⚠️SCAM⚠️ BC.game - refusing to pay $1.5m, switched jurisdiction to avoid paying

[Blossom15]

Ha ha ha…  you sound like you need a hug  .

You sound like you need to read the beslissing [#22]. Point us out where the verdict of the court that ruled in OP's favor is?

Oh my god, you are dumber than I thought!

Is this what you are basing your argument on?

The verdict of the hearing that day, as per what you uploaded to imgur, is as below [translated]:

I don't think you’re fully getting how the court stuff played out here. You keep saying the court didn’t explicitly say bcgame has to pay op, but like... the bankruptcy ruling kind of says it all.

They don’t declare companies bankrupt just for fun, that ruling basically means the court agreed the player claims, including op’s, were legit.

I did some digging and found a couple sources:

NEXT.io article : https://next.io/news/regulation/bc-game-declared-bankrupt/
Title: BC.Game Declared Bankrupt Amid Unpaid Player Claims - says the curaçao court declared bcgame’s parent companies - small house bv and blockdance bv bankrupt over unpaid player claims. Mentions the lawsuit came from multiple players, op included for withheld winnings. Notes bcgame dipped out to belize/anjouan after the bankruptcy

Curaçao Chronicle article:
https://www.curacaochronicle.com/post/main/curacao-court-declares-bankruptcy-for-blockdance-and-small-house-amidst-unpaid-player-claims/
Title: Curaçao Court Declares Bankruptcy for Blockdance and Small House Amid Unpaid Player Claims
This one straight up says the court ruled in favor of the players, also confirms bcgame owed over $2.1M, and yeah, it calls out the bankruptcy as a dodge to avoid paying up

So while it might not be in the form of a big bold “bcgame must pay op,” the rulings and articles make it super clear the claims were valid and the company was held accountable - at least on paper.

Looking forward to how you’re gonna spin this now.

Oh wait, you're not engaging with me anymore? lol okay. But hey, if facts mess with your narrative, just ignore them right?

[gh0573d]

I sold it somewhere around when I was questioned in relation to my account freeze. If it was earlier or after account was locked, I truly can't remember. But I do know who the phone was sold to, and if I was ever received any information to that third account, I could at least confirm or deny if he is one of the guys I sold the phones to. I can even name them both (privately) if that would help.

Or... we can reverse the process, where you ask that person who buy your phone whether they created an account on BC, what UID they have, when, etc. intstead of guessing what and how?

And yes, if you can do that, it might help us advance with your case. I mean do as above, asking them the question above, not sending me their name... It'll be useless if they're not related to this case.

As for how you log-in to the active account, I used phone + password. What I am telling is I don't know which one was exactly which, but I am 100% sure that one of these 2 accounts without activity were created out of a technical bug I previously explained, and that second account was NEVER used. Retracing it back a year, especially now that I have not my old phones with me would be impossible.

And holy, I really appreciate your thorough questioning, and once this issue is resolved (either here on in court), I'll come back and compensate you for time. You gave me already few different insights that were right in front of me, but I wasn't even looking at them. My lawyers are already drafting claims for Belize and Cyprus courts and the things you pointed me to helped A LOT! Thanks!

And what about how you access the account all this time? To LuckyWalker69? Do you use Google auto-sign-up or phone number?

edit:

Actually, I can re-trace it, based on e-mail confirmation link:



Unused account was created manually, and the one I've been using up until closure was the one created with Google SSO option. This is my understanding based on the account creation date (which I can barely see) and considering that for Google SSO, you don't need to verify e-mail address.

What is this about?

The problem is I no longer have contact of these guys, so I cannot reach them. One of them were working for a "my firm" and other one was sold online, so getting in touch with them would be hard, but if I can give you the names, you could at least check with your contact and if any of those two were owners of third account, I assume that BCgame could easily verify that by contacting them. Another problem in all of this fuss is that the third account we're talking about here was never banned (as you can see from image they sent me, and I assume you've also seen clear version), while two accounts of mine (active one and the one arose from a bug) were banned.

Q: What is this about?

A: So, you asked me how did I access to LuckyWalker69, I was using my phone number. And "what is this about" is verifying which account is which. The one I manually created (filing out information) was the inactive one (based on the screenshot created day prior). So the active account (LuckyWalker69) was created using Google Sign On option and that account was being verified/used all this time. Google SSO accounts doesn't need e-mail verification, as they "don't have" email on file.

Issue with double account bug is pretty simple: Bc.game doesn't cross-check database tables (e-mail and Google id) to verify if the user is actually trying to create account with already existing e-mail. If you have account on Stake, depending on how you created it, you can attempt to create another one (if you've manually signed up, try signing up with Google SSO or vice-versa) and you will see that it won't allow you to do that, because they do that verification, so users don't actually create double accounts by accident using same e-mail address.

I am still sad that all of this mess has happened because of an error, as I already wrote I have accounts with other casinos as well and every single one I started using after doing KYC verification, same as BC.game one. I would've never created second account intentionally.

[holydarkness]

I sold it somewhere around when I was questioned in relation to my account freeze. If it was earlier or after account was locked, I truly can't remember. But I do know who the phone was sold to, and if I was ever received any information to that third account, I could at least confirm or deny if he is one of the guys I sold the phones to. I can even name them both (privately) if that would help.

Or... we can reverse the process, where you ask that person who buy your phone whether they created an account on BC, what UID they have, when, etc. intstead of guessing what and how?

And yes, if you can do that, it might help us advance with your case. I mean do as above, asking them the question above, not sending me their name... It'll be useless if they're not related to this case.

As for how you log-in to the active account, I used phone + password. What I am telling is I don't know which one was exactly which, but I am 100% sure that one of these 2 accounts without activity were created out of a technical bug I previously explained, and that second account was NEVER used. Retracing it back a year, especially now that I have not my old phones with me would be impossible.

And holy, I really appreciate your thorough questioning, and once this issue is resolved (either here on in court), I'll come back and compensate you for time. You gave me already few different insights that were right in front of me, but I wasn't even looking at them. My lawyers are already drafting claims for Belize and Cyprus courts and the things you pointed me to helped A LOT! Thanks!

And what about how you access the account all this time? To LuckyWalker69? Do you use Google auto-sign-up or phone number?
[...]

The problem is I no longer have contact of these guys, so I cannot reach them. One of them were working for a "my firm" and other one was sold online, so getting in touch with them would be hard, but if I can give you the names, you could at least check with your contact and if any of those two were owners of third account, I assume that BCgame could easily verify that by contacting them. Another problem in all of this fuss is that the third account we're talking about here was never banned (as you can see from image they sent me, and I assume you've also seen clear version), while two accounts of mine (active one and the one arose from a bug) were banned.

Q: What is this about?

A: So, you asked me how did I access to LuckyWalker69, I was using my phone number. And "what is this about" is verifying which account is which. The one I manually created (filing out information) was the inactive one (based on the screenshot created day prior). So the active account (LuckyWalker69) was created using Google Sign On option and that account was being verified/used all this time. Google SSO accounts doesn't need e-mail verification, as they "don't have" email on file.

Issue with double account bug is pretty simple: Bc.game doesn't cross-check database tables (e-mail and Google id) to verify if the user is actually trying to create account with already existing e-mail. If you have account on Stake, depending on how you created it, you can attempt to create another one (if you've manually signed up, try signing up with Google SSO or vice-versa) and you will see that it won't allow you to do that, because they do that verification, so users don't actually create double accounts by accident using same e-mail address.

I am still sad that all of this mess has happened because of an error, as I already wrote I have accounts with other casinos as well and every single one I started using after doing KYC verification, same as BC.game one. I would've never created second account intentionally.

Hmm... that'll pose as a difficulties, because I don't think BC will release the name of the owner. I mean, even with your consent that you wrote publicly here days ago, they still can't reveal private matters like your name. So I guess our only option here is back to trying to piece the puzzle.

Again, help me understand. Suppose the third account is indeed the one you sell your phone to, did you refer yourself to them? Did you ever share and use your affiliate account? I'm still trying to figure out how that affiliate could "attached" themselves to your device.

As for google SSO, well, I'm too paranoid to use any auto-fill, so I always manually sign up, but I think it's safe to say that when you sign-up to a platform, any platform, with that method, the platform will get access to your email address? No? So, although you always use your phone number to log-in, they still have your gmail address, from the first time you "sign up" with Google auto-sign-in.

[gh0573d]

I sold it somewhere around when I was questioned in relation to my account freeze. If it was earlier or after account was locked, I truly can't remember. But I do know who the phone was sold to, and if I was ever received any information to that third account, I could at least confirm or deny if he is one of the guys I sold the phones to. I can even name them both (privately) if that would help.

Or... we can reverse the process, where you ask that person who buy your phone whether they created an account on BC, what UID they have, when, etc. intstead of guessing what and how?

And yes, if you can do that, it might help us advance with your case. I mean do as above, asking them the question above, not sending me their name... It'll be useless if they're not related to this case.

As for how you log-in to the active account, I used phone + password. What I am telling is I don't know which one was exactly which, but I am 100% sure that one of these 2 accounts without activity were created out of a technical bug I previously explained, and that second account was NEVER used. Retracing it back a year, especially now that I have not my old phones with me would be impossible.

And holy, I really appreciate your thorough questioning, and once this issue is resolved (either here on in court), I'll come back and compensate you for time. You gave me already few different insights that were right in front of me, but I wasn't even looking at them. My lawyers are already drafting claims for Belize and Cyprus courts and the things you pointed me to helped A LOT! Thanks!

And what about how you access the account all this time? To LuckyWalker69? Do you use Google auto-sign-up or phone number?
[...]

The problem is I no longer have contact of these guys, so I cannot reach them. One of them were working for a "my firm" and other one was sold online, so getting in touch with them would be hard, but if I can give you the names, you could at least check with your contact and if any of those two were owners of third account, I assume that BCgame could easily verify that by contacting them. Another problem in all of this fuss is that the third account we're talking about here was never banned (as you can see from image they sent me, and I assume you've also seen clear version), while two accounts of mine (active one and the one arose from a bug) were banned.

Q: What is this about?

A: So, you asked me how did I access to LuckyWalker69, I was using my phone number. And "what is this about" is verifying which account is which. The one I manually created (filing out information) was the inactive one (based on the screenshot created day prior). So the active account (LuckyWalker69) was created using Google Sign On option and that account was being verified/used all this time. Google SSO accounts doesn't need e-mail verification, as they "don't have" email on file.

Issue with double account bug is pretty simple: Bc.game doesn't cross-check database tables (e-mail and Google id) to verify if the user is actually trying to create account with already existing e-mail. If you have account on Stake, depending on how you created it, you can attempt to create another one (if you've manually signed up, try signing up with Google SSO or vice-versa) and you will see that it won't allow you to do that, because they do that verification, so users don't actually create double accounts by accident using same e-mail address.

I am still sad that all of this mess has happened because of an error, as I already wrote I have accounts with other casinos as well and every single one I started using after doing KYC verification, same as BC.game one. I would've never created second account intentionally.

Hmm... that'll pose as a difficulties, because I don't think BC will release the name of the owner. I mean, even with your consent that you wrote publicly here days ago, they still can't reveal private matters like your name. So I guess our only option here is back to trying to piece the puzzle.

Again, help me understand. Suppose the third account is indeed the one you sell your phone to, did you refer yourself to them? Did you ever share and use your affiliate account? I'm still trying to figure out how that affiliate could "attached" themselves to your device.

As for google SSO, well, I'm too paranoid to use any auto-fill, so I always manually sign up, but I think it's safe to say that when you sign-up to a platform, any platform, with that method, the platform will get access to your email address? No? So, although you always use your phone number to log-in, they still have your gmail address, from the first time you "sign up" with Google auto-sign-in.

I haven't given anyone my referral link. Nor I advertised it anywhere.

Platform will get access to my e-mail address, but in the BCgame case, they don't check/populate email address field whenever someone uses auto-fill for sign up. So even if you have account registered with that e-mail address, using Auto-fill, they'll create another one, and use SSO id as unique identifier before even checking if there's account using that Google Mail. That's what happened.

As for me, I added my phone number during KYC verification.

[holydarkness]

Umm... come to my mind... this part of the process of me diving into a deep end of the barrel is never let known to public as I previously didn't think I need to spell out what I do and what I exhausted to get an understanding of a situation. But, recently addressing a post on BC's ANN thread, I remember one or two occasions in the past where people accusing me of only "interrogating" the players and not the casino, thus siding with casinos.

So, this shall be [probably useless] reference post in case people wonder in the future: the observably considerable decrease in posts I made in this thread, questioning OP, is because I am currently busy questioning the casino side. I had and have and will have a talk with the casino to understand from their side. So... just in case, in the future people accuse me of siding with casinos because I am not visibly asking them, kindly find solace in this decreased frequency of me posting in this thread as I am chasing the story from the casino side and drilling them with questions, as I previously did to the player.

OP, no need to address this. I'll return to your post above when I need to get a better understanding of a situation from you. I am currently trying to understand BC's. And [hopefully] I'm nearing the end of collecting information from BC, but my contact have to leave to handle other matters. We're scheduled to have another sit together tomorrow. Please be a bit patient.

[holydarkness]

Umm... OP, I'll once again need your help to understand very very vividly from your side here. You know the drill as you've done this: be very detail, throw anything you have in mind, help me retrace your step, relive the moment.

With my best to not lead you to any direction with any prompt, do you mind to tell me as many as you can with what you do when you get the KYC request as below:

[gh0573d]

Umm... OP, I'll once again need your help to understand very very vividly from your side here. You know the drill as you've done this: be very detail, throw anything you have in mind, help me retrace your step, relive the moment.

With my best to not lead you to any direction with any prompt, do you mind to tell me as many as you can with what you do when you get the KYC request as below:

Okay, the KYC request from that image came to me AFTER they asked me to provide simple details: mail, ip, known devices, etc (you can see it in demand letter).

My account was advanced KYC verified prior to this email (to establish that). After I have received this e-mail, I clicked the link and sent the document id again (passport, same picture as in my initial KYC verification, as I had it saved).

After doing that, Sumsub prompted "These documents were used to verify another account" (the black/white image I shown above)

Week or two after, I was informed that my account was permanently banned for breaching Terms of Service.

[holydarkness]

Umm... OP, I'll once again need your help to understand very very vividly from your side here. You know the drill as you've done this: be very detail, throw anything you have in mind, help me retrace your step, relive the moment.

With my best to not lead you to any direction with any prompt, do you mind to tell me as many as you can with what you do when you get the KYC request as below:

[Image snip]

Okay, the KYC request from that image came to me AFTER they asked me to provide simple details: mail, ip, known devices, etc (you can see it in demand letter).

My account was advanced KYC verified prior to this email (to establish that). After I have received this e-mail, I clicked the link and sent the document id again (passport, same picture as in my initial KYC verification, as I had it saved).

After doing that, Sumsub prompted "These documents were used to verify another account" (the black/white image I shown above)

Week or two after, I was informed that my account was permanently banned for breaching Terms of Service.

A tad bit more detailed won't hurt? Like... How long after you get the email did you do the KYC? On which device do you received the email? And I understand correctly you recycle the exact same documents you gave for LuckyWalker69, that was stored in that exact device? Or do you switch device and complete the KYC on other device as the files that needed to be uploaded were on the other device? Do you happen to remember which device is this?

[gh0573d]

Umm... OP, I'll once again need your help to understand very very vividly from your side here. You know the drill as you've done this: be very detail, throw anything you have in mind, help me retrace your step, relive the moment.

With my best to not lead you to any direction with any prompt, do you mind to tell me as many as you can with what you do when you get the KYC request as below:

[Image snip]

Okay, the KYC request from that image came to me AFTER they asked me to provide simple details: mail, ip, known devices, etc (you can see it in demand letter).

My account was advanced KYC verified prior to this email (to establish that). After I have received this e-mail, I clicked the link and sent the document id again (passport, same picture as in my initial KYC verification, as I had it saved).

After doing that, Sumsub prompted "These documents were used to verify another account" (the black/white image I shown above)

Week or two after, I was informed that my account was permanently banned for breaching Terms of Service.

A tad bit more detailed won't hurt? Like... How long after you get the email did you do the KYC? On which device do you received the email? And I understand correctly you recycle the exact same documents you gave for LuckyWalker69, that was stored in that exact device? Or do you switch device and complete the KYC on other device as the files that needed to be uploaded were on the other device? Do you happen to remember which device is this?

Shortly after getting that e-mail, it was pretty quick but not sure eta.

You understand correctly, but this whole information was in regards to that account, not any other. In the demand letter and email I sent them, you may see I typed wrong username (88, instead of 69), but that was a typo as I was rushing to get things sorted out.


As for whether or not I switched devices, Samsung Galaxy Z fold was used.

edit: This whole interaction after getting account frozen and before getting permanent ban was (I assumed) in regards to my main account (not the "accidental" double one or even third that I don't know shit about)

[holydarkness]

A tad bit more detailed won't hurt? Like... How long after you get the email did you do the KYC? On which device do you received the email? And I understand correctly you recycle the exact same documents you gave for LuckyWalker69, that was stored in that exact device? Or do you switch device and complete the KYC on other device as the files that needed to be uploaded were on the other device? Do you happen to remember which device is this?

Shortly after getting that e-mail, it was pretty quick but not sure eta.

You understand correctly, but this whole information was in regards to that account, not any other. In the demand letter and email I sent them, you may see I typed wrong username (88, instead of 69), but that was a typo as I was rushing to get things sorted out.


As for whether or not I switched devices, Samsung Galaxy Z fold was used.

edit: This whole interaction after getting account frozen and before getting permanent ban was (I assumed) in regards to my main account (not the "accidental" double one or even third that I don't know shit about)

Which... exactly means... what, by the way? The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold? I mean... yes, I am aware that you write that you use it frequently, alongside with the two other devices, but... in regards to my question, were you reading the email from one device and switch to other, or...?

And about the typo... thank you for bringing it to public. I've been wondering for a while after reading your demand letters, wondering where that account came from. And I can't ask here as it's not brought to public, nor such username is shown by BC, so I just shoved it to the back of my mind and hoped it got addressed somewhere or [kinda hoping] perhaps just an irrelevant details.

Just to be sure though, you don't have LuckyWalker88, right? I mean, 8 and 6 and 9 is very far on keyboard to be a typo. That's what's been in the back burner of my mind for a while.

[gh0573d]

A tad bit more detailed won't hurt? Like... How long after you get the email did you do the KYC? On which device do you received the email? And I understand correctly you recycle the exact same documents you gave for LuckyWalker69, that was stored in that exact device? Or do you switch device and complete the KYC on other device as the files that needed to be uploaded were on the other device? Do you happen to remember which device is this?

Shortly after getting that e-mail, it was pretty quick but not sure eta.

You understand correctly, but this whole information was in regards to that account, not any other. In the demand letter and email I sent them, you may see I typed wrong username (88, instead of 69), but that was a typo as I was rushing to get things sorted out.


As for whether or not I switched devices, Samsung Galaxy Z fold was used.

edit: This whole interaction after getting account frozen and before getting permanent ban was (I assumed) in regards to my main account (not the "accidental" double one or even third that I don't know shit about)

Which... exactly means... what, by the way? The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold? I mean... yes, I am aware that you write that you use it frequently, alongside with the two other devices, but... in regards to my question, were you reading the email from one device and switch to other, or...?

And about the typo... thank you for bringing it to public. I've been wondering for a while after reading your demand letters, wondering where that account came from. And I can't ask here as it's not brought to public, nor such username is shown by BC, so I just shoved it to the back of my mind and hoped it got addressed somewhere or [kinda hoping] perhaps just an irrelevant details.

Just to be sure though, you don't have LuckyWalker88, right? I mean, 8 and 6 and 9 is very far on keyboard to be a typo. That's what's been in the back burner of my mind for a while.

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold was main phone and was used for verification of that account. Other devices were used just to play on the account when the battery on Samsung was low and needed to be re-charged. Nothing more, nothing less. As for specifics, I've read it from Galaxy, opened it from Galaxy and filed the documents from it as well.

As for LuckyWalker88, as I said I was trying to be quick at a time, thinking that faster I respond, faster they'll get this issue resolved. It was my mistake. Same as I am trying to do here (and you can see a lot of edits after post going public, for the same reason).


edit: and yeah, there's no such account of mine LuckyWalker88, it was just a mistake reason for that being is that my account name across the platforms varies, either HokiWalker or LuckyWalker with combination of 88 or 69 (I think I posted somewhere links/images from my profiles on other casinos).

[holydarkness]

Which... exactly means... what, by the way? The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold? I mean... yes, I am aware that you write that you use it frequently, alongside with the two other devices, but... in regards to my question, were you reading the email from one device and switch to other, or...?

And about the typo... thank you for bringing it to public. I've been wondering for a while after reading your demand letters, wondering where that account came from. And I can't ask here as it's not brought to public, nor such username is shown by BC, so I just shoved it to the back of my mind and hoped it got addressed somewhere or [kinda hoping] perhaps just an irrelevant details.

Just to be sure though, you don't have LuckyWalker88, right? I mean, 8 and 6 and 9 is very far on keyboard to be a typo. That's what's been in the back burner of my mind for a while.

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold was main phone and was used for verification of that account. Other devices were used just to play on the account when the battery on Samsung was low and needed to be re-charged. Nothing more, nothing less. As for specifics, I've read it from Galaxy, opened it from Galaxy and filed the documents from it as well.

As for LuckyWalker88, as I said I was trying to be quick at a time, thinking that faster I respond, faster they'll get this issue resolved. It was my mistake. Same as I am trying to do here (and you can see a lot of edits after post going public, for the same reason).


edit: and yeah, there's no such account of mine LuckyWalker88, it was just a mistake reason for that being is that my account name across the platforms varies, either HokiWalker or LuckyWalker with combination of 88 or 69 (I think I posted somewhere links/images from my profiles on other casinos).

Yeah, it's mentioned here below,

Oh, on another note, I forgot to show my profiles on other casinos who never questioned my integrity:



and numerous of others
[...]

I'm currently waiting for answers for a couple of questions from my contact, and while we're at it, do you mind to satisfy my curiosity about these accounts? Were you also signing up and logging in with your phone number? Or with google automatic sign in? Or with your email address?

[gh0573d]

Which... exactly means... what, by the way? The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold? I mean... yes, I am aware that you write that you use it frequently, alongside with the two other devices, but... in regards to my question, were you reading the email from one device and switch to other, or...?

And about the typo... thank you for bringing it to public. I've been wondering for a while after reading your demand letters, wondering where that account came from. And I can't ask here as it's not brought to public, nor such username is shown by BC, so I just shoved it to the back of my mind and hoped it got addressed somewhere or [kinda hoping] perhaps just an irrelevant details.

Just to be sure though, you don't have LuckyWalker88, right? I mean, 8 and 6 and 9 is very far on keyboard to be a typo. That's what's been in the back burner of my mind for a while.

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold was main phone and was used for verification of that account. Other devices were used just to play on the account when the battery on Samsung was low and needed to be re-charged. Nothing more, nothing less. As for specifics, I've read it from Galaxy, opened it from Galaxy and filed the documents from it as well.

As for LuckyWalker88, as I said I was trying to be quick at a time, thinking that faster I respond, faster they'll get this issue resolved. It was my mistake. Same as I am trying to do here (and you can see a lot of edits after post going public, for the same reason).


edit: and yeah, there's no such account of mine LuckyWalker88, it was just a mistake reason for that being is that my account name across the platforms varies, either HokiWalker or LuckyWalker with combination of 88 or 69 (I think I posted somewhere links/images from my profiles on other casinos).

Yeah, it's mentioned here below,

Oh, on another note, I forgot to show my profiles on other casinos who never questioned my integrity:



and numerous of others
[...]

I'm currently waiting for answers for a couple of questions from my contact, and while we're at it, do you mind to satisfy my curiosity about these accounts? Were you also signing up and logging in with your phone number? Or with google automatic sign in? Or with your email address?

E-mail and password, but all of them has phone number added/verified.

EDIT: Gamdom account (which is not here) is Google login tho.





Roobet - https://roobet.com/?modal=profile&user=HokiWalker69
Stake - https://stake.com/?name=hokiwalker88&modal=user
Gamdom - https://gamdom.com/user/LuckyWalker

edit: for some reason, can't get stake stats fully public

[holydarkness]

[...]
I'm currently waiting for answers for a couple of questions from my contact, and while we're at it, do you mind to satisfy my curiosity about these accounts? Were you also signing up and logging in with your phone number? Or with google automatic sign in? Or with your email address?

E-mail and password, but all of them has phone number added/verified.

EDIT: Gamdom account (which is not here) is Google login tho.

[image snip]

Roobet - https://roobet.com/?modal=profile&user=HokiWalker69
Stake - https://stake.com/?name=hokiwalker88&modal=user
Gamdom - https://gamdom.com/user/LuckyWalker

edit: for some reason, can't get stake stats fully public

Noted. Thank you for the context and information. I understand correctly that only BC is registered and logged-in with phone number [as well as google auto sign in], other casinos as shown above are always logging in with email address shown here [with exception to Gamdom]? Not phone number or through Google auto sign in?

[gh0573d]

[...]
I'm currently waiting for answers for a couple of questions from my contact, and while we're at it, do you mind to satisfy my curiosity about these accounts? Were you also signing up and logging in with your phone number? Or with google automatic sign in? Or with your email address?

E-mail and password, but all of them has phone number added/verified.

EDIT: Gamdom account (which is not here) is Google login tho.

[image snip]

Roobet - https://roobet.com/?modal=profile&user=HokiWalker69
Stake - https://stake.com/?name=hokiwalker88&modal=user
Gamdom - https://gamdom.com/user/LuckyWalker

edit: for some reason, can't get stake stats fully public

Noted. Thank you for the context and information. I understand correctly that only BC is registered and logged-in with phone number [as well as google auto sign in], other casinos as shown above are always logging in with email address shown here [with exception to Gamdom]? Not phone number or through Google auto sign in?

Out of context.

If you have seen me "whining" about the issue with creating double account with same e-mail, we would be fine. So let me hop on that context first, then answer your question.

Context:

- The problem with double accounts, as previously explained is that I could create (and probably did, unintentionally) using identical e-mail address.
- Password is required for some reason on BC.game (whether it's moving funds to vault, or withdraw I'm not sure, haven't used them in a while).

Now, to answer your question, you are partially right. But the reason why I used that type of login is because if I used email + password, I would've (probably) logged into the inactive account. Another thing to note is that once you're logged in into BC account, you (mostly) stay logged in "forever" (not sure cookie expiry how long it is).

Having said that, because of the issue I faced with their technical error, I had to use said login type. But the phone was added initially upon KYC verification of the active account and before playing.

And please note, considering I have no CLEAR information (which I haven't been supplied with yet), any information I give you regarding my accounts should be considered as a "speculation" as well.

The whole problem I'm having with BCgame is not having ANY information in regards to my account.

But yeah, I used phone + password to login to that account, and specifically through bcgame.sk.


edit:

Here's another way all of this could've happened: initial account I created I did on bc.game or any other domain. When I went to do KYC later on, I went to bcgame.sk, wasn't logged in, and used Google SSO, eventually creating another account. again unintentionally. I can reproduce issue of that second account in at least 10 different ways, and me knowing how I did it is literally impossible.


So, in order for others to explain my case, I've decided to write some analogy directly to holydarkness, and going to publish it here as well. Reason for that is because some of the questions I've been asked continuously are questions I either don't have answer to or I do have answers but based on limited information I have.

I'll do a small analogy of my case here, maybe it will help you better understand my case and reason why I am mostly answering "I guess" or "speculation".

Imagine BC.game is a real world casino.
I am a player.
Every domain they have is one entrance to that casino.
My e-mail is my ID card.
BC.game KYC is "proof of funds" in this scenario.
They allow player to be registered only once according to their terms.

SCENARIO:

I'm coming in to that casino first time. At entrance, they ask me to give them my id card to register and they enter details manually. And register me. I go around, see what additional information they require from me to bring them on before playing. I exit the casino.

(now explaining my actual problem)

I come back to casino. I came to some entrance (maybe same as yesterday, maybe different one, I don't know). They again ask me for id. I provide them, give them proof of funds. Now, what they did is used RFID chip in my ID to identify me, but their system never looked if I was returning player, but registered me again. With same ID. I start playing in their casino. I lose some, add more funds. Win some, go to cashier and withdraw several times successfully. Next day, I come again to any entrance. I show my id and go play again. And I win big. I come to exchange chips for cash, I show them my id and they ask me for proof of funds, again, even if I already showed them. I show them, only for them telling me I broke their terms because I was registered twice in their system with same ID, yet I didn't knew that fact ever. They won't give me funds, because they assume I was guilty for that, yet it was their fault.

-----

Explanation in relationship to my case:

1 - In this scenario, I was never aware I was double registered nor it was my intention. If I wanted to scam them, I would've shown any alternative id, or in my case e-mail. I never used that second account as states few times.
2 - "And I win big. I come to exchange chips for cash, I show them my id and they ask me for proof of funds, again, even if I already showed them" - when they asked me for KYC documents once again via that e-mail, my assumptions were they were asking me for the account I already used (35865086). If that was true, it wouldn't bounce back in Sumsub system.
3 - "I came to some entrance (maybe same as yesterday, maybe different one, I don't know)" - You asked me several times do you remember which account was which, which was first registered. If you see fact 1 and 2, I couldn't give you the answer correctly because they never told me this was it this was that. All what I told you was based on that blurry image.
4 - "Now, what they did is used RFID chip in my ID to identify me, but their system never looked if I was returning player, but registered me again." - let me add this somewhere. "at some point, they never proceeded to ask me for id again at that specific entrance". Reason for that is because once I was logged in at bcgame.sk, I was (almost) never logged out.
5 - "I show them, only for them telling me I broke their terms because I was registered twice in their system with same ID, yet I didn't knew that fact ever. They won't give me funds, because they assume I was guilty for that." - story of my life in regards to those two accounts.
6 - In regards to that third account mentioned by BCgame, it could just be that Agness, who requested additional KYC, provided me link for that third account by mistake, and hence the error "these documents were used to verify another account", or it was just for the account I unintentionally created.


So based on everything, I could've created that double account on bcgame.sk trying to log in to my existing account, while actually being logged in in that first one using domain bc.game (maybe not even logged out). Or maybe I was logged out. That's also another guessing I provided in the thread.

The problem with me answering to your questions is I only can give you what I am aware of, and most of the questions you are asking is something I am either completely unaware of, or being aware based on some "vague" image I have.

For example, I am 100% positive I used Samsung Galaxy Z Fold to do KYC verification first time (when created account) and even second time, when Agness asked me via e-mail.

On the other hand, I am not sure exact method of which of these two accounts were created how (which one was created with Google SSO and which one manual creation). I am 100% sure that they share same e-mail address, because of the problem with BC.game never doing such verification.

Sorry for such a long message and jumping back on same old, but more you're trying to get specifics off of me, more it seems like you're trying to establish me being untruthful. I know this isn't your agenda, but you're trying to get a clear picture, and it's certainly not something I could provide you at my end.

I'll keep answering your questions to the best of my knowledge. Thanks once again for going all this way to escalate this issue, I'll make sure to compensate you properly if my case was resolved.

[holydarkness]

Thank you for this, I am quite close with presenting my findings. An element in your post above add more point of assurance to the authenticity of the evidence BC provided to me thought this double-blind test you both have. Of which again, earned without explicitly asking any party to volunteering the info, rather they blurted out or accidentally show to me.

I am currently waiting for another evidence that I've asked from BC and they're yet to be online and read my post. I've nudged them every now and then, please have a bit of patience.

[gh0573d]

Thank you for this, I am quite close with presenting my findings. An element in your post above add more point of assurance to the authenticity of the evidence BC provided to me thought this double-blind test you both have. Of which again, earned without explicitly asking any party to volunteering the info, rather they blurted out or accidentally show to me.

I am currently waiting for another evidence that I've asked from BC and they're yet to be online and read my post. I've nudged them every now and then, please have a bit of patience.

All I have is time

[gh0573d]

Just a slight an update, my lawyers (as other players went different route): Michael Kyprianou & Connor Legal have prepared final draft to be filed in Cyprus against Fenice Tech (which is parent company of BC.game) and will be filing it by the end of this week.

While I'm optimistic in regards to getting new findings from holydarkness (or maybe even resolution to the case), I'm taking next steps in securing further legal actions if this (public) resolution goes sideways. Hoping that it won't be necessary, I still need to be prepared as previous interactions shown me that it actually might.

Hope I'll be able to get some closure soon, one way or the other.

[gh0573d]

Considering holydarkness conclusion, which is against me (we'll wait for him to provide the evidence), it is time to throw more data into equation.

Company that holds the license doesn't exist in Belize company registrar (aka never registered)?

[GxSTxV]

I believe this is a serious situation and sorry you are going through it. well thanks for the detailed explanation. Your analogy really helps clarify your case. Even that I personally never had issues with BC.GAME on smaller withdrawals, but your case clearly involves more complexity more activity and higher amounts. Hope they step up with some transparency and communication soon, I will be following to see how this unfold.
If all the details you have shared are accurate and true, then the casino definitely has a lot to clarify. Moreover, I have seen another [1] case here on Bitcointalk where a player also won about 7M million and eventually got paid after opening a topic and got help from community, so hopefully theres still a chance for your case as well to get resolved fairly.
About the licensing company if it truly doesn't exist in the Belize company registry, that surely raises serious questions in our community. Especially considering the weight of the case and how this casino is envolved in the forum with many campaigns and been always legit. For this one every detail matters, hopefully @holydarkness takes that into account when reviewing the evidence, Im certain Holy is always taking all details and evidence to help and provide a fair conclusio.

 I will try to follow up with this case, especially that it envolves a huge amount.

[1] : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5504423.0