesn't make any sense.
As of now I still think this is just a big misunderstanding but I might also be wrong of course. Yet, if you have your documents  and everything, it wouldn't make any sense to ask somebody else to sit in front of the camera and try to pass the check.
Nobody would make thins intentionally and I really think you didn't as well.
I mean, the problem is FJ should also come to this understanding, seeing it for what it is. For me it's kinda obvious but what I think doesn't matter unfortunately.

[kerosin48]

FJ:
The Original Poster’s (OP’s) KYC attempt wasn’t successful because different people tried to do the KYC during different attempts.

The first KYC attempt was on Nov 11th, and it wasn’t successful. The reason for this is that the only person seen on the camera did not match the provided identification document. The photo on the document and the person on the camera weren’t the same, so the attempt wasn’t successful. In general, during the KYC, the camera takes multiple pictures, which then transforms into a collage for us, and on Nov 11th, there was only 1 person seen on the camera, and it did not match the person on the document. Since the attempt wasn’t successful, it wasn’t further manually checked.
https://casinoguru-en.com/fortunejack-casino-player-s-kyc-verification-has-failed

- They won't give me my winnings because they took pictures of what was happening in my apartment. They don't care that I did a live check, that I scanned the QR code, that I turned my head around. They just saw on the camera that I don't live alone. And that's enough to not give me my winnings.
It's just incredible

First of all, I am glad that FJ made their reply to CG and put things in motion.

Their explanation on CG is actually longer and more detailed than what's snipped above, and I'll invite the overseer to read the CG thread themselves.

For OP, I think I'll need to assure you that all we can and need to do is wait. ADante provided the mediator with relevant evidences from their side, the KYC on both occasions and the situation surroundings the photo being gathered. I am more than sure the mediator is fair and can pull their own conclusion on what happened.

If the situation is like what you describe, where you're innocent and the root of the problem was just your brother being in the same room as you, then they'll point it out as an invalid evidence. Otherwise, they'll inform us with their findings and conclusion regarding the submitted evidence once they've finished investigating it.

You see, casinoguru doesn't understand how their verification works. FJ will just send a screenshot where another person is on the webcam. Casinoguru won't figure out that to pass the live check you need to scan the QR code, turn your head, blink. They will just see the fact of another person's presence.
That's why I asked Fortunejack to send a video of the verification. But this video doesn't exist, because only I passed the live check. The situation is so stupid. It's so mean. Well, it's obvious that I passed the verification, That I am the owner of the account. But they just don't care about it.

[holydarkness]

First of all, I am glad that FJ made their reply to CG and put things in motion.

Their explanation on CG is actually longer and more detailed than what's snipped above, and I'll invite the overseer to read the CG thread themselves.

For OP, I think I'll need to assure you that all we can and need to do is wait. ADante provided the mediator with relevant evidences from their side, the KYC on both occasions and the situation surroundings the photo being gathered. I am more than sure the mediator is fair and can pull their own conclusion on what happened.

If the situation is like what you describe, where you're innocent and the root of the problem was just your brother being in the same room as you, then they'll point it out as an invalid evidence. Otherwise, they'll inform us with their findings and conclusion regarding the submitted evidence once they've finished investigating it.

You see, casinoguru doesn't understand how their verification works. FJ will just send a screenshot where another person is on the webcam. Casinoguru won't figure out that to pass the live check you need to scan the QR code, turn your head, blink. They will just see the fact of another person's presence.
That's why I asked Fortunejack to send a video of the verification. But this video doesn't exist, because only I passed the live check. The situation is so stupid. It's so mean. Well, it's obvious that I passed the verification, That I am the owner of the account. But they just don't care about it.

I somewhat believe CasinoGuru will understand how verification works. They've handled and mediated KYC issues from a lot of casinos and I'd like to think it made them well versed in KYC verification across casino platforms. Besides, if I understand things correctly, what ADante send to CG is actually a collage of the first and second KYC, not just one picture of a screenshot of someone in the webcam. They sent the entire documents taken for KYC purposes both on the first and second KYC.

I believe CG can make the most of it and draw their conclusion based on the collection of images provided.

If I may satisfy my curiosity though... I thought you said your brother was sitting next to you when the webcam suddenly turned on and take a photo of both of you when you're in the process of uploading the first stage, picture of passport. Leaving for now the fact that [yet to reemphasize] what they collected is what you pressed to be submitted, not random images that they record, so you basically accepted that that image is the one be uploaded, the photo of you and your brother while you try to snap your passport... umm...?

[kerosin48]

If I may satisfy my curiosity though... I thought you said your brother was sitting next to you when the webcam suddenly turned on and take a photo of both of you when you're in the process of uploading the first stage, picture of passport. Leaving for now the fact that [yet to reemphasize] what they collected is what you pressed to be submitted, not random images that they record, so you basically accepted that that image is the one be uploaded, the photo of you and your brother while you try to snap your passport... umm...?

-No, I didn't upload anything except my passport. They just took screenshots of what was happening in my apartment. I think it's illegal. I didn't give my consent to it. It wasn't verification. I repeat it for the hundredth time. To pass the live check, you need to scan the QR code and turn your head.
To pass the first stage, you need to upload your passport. So what did I violate then? Why am I being blamed for not being alone in the room?
They claim that I failed the live check. Then let them prove it. Let them upload a video of another person passing this verification. What's the problem?

[Mahdirakib]

-No, I didn't upload anything except my passport. They just took screenshots of what was happening in my apartment. I think it's illegal. I didn't give my consent to it. It wasn't verification. I repeat it for the hundredth time. To pass the live check, you need to scan the QR code and turn your head.

Interesting! FortuneJack team said that there was a different person during the liveness check in the first verification attempt on 11th November. But you are saying that you hadn't proceed to the liveness check during then. FortuneJack team have already forwarded the evidences to Casino Guru team. Hopefully they will verify the evidences properly and make a fair judgement.

[holydarkness]

-No, I didn't upload anything except my passport. They just took screenshots of what was happening in my apartment. I think it's illegal. I didn't give my consent to it. It wasn't verification. I repeat it for the hundredth time. To pass the live check, you need to scan the QR code and turn your head.
To pass the first stage, you need to upload your passport. So what did I violate then? Why am I being blamed for not being alone in the room?
They claim that I failed the live check. Then let them prove it. Let them upload a video of another person passing this verification. What's the problem?

Actually, the part that I don't understand and not sure I grasp correctly is the part on the screenshot of your post that is marked in bold. In your previous statement you said that the webcam suddenly turned on and take a snap of you and your brother while he translates for you, [IIRC] during the process of uploading passport.

On that bolded statement though, you left the room, your brother walked in, and [inferred] the webcam took a snapshot of this and became the reason of your failed KYC.

So, were you with your brother, together, in front of a screen, you left the room and he walked in, or what?

[kerosin48]

-No, I didn't upload anything except my passport. They just took screenshots of what was happening in my apartment. I think it's illegal. I didn't give my consent to it. It wasn't verification. I repeat it for the hundredth time. To pass the live check, you need to scan the QR code and turn your head.
To pass the first stage, you need to upload your passport. So what did I violate then? Why am I being blamed for not being alone in the room?
They claim that I failed the live check. Then let them prove it. Let them upload a video of another person passing this verification. What's the problem?

Actually, the part that I don't understand and not sure I grasp correctly is the part on the screenshot of your post that is marked in bold. In your previous statement you said that the webcam suddenly turned on and take a snap of you and your brother while he translates for you, [IIRC] during the process of uploading passport.

On that bolded statement though, you left the room, your brother walked in, and [inferred] the webcam took a snapshot of this and became the reason of your failed KYC.

So, were you with your brother, together, in front of a screen, you left the room and he walked in, or what?

It doesn't matter. You understand that it wasn't verification. For verification, you have to take a photo of your passport. Press the "upload" button. I uploaded my passport there. And at that time they (as it turned out) were taking photos of what was happening in my room. I was not alone in the room.

[FortuneJack]

Hey folks

First of all, Merry Christmas!, wishing all of you Happy Holidays.

Today, the complaint on Casino Guru has been rejected and closed by their team.

The Complaint -> CG CASE

Since our last reply on here, there was still some confusion about certain aspects of the case, so I would like to clarify some points for our BitcoinTalk Community. Questions about why the OP was allowed a 2nd KYC attempt, how the KYC works etc etc.

When KYC isn't completed (not necessarily "failed", just not completed fully) it doesn't usually get manually reviewed by our team. Even when a KYC attempt isn't "successful", users still get the 30-day e-mail notice to complete verification. Successful KYC's always undergo a further manual review from our team. As for the "footage" itself, during the KYC the camera takes multiple pictures which then transform into a collage for us.

 On Nov 11th, the KYC attempt wasn't successful. We have 2 collages from this KYC attempt, in both of these (and all the pictures) the only person seen on camera is the alleged brother of the OP. The person in the camera didn't match the provided identification document, so the KYC attempt wasn't successful, and it wasn't further manually checked.

The 2nd KYC attempt was on Dec 2nd, and from the photos/collages we have from this, we see two different people. In one collage, it's the same person from the KYC attempt on Nov 11th (the Brother, as OP claims); in another collage, it's a different person. These two people are never seen together in any of our photos/collages.

In this 2nd collage, the person's (who OP suggests is them) face matched the provided identification document, and verification was successful because of this, but after manually reviewing the verification, our security team were able to see multiple people on camera in multiple collages.

As for the sportsbook restriction, the OP was handed several restrictions from our provider, with the latest restriction coming on Nov 12th, limiting the maximum amount OP could bet on the Sportsbook.

All of the abovementioned e-mails, pictures, collages, and sportsbook provider restriction evidence were sent to the Casino Guru team, and today we got their decision.

OP was not allowed to withdraw their winning amount, but the remaining deposited amount is still on their balance, which they can withdraw. 


Thank you,


- ADante,

[Eternad]

@OP, it’s hard to accept loss but you have nothing to do here. I’m not sure what the heck you are trying to do by busting a simple KYC procedure multiple times through involving different person on your submitted picture.

KYC procedure is very easy to complete that’s why I’m doubting you already after the explanation of FJ and supporting of Casinoguru to FJ after submitting the evidence.


This is the danger of playing in the casino that you shouldn’t allowed to play. Your supposed to be profit can be confiscated by just simply imposing ToS despite there’s no cheating involved on the game. If you lose casino will accept your money, if you win the6 will use ToS as trap card to confiscate your profit.

Moral of the story, Don’t bypass casino restrictions or don’t do anything shitty with your KYC procedure.

[kerosin48]

Where is the video of another person going through a live check?
Casinoguru didn't respond at all. They just closed the complaint.

[Mahdirakib]

~snip~

Don't you think that it could be indeed a mistake from OP's side that his brother had completed the face verification during the first attempt? Was there anything wrong with his provided documents? Casino always shows extreme level of strictness to the users. Personally, I think OP's issue can be considered in a soft angle. OP had only messed up in the face verification. There wasn't any manipulation with the provided documents, isn't it?

Where is the video of another person going through a live check?

Those are sensitive documents. Neither FortuneJack nor Casino Guru team will post those evidences publicly. FJ team has sent those evidences to CG team through email.

[holydarkness]

I found myself a bit confused. The case was indeed marked as rejected by the mediator. But I can't find his closing statement, nor the summary of the case [as it usually did] provide the conclusion that the mediator draw after reviewing the provided evidences by both parties.

ADante, FortuneJack or OP, can any of you perhaps ask CG to "complete" the thread with their closing statement or a summary update of the verdict made? It'll help us get a closure on our own list.

[Rating Place]

1. It was good to see ADante explain the KYC procedure.
2. Winnings should almost never be confiscated.
3. Holydarkness is on the right path. We need more on the report of CG on why it was rejected. If CG sides with FJ, then it should be marked resolved even though I personally disagree with the OP getting stiffed.

[kerosin48]

ADante, please tell me. Was another person trying to pass the live check? Or is the winnings confiscated because you took some photos that included another person?

Thank you


I found myself a bit confused. The case was indeed marked as rejected by the mediator. But I can't find his closing statement, nor the summary of the case [as it usually did] provide the conclusion that the mediator draw after reviewing the provided evidences by both parties.

ADante, FortuneJack or OP, can any of you perhaps ask CG to "complete" the thread with their closing statement or a summary update of the verdict made? It'll help us get a closure on our own list.

- I wrote a letter to casinoguru. I will wait for their answer.


[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[Eternad]

ADante, please tell me. Was another person trying to pass the live check? Or is the winnings confiscated because you took some photos that included another person?

Thank you

They are using the simple breaking the ToS as way to confiscate your winnings. As long as you can’t proved that your KYC procedure is just pure mistake then they just keep using as an excuse to accused for trying to bypass the KYC verification by using other person identity.

The only way you can fight this kind of issue is convincing the mediator who will view your KYC materials that you honestly made a mistake.

[holydarkness]

They are using the simple breaking the ToS as way to confiscate your winnings. As long as you can’t proved that your KYC procedure is just pure mistake then they just keep using as an excuse to accused for trying to bypass the KYC verification by using other person identity.

The only way you can fight this kind of issue is convincing the mediator who will view your KYC materials that you honestly made a mistake.

A very likely possible situation here, far more likely than not, is that the mediator already convinced that the KYC submitted by FJ [and through FC, OP] indeed has some questionable factors in it. Thus they marked it as rejected. I am hoping for further explanation about why and how they make that ruling, which hopefully would be given following OP's inquiry to them.

A second fleeting thought, though, there is a slim chance the case was wrongly marked, an oversight due to the hectic situation they're currently facing.

Whichever that is, hopefully can be cleared by CG's closing statement.

[kerosin48]

when will you understand that no one except me tried to pass verification. And they just illegally took a photo of what was happening in my apartment