A casino paid £900,000 for delay of withdrawal processing

[BALIK]

If these regulators tighten their supervision, it will only make crypto casinos look for other regulators with less strict regulations, and that would harm the regulators who have already profited by providing affordable licenses to those crypto casinos. So expecting stricter oversight of crypto casinos is just pointless.

I wouldn’t call strict oversight pointless. Yes, some operator will certainly move to jurisdiction with weaker regulation. But that does not mean there is no reason for regulator to take action. This UKGC case demonstrate that regulator can take action against unfair withdrawal term, as well as failure related to AML and safer gambling.

For crypto casinos, actual issues are jurisdiction and enforcement. If there is no effective legal connection between operator and customer’s country then taking legal action on behalf of customer becomes costly or in practice, ineffective. Therefore, I think that mere existence of license should not be taken as guarantee of customer protection. Again, it's not as if all oversight is useless, that wouldn't be right either. Low cost license that lack provision for effective remedies cannot offer much protection to customer.

[jossiel]

I think that the bible verse is inappropriate on this situation since it's related to gambling and that two can't be connected.
But I do see the point

Who are you to dictate what is, and what is not appropriate in my post?? Some of you just don't know your boundaries and it tells a lot about how you live. The message there was clear, even a blind person could see it.

I'm not dictating you, I'm only saying that using a bible verse in a gambling related topic might be out of touch.

And as I've said, I do see the whole point of what you're trying to make. You even already judged me by how I live but okay, let's move on.

So let's be chill, it's an open discussion and even I agreed in the end about the point. Peace.

I can't really tell what you mean by "make reasoning'', but this isn't far from the quoted part of my post.

It's about these casinos making some reasons to cause the withdrawal of the players.

[Myleschetty]

A settlement amounting to £900k for delays in withdrawal and AML failures? I don't believe we can see this in the online crypto casino because it's an accountability we never encounter. Despite the desire of all crypto gamblers for almost instant withdrawals, but the online gambling space lacks a regulator who can enforce a settlement.

[mirakal]

That is very good. This is the reason licensing and regulations can help customers at times. It is just like the ones that we have posted about before about customers not be required to do KYC during deposit, but be forced to do KYC when about to withdraw the money won. But you listed three other wrongdoings of the gambling site which are pending withdrawal that may be connected to the KYC during withdrawal, problem gambling and money laundering, while two are not about withdrawal issues.

I think that's how licensing and regulations should be, it should help more the customers than the gambling personnel themselves. However, in reality, those regulations end up taken advantage by one party only, and bring it to their biggest advantage. Enforcing KYC all of a sudden when its not required in the beginning is a big joke, but most of the shady casinos do that so they can delay the winning withdrawal, or worst is to avoid paying the huge amount because it could mean a huge loss to their own casino.