BC.game KYC failed - account temporarily unaviable - frozen 29ETH

[acroman08]

I am not aware that I broke any rules when registering an account, this responsibility must be on the casinos to ensure that the self-exclusion process helps and protects players.

It's the player's responsibility to know if they are breaking the rules, that's why casinos have Terms and Conditions posted on their website, so the gamblers read them and learn what to do and not to do. no offense, but right now you sound like you are putting all the blame on the casino and not taking any accountability.

[cendaaa]

It's the player's responsibility

Responsibility...

Casinos are a regulated industry, they have to comply with the laws and licensing conditions in the countries where they operate. They have committed to ensuring the possibility of self-restrictive measures for players.

I think they cannot throw this responsibility on the user, but they have an obligation to ensure it.

I don't know what is complicated about requiring personal data upon registration (name, address, date of birth, or at least KYC verification before the possibility of depositing and playing.

If someone applies self-restrictive measures and in 10 years re-registers, is it really the user's responsibility where he was or was not registered?

There are thousands of ways to create a new account at online casino after requesting self-exclusion.

I didnt use vpn during registration, i done it from the same device.

Precisely because these options exist, they could simply be prevented by requiring verification (at least name, address, date of birth) during the registration process.

Why they didn't implement this verification during registration is up to each person to answer for themselves, I understand now.

I broke a rule that was supposed to protect me as a player and bc.game helped me by freezing my funds in the amount of 29 ETH. Doesn't that sound strange?

[holydarkness]

It's the player's responsibility

Responsibility...

Casinos are a regulated industry, they have to comply with the laws and licensing conditions in the countries where they operate. They have committed to ensuring the possibility of self-restrictive measures for players.

I think they cannot throw this responsibility on the user, but they have an obligation to ensure it.

I don't know what is complicated about requiring personal data upon registration (name, address, date of birth, or at least KYC verification before the possibility of depositing and playing.

If someone applies self-restrictive measures and in 10 years re-registers, is it really the user's responsibility where he was or was not registered?

There are thousands of ways to create a new account at online casino after requesting self-exclusion.

I didnt use vpn during registration, i done it from the same device.

Precisely because these options exist, they could simply be prevented by requiring verification (at least name, address, date of birth) during the registration process.

Why they didn't implement this verification during registration is up to each person to answer for themselves, I understand now.

I broke a rule that was supposed to protect me as a player and bc.game helped me by freezing my funds in the amount of 29 ETH. Doesn't that sound strange?

And when a casino do this, some will condemn it as an act against privacy and the very root of crypto pseudoanonymity. There is a reason why casinos only ask KYC upon violation or big win or other event that worth investigating [excepting Stake that require basic KYC upon registration]. They're tiptoeing between being compliant to international-government bodies [namely: your and everyone's country] to restrict the growth of crypto and the "privilege" of anonymity that crypto offered [namely, by imposing label of AML/ATF] and to give as many leeway and privacy to the cryptousers.

[cendaaa]

There is a reason why casinos only ask KYC upon violation or big win

or maybe so they don't have to pay them

Please do you have any news from your contact ?

Today, I received an email from bc.game stating that my account has been permanently locked due to prohibited techniques. Without any further explanation.

I requested that the remaining funds from the account be sent to my eth address.

[Mahdirakib]

I didnt use vpn during registration, i done it from the same device.
Precisely because these options exist, they could simply be prevented by requiring verification (at least name, address, date of birth) during the registration process.

So, they haven't taken any steps to prevent you from creating an account at BCgame. They should have at least blocked your IP address and device fingerprint. It isn't possible to prevent users from creating multiple accounts by applying mandatory KYC verification. Users who have gambling problems will use their known people to complete the KYC verification.

I broke a rule that was supposed to protect me as a player and bc.game helped me by freezing my funds in the amount of 29 ETH. Doesn't that sound strange?

They didn't allow you to login and deposit on the same account from which you had requested self-exclusion. You created another account to play there, it is against the terms of the casino. You accepted their terms during registration. Therefore, you are still guilty here if we look at it from the different side.

[cendaaa]

I didnt use vpn during registration, i done it from the same device.
Precisely because these options exist, they could simply be prevented by requiring verification (at least name, address, date of birth) during the registration process.

So, they haven't taken any steps to prevent you from creating an account at BCgame. They should have at least blocked your IP address and device fingerprint. It isn't possible to prevent users from creating multiple accounts by applying mandatory KYC verification. Users who have gambling problems will use their known people to complete the KYC verification.

I broke a rule that was supposed to protect me as a player and bc.game helped me by freezing my funds in the amount of 29 ETH. Doesn't that sound strange?

They didn't allow you to login and deposit on the same account from which you had requested self-exclusion. You created another account to play there, it is against the terms of the casino. You accepted their terms during registration. Therefore, you are still guilty here if we look at it from the different side.

They do not have a self-exclusion mechanism in the system because they want to (they really don't want to) , but because they have to comply with the licensing conditions and laws of the countries in which they operate.
And they must ensure the functioning of this mechanism.
It is not something that is supposed to help the casino confiscate the money won, but on the contrary, to help players not to lose it when they have a problem.

BC.game abuses this mechanism in the exact opposite way to why it must be introduced in the casino.
They allow these players to deposit and play without verifying their identity and then rob them a second time when they manage to win something.

I think that everyone who has a little sense of law and justice must feel that this does not make sense and goes against the meaning of why they must have a self-exclusion mechanism in the casino and must ensure it.

[cendaaa]

I have not received any new official explanatory statement from BC.game, not even here on the forum.
We are now preparing a complaint to the Ministry of Finance of the Czech Republic, which is responsible for the license and the Gambling Act.

If bc.game is going to focus on violating one sentence of the terms and conditions, which is supposed to protect players, they have violated almost the entire Gambling Act, which you can download in English here.

https://www.mfcr.cz/cs/kontrola-a-regulace/legislativa/legislativni-dokumenty/2016/zakon-c-186-2016-sb-25992

So that is the first thing that will most likely result in a legal dispute.

The second thing is that we found out that they probably do not even have a license to operate gambling in the Czech Republic. The ministry sanctions this circumvention of the law with a fine of up to 2 million dollars, as stated in the Gambling Act in CZ.

[JollyGood]

I mentioned something similar in a different thread and it is relevant here too, I think it is becoming increasingly difficult (if not impossible) to defend BC Game against many of the accusations being made against them. They are supposed to be a professional company and that should include exceptional customer services and customer care. Going by the accusations made against them in the forum, it seems they have zero respect for their customers.

If you are correct about them not having a licence to operate in your country, I hope you proceed to report them to your Ministry of Finance because if they fine BC Game millions of USD$ it could be the wake up call they need in order to either become a serious business that provides excellent customer services or they will declare bankruptcy and shut down.

I have not received any new official explanatory statement from BC.game, not even here on the forum.
We are now preparing a complaint to the Ministry of Finance of the Czech Republic, which is responsible for the license and the Gambling Act.

If bc.game is going to focus on violating one sentence of the terms and conditions, which is supposed to protect players, they have violated almost the entire Gambling Act, which you can download in English here.

https://www.mfcr.cz/cs/kontrola-a-regulace/legislativa/legislativni-dokumenty/2016/zakon-c-186-2016-sb-25992

So that is the first thing that will most likely result in a legal dispute.

The second thing is that we found out that they probably do not even have a license to operate gambling in the Czech Republic. The ministry sanctions this circumvention of the law with a fine of up to 2 million dollars, as stated in the Gambling Act in CZ.

[gh0573d]

I mentioned something similar in a different thread and it is relevant here too, I think it is becoming increasingly difficult (if not impossible) to defend BC Game against many of the accusations being made against them. They are supposed to be a professional company and that should include exceptional customer services and customer care. Going by the accusations made against them in the forum, it seems they have zero respect for their customers.

If you are correct about them not having a licence to operate in your country, I hope you proceed to report them to your Ministry of Finance because if they fine BC Game millions of USD$ it could be the wake up call they need in order to either become a serious business that provides excellent customer services or they will declare bankruptcy and shut down.

I have not received any new official explanatory statement from BC.game, not even here on the forum.
We are now preparing a complaint to the Ministry of Finance of the Czech Republic, which is responsible for the license and the Gambling Act.

If bc.game is going to focus on violating one sentence of the terms and conditions, which is supposed to protect players, they have violated almost the entire Gambling Act, which you can download in English here.

https://www.mfcr.cz/cs/kontrola-a-regulace/legislativa/legislativni-dokumenty/2016/zakon-c-186-2016-sb-25992

So that is the first thing that will most likely result in a legal dispute.

The second thing is that we found out that they probably do not even have a license to operate gambling in the Czech Republic. The ministry sanctions this circumvention of the law with a fine of up to 2 million dollars, as stated in the Gambling Act in CZ.

They've already been fined three times: Spain, Netherlands and UK. All three fines were avoided when they were forced into bankruptcy in Curacao, so another fine in their ledger is just another "issue" they can solve by ignoring. It has become evident that they couldn't care less about any legal proceedings thrown at them, because due to nature of their legal setup, it's way easier to just ignore it.

[holydarkness]

I have not received any new official explanatory statement from BC.game, not even here on the forum.
We are now preparing a complaint to the Ministry of Finance of the Czech Republic, which is responsible for the license and the Gambling Act.

If bc.game is going to focus on violating one sentence of the terms and conditions, which is supposed to protect players, they have violated almost the entire Gambling Act, which you can download in English here.

https://www.mfcr.cz/cs/kontrola-a-regulace/legislativa/legislativni-dokumenty/2016/zakon-c-186-2016-sb-25992

So that is the first thing that will most likely result in a legal dispute.

The second thing is that we found out that they probably do not even have a license to operate gambling in the Czech Republic. The ministry sanctions this circumvention of the law with a fine of up to 2 million dollars, as stated in the Gambling Act in CZ.

Umm... if I understand their ToS correctly, which also shared by many other casinos, only different slightly in wordings, actually the burden to ensure if it is legal to gamble in one's country, is shifted to the player. For example, this point:



Not to mention, though I can't verify this myself as I have no interest to put my account in permanent self-exclusion just to verify the rules [I still need the accounts to rake ToS or be in player's shoes and simulate their activity], I think there is a clause in self-exclusion that says it is prohibited to create a new account and they have full right to confiscate funds upon breach of ToS.

Those said, my contact was sick for the past two days and just returned to work today. I am currently inquiring for your situation and a way out of it [this should answer your question why BC's representative give zero statement this far] that will at least give you something despite the bypass of self-exclusion.

If you wished to go with that step above to escalate to legal matters, though, by all means, kindly tell me so I can allocate my time better with other cases and drop yours, as it'll be out of my and my contact's hand and shifted to legal department.

[cendaaa]

is shifted to the player...

The player cannot know whether or not the casino has a license to operate a service in a particular country, it is not public information, it is really the responsibility of the casino if it operates these services in a given country, it must be legally responsible for being able to operate them. Regardless of the fact that my previous account passed KYC verification without any problems, and they allowed me to use their services in my country (I cannot know whether they are breaking the law or not, if I do not know whether they have a license or not).
They can't write whatever they want in their terms and conditions (that you have to wear a black T-shirt with their logo when playing, otherwise you risk having your winnings confiscated). They have to adhere to some legal framework and be responsible for THEIR services.

full right to confiscate funds upon breach of ToS

On the contrary, in ToS, only players can manage the funds in the wallet.

If you wished to go with that step above to escalate to legal matters, though, by all means, kindly tell me so I can allocate my time better with other cases and drop yours, as it'll be out of my and my contact's hand and shifted to legal department.

Of course, we would prefer to take some kind of amicable path.

Please let us know how BC.Game views the whole situation, or how they propose to resolve the situation, because an agreement may not be reached through official channels. Thank you very much

[cendaaa]

I still haven't received any official explanation, on July 28, 2025 I'll start acting like them

[SamReomo]

I still haven't received any official explanation, on July 28, 2025 I'll start acting like them

I suggest you to wait a few more days to see that you'll get something from the casino, the members have said the truth. It's a user's own responsibility to read the ToS of casinos and sometimes those ToS's can change without any notification, and that's why when a user is part of a casino then he/she should always try to read the ToS multiple times.

[holydarkness]

I still haven't received any official explanation, on July 28, 2025 I'll start acting like them

What official explanation do you need? I might be able to convey that to my contact if you specified it to me. Regarding their standing for your case, though, I've heard back from them and their firm offer of returning your initial deposit of 1,900 USD. This is the furthest they'll do, given the nature of your case is self-exclusion circumvention.

[cendaaa]

their firm offer of returning your initial deposit of 1,900 USD. This is the furthest they'll do, given the nature of your case is self-exclusion circumvention.

Thank you for the message, my deposits were in ETH, but I agree, let me forget about it with sorrow and put it out of my mind. How do we do this with them? I assume they have my ETH address?

[holydarkness]

their firm offer of returning your initial deposit of 1,900 USD. This is the furthest they'll do, given the nature of your case is self-exclusion circumvention.

Thank you for the message, my deposits were in ETH, but I agree, let me forget about it with sorrow and put it out of my mind. How do we do this with them? I assume they have my ETH address?

I assume they do, and they'll proceed by returning 1,900 worth of USD [i am not sure whether they'll be in USDT or in ETH or other currencies] to the originating address. I'll let them know about this decision right away, alongside with inquiring the further details that'll be needed to proceed. Just in case, though, mind to shoot me your ETH address? By PM is fine.

[cendaaa]

their firm offer of returning your initial deposit of 1,900 USD. This is the furthest they'll do, given the nature of your case is self-exclusion circumvention.

Thank you for the message, my deposits were in ETH, but I agree, let me forget about it with sorrow and put it out of my mind. How do we do this with them? I assume they have my ETH address?

I assume they do, and they'll proceed by returning 1,900 worth of USD [i am not sure whether they'll be in USDT or in ETH or other currencies] to the originating address. I'll let them know about this decision right away, alongside with inquiring the further details that'll be needed to proceed. Just in case, though, mind to shoot me your ETH address? By PM is fine.

I sent you the ETH address in a private message, I would be happy if the agreed amount in ETH could be sent to me.

I would not address the matter any further, and as I wrote here I would rather forget about this whole situation as soon as possible, with the added thanks for your effort.

[holydarkness]

I assume they do, and they'll proceed by returning 1,900 worth of USD [i am not sure whether they'll be in USDT or in ETH or other currencies] to the originating address. I'll let them know about this decision right away, alongside with inquiring the further details that'll be needed to proceed. Just in case, though, mind to shoot me your ETH address? By PM is fine.

I sent you the ETH address in a private message, I would be happy if the agreed amount in ETH could be sent to me.

I would not address the matter any further, and as I wrote here I would rather forget about this whole situation as soon as possible, with the added thanks for your effort.

This is to double confirm [already did that through PM] and to publicly inform the overseers that I've got the address, I'll relay that to my contact, and will relay here the steps needed to be taken to proceed once I heard from them. It's night time in my contact's timezone and they're already asleep [I believe]. So... probably tomorrow.

[JollyGood]

I am no fan of BC Game because their standards have slipped over the past months. The way BC Game have been handling complaints within the forum is sub-standard (but to be fair most casinos are behaving  similarly). Having said that, I have no recollection of BC Game ever being fined by regulators in Spain, Netherlands and the UK but they were expelled from the UK because they were at that stage at risk of bankruptcy courtesy of Curacao.

As a priority, I think they should try improving their customer services especially within the forum otherwise they could be facing more damage to their reputation. It might even get to a point where the damage to their reputation becomes the reason they close down.

They've already been fined three times: Spain, Netherlands and UK. All three fines were avoided when they were forced into bankruptcy in Curacao, so another fine in their ledger is just another "issue" they can solve by ignoring. It has become evident that they couldn't care less about any legal proceedings thrown at them, because due to nature of their legal setup, it's way easier to just ignore it.

[Rating Place]

When you signed up a second account, you were flagged for multi-accounting. Instead of BC.game banning you right there and then, they free rolled you where you could lose, but not win. It's a crooked tactic used by the casinos since they are well aware of the second account. The good books ban immediately or give your deposit back.