FORTUNEJACK.COM |Deposit 777 play with 1777 mBTC |Live Casino, Slots, Betting

[TIMOM]

I will no longer make a deposit here, there is too much risk of being blocked.

it’s good that I withdrew all the money on time.
play without me.

[1715338257]

1715338257

[1715338257]

1715338257

[amelik2]

FJ - why don't you respond to my emails? You have no problem posting private info of your users on a public forum but can't even have a private discussion? Nice way to operate an online gambling site...

You are also completely ignoring the fact that you paid out my coworker winnings yesterday. Please explain that?

I already posted the emails of the payment to 'PatDugan' Here is a direct screen grab he sent this morning of his acct confirming the payment:

https://i.ibb.co/7ksRyQp/screen.png

Why don't you post the IP's of the users on the weekends or after 5PM EST? Have both users been logged in at the same time from different IP's in different areas? I bet they have...I'm sure you won't share that though because it will help justify my side even more. You already posted us logging in 18 minutes apart in different cities. If you really cared about doing what is right you would respond to my emails and do a more thorough investigation. I've offered to complete a KYC and send in doc's. You won't even respond to my offering.  

Just because we are coworkers who signed up on the same day because another person told us positive things about your site means you can refuse to pay? I'm sure many people on this forum have a friend or coworker who uses the same gaming site. You're refusing payment because we happened to connect to the same office wifi network a couple times?

How do you expect to grow your business by word of mouth if you don't allow friends or co-workers of users to get paid?

FYI myself and many of my coworkers are on a few established we'll known books (5D, Bookmaker, Heri) Not once have they ever given us a problem about logging in from the same IP. They have the same 'Terms and Conditions' you posted. We are all verified users with 0 issues!

I've offered to show FJ that my deposit came from my verified account on Heritage but they aren't interested. Nice shady operation they have going on...

[allahabadi]

According to our Terms and Conditions, we reserve the right to terminate all the accounts onto the same IP. The rules apply to the accounts, coming from the same family, household, relative or a connected person that might be somehow linked with the acc.

Maybe others can see what I can't can someone point me to the section where it says SAME IP and not some frivolous shit like multiple registered accounts?

[amelik2]

YES! Their only basis is that we logged in from the same IP. They are making false assumptions.

'PatDugan' was verified via KYC and I believe he sent in docs. I've offered to do a KYC of myself and have proof that my BTC deposit came from a verified account registered to me. My account since day one was verified with my email address which is my name @gmail.com and my phone number which I've offered to send a copy of the bill for.

What more proof do I need to prove that we are 2 separate users?

I'm sure if we were still depositing and losing there would be no issue with 2 accounts logging in from the same IP.

[webtricks]

Hey admin/manager/anyone,
What's up with website? I cannot access 'Sports' section, it's taking eternity to load. I messaged Customer Expectations Team but no response. I hope Sports section will become accessible within 3 hours else I will miss important bets for tonight games.

[JeromeTash]

Hey admin/manager/anyone,
What's up with website? I cannot access 'Sports' section, it's taking eternity to load. I messaged Customer Expectations Team but no response. I hope Sports section will become accessible within 3 hours else I will miss important bets for tonight games.

What browser are you using? Maybe you should try changing to other browser and you see. Make sure the internet connectivity is also strong, Fortunejack can be head with weak connections.

Mine is loading well through Chrome browser PC

[hopenotlate]

According to our Terms and Conditions, we reserve the right to terminate all the accounts onto the same IP. The rules apply to the accounts, coming from the same family, household, relative or a connected person that might be somehow linked with the acc.

From what I have read in last few page I am brought to think that the word " winning " is missing between "all" and "accounts" ones so that the correct sentence should be "we reserve the right to terminate all winning accounts onto the same IP; no checks are made on the ones who lose their money on our site".

I mean everyone is free to create account deposit and lose from same IPs, devices, and so on until they are losing players and all the checks are triggered once player make a win.
Unfortunately this is a common practice in my opionion in gambling insdustry and you are in good company.

[webtricks]

Hey admin/manager/anyone,
What's up with website? I cannot access 'Sports' section, it's taking eternity to load. I messaged Customer Expectations Team but no response. I hope Sports section will become accessible within 3 hours else I will miss important bets for tonight games.

What browser are you using? Maybe you should try changing to other browser and you see. Make sure the internet connectivity is also strong, Fortunejack can be head with weak connections.

Mine is loading well through Chrome browser PC

It was a cloudflare error. Mumbai server of Cloudflare not working so I ain't able to access the website in India. However, I used proxy and it worked.

[2double0]

YES! Their only basis is that we logged in from the same IP. They are making false assumptions.

'PatDugan' was verified via KYC and I believe he sent in docs. I've offered to do a KYC of myself and have proof that my BTC deposit came from a verified account registered to me. My account since day one was verified with my email address which is my name @gmail.com and my phone number which I've offered to send a copy of the bill for.

What more proof do I need to prove that we are 2 separate users?

I'm sure if we were still depositing and losing there would be no issue with 2 accounts logging in from the same IP.

If that's the case, I guess FJ should have indicated you on the first day of your registration that your account has been made over a same IP or something like - you cannot create more than one account here from same IP. Your account should have been either banned or you should not have been given the chance to create an account there (which would make it clear for you that your IP address belonged to someone some time ago and they accessed as well as may have already created an account there) and you could have tried with a different IP address if such warning would have been displayed.

[Hhampuz]

If that's the case, I guess FJ should have indicated you on the first day of your registration that your account has been made over a same IP or something like - you cannot create more than one account here from same IP. Your account should have been either banned or you should not have been given the chance to create an account there (which would make it clear for you that your IP address belonged to someone some time ago and they accessed as well as may have already created an account there) and you could have tried with a different IP address if such warning would have been displayed.

That is not how it should happen or how FJ should act in such a situation, it just isn't. What you are saying is basically that FJ owes it to their potential customers to let them know they need to take more precautions to abuse their site by saying "Oh hey you've already used this IP, go find a different one and come back". You understand how silly that sounds, no?

[2double0]

That is not how it should happen or how FJ should act in such a situation, it just isn't. What you are saying is basically that FJ owes it to their potential customers to let them know they need to take more precautions to abuse their site by saying "Oh hey you've already used this IP, go find a different one and come back". You understand how silly that sounds, no?

I'm sorry but your statement here looks more defensive on their part. [Please don't get offended, I don't need a quarrel here as we're both good friends  ]
I'm not saying that, but the statement by amelik2 is also justifiable that if he'd have lost over there, everything would have worked fine as no checks would have been done or needed. But after winning a certain amount, why these checks? What can a user do to prevent themselves from these problems? Amelik2 is ready to do everything to prove that he is not the old person, then what is taking so long on FJ's end to hear this case and respond? I never said that FJ are scammers [they had been in the business since years and I don't think they will do like this to anybody but I'm just trying to be preventive].

[Thekool1s]

@2double0 Apparently it's Standard industry practice. I have been reading about William hill and how they handle cases of a user having multiple accounts. In most cases, they do a standard KYC and detect multi-account users from that. Having the same home address and so on, they don't solely rely on IPs but in this case, it seems like KYC doesn't do the trick... Even if you will provide 2 separate KYCs, FJ still counts that as multi-accounting according to their TOS. @amelik2 can't do much here... Their TOS kinda protects them. Also, I believe William hill does an upfront verification of the account so cases like these are protected right outta the window.

Since 7th May 2019, if you register as a UK or Isle of Man customer, we’ll need to complete verification before you deposit to avoid your account being suspended.

So it seems like at least the Big Boys do owe their customers the information regarding having an existing account already registered with them. Also, @Hhampuz I fail to see how it is silly if you are protecting your customer. I would literally brag about your Casino if they actually looked after me... Imagine being honest from the get-go, Sir/Madam we have detected you have an account already registered with us, please contact the support team immediately. Your ability to bet has been temporarily suspended... Sounds nice rather than silly TBH. This would show that the casino respects me and my money and isn't just there to basically rip me off... Rather than having to rely on shady industry practices why not stand apart from the crowd? Literally takes a day of coding to make these kinds of filters and you end up the trouble of going through cases like @amelik2...  

At this point making an account on FJ seems like a gamble in itself. Just hope that none of your coworkers or your family members hasn't opened an account with them because if you win big, you might end up with nothing and if you end up losing money, FJ will let your account slide through. The real question here is has this happened before and what's their TOS on that. Their TOS agreement allows them to make the Assumption that you and your brother are basically the same person because you are living under the same roof and even a KYC won't be enough to change their mind apparently. I mean if FJ doesn't want to expand its operations then these kinds of TOS make sense but a casino/bookmaker who wants to dominate the market will have way more leniency than relying on mere IPs to detect multi-account users TBH...

Edit:

"Oh hey you've already used this IP, go find a different one and come back".

Or could be something like this, "Oh hey you've already used this IP, Kindly contact the support team if you believe this is a mistake". You are basically implying that every new user is a cheater trying to abuse the promotions etc, But we live in a world where a person is innocent until proven guilty... Your statement implies otherwise...

Source:
[1] https://www.williamhill.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5065

^{Note: I feel like I have to leave this here, I have nothing against the signature campaign members of FJ or FJ altogether. I believe a better environment can be made for the punters. From learning from these cases and embracing the technology which is publicly available. Also, I'm not getting paid by or am I linked with @amelik2. All of what I have said are my genuine concerns. I never take part in dramas, I let the big boys do that but if this is the industry standard then people are literally burning their money away as if they weren't going to anyway. With that being said I'm gonna hit the sidelines and see how this situation develops.}

[marlboroza]

According to our Terms and Conditions, we reserve the right to terminate all the accounts onto the same IP. The rules apply to the accounts, coming from the same family, household, relative or a connected person that might be somehow linked with the acc.

According to your privacy policy, you are not allowed to share private information, just saying...
Can we discuss something here, related to ToS?

Bob opens account from his home.
Bob sells house to Alice
Alice opens account on FJ.
FJ bans both accounts.

Scenario 2:

Bob is at work, bored working night shift
Bob opens account on FJ.
His coworker (Alice) comes to job next week and finds out her FJ account is banned.
FJ says to Alice "I am sorry, Bob wasn't allowed to create account, that's why you are both banned".

Scenario 3:

Bob and Alice are friends.
Alice is new in crypto world and wants to gamble with bitcoin.
Bob suggests Alice to open account on FJ
FJ bans both accounts because Bob and Alice are friends.

Scenario 4:

Bob and Alice have mutual forum trust inclusions, made several forum deals and sent positive trust to each other.
FJ bans both account because they are "otherwise connected person"

No, it really doesn't make much sense. Highlighted part of ToS doesn't make any sense at all, according to what is stated in ToS, you can call everyone friends and confiscate all funds. For company to "reserve right to qualify accounts as multiaccounts", company has to perform KYC check prior to customer depositing funds. Other practices are very...questionable.

[allahabadi]

-

Good points and yet people continue to defend FJ and accuse the victim of being an abuser, to those who are claiming what happened to Innocent till proven guilty clause in case of FJ, the same parameters shud be applied to the victim too who has been held guilty without been given a chance to put his point.

[hopenotlate]

According to our Terms and Conditions, we reserve the right to terminate all the accounts onto the same IP. The rules apply to the accounts, coming from the same family, household, relative or a connected person that might be somehow linked with the acc.

According to your privacy policy, you are not allowed to share private information, just saying...
Can we discuss something here, related to ToS?

Bob opens account from his home.
Bob sells house to Alice
Alice opens account on FJ.
FJ bans both accounts.

Scenario 2:

Bob is at work, bored working night shift
Bob opens account on FJ.
His coworker (Alice) comes to job next week and finds out her FJ account is banned.
FJ says to Alice "I am sorry, Bob wasn't allowed to create account, that's why you are both banned".

Scenario 3:

Bob and Alice are friends.
Alice is new in crypto world and wants to gamble with bitcoin.
Bob suggests Alice to open account on FJ
FJ bans both accounts because Bob and Alice are friends.

Scenario 4:

Bob and Alice have mutual forum trust inclusions, made several forum deals and sent positive trust to each other.
FJ bans both account because they are "otherwise connected person"

No, it really doesn't make much sense. Highlighted part of ToS doesn't make any sense at all, according to what is stated in ToS, you can call everyone friends and confiscate all funds. For company to "reserve right to qualify accounts as multiaccounts", company has to perform KYC check prior to customer depositing funds. Other practices are very...questionable.

Also add to these scenarios an important aspect : all of these eventual bans you described would only take place if either Bob or Alice are winning something because all the controls seem to take place onle when players are winning and everything is allowed until you register, deposit and lose to the casino....and unfortunately it seems to be industry tandard in crypot gambling.

[Lauda]

@2double0 Apparently it's Standard industry practice. I have been reading about William hill and how they handle cases of a user having multiple accounts. In most cases, they do a standard KYC and detect multi-account users from that. Having the same home address and so on, they don't solely rely on IPs but in this case, it seems like KYC doesn't do the trick... Even if you will provide 2 separate KYCs, FJ still counts that as multi-accounting according to their TOS. @am

1) KYC is useless and does not work. You can buy full KYC for $50 - $150. Note: Do not tell me about the need of photos or videos with a piece of paper with today's date or anything similar. The $150 price range includes a person wearing a pink suit, standing on their left leg and writing whatever you want for this procedure. KYC does not work as a replacement for IP-analysis or fingerprinting.
2) The TOS does not "kind of protect them", the TOS gives them full protection.
People need to be educated to read the TOS before using service, rather than blaming services for whatever TOS they use (in this particular case, you may want to start going after almost every single company in existence).

Also add to these scenarios an important aspect : all of these eventual bans you described would only take place if either Bob or Alice are winning something because all the controls seem to take place onle when players are winning and everything is allowed until you register, deposit and lose to the casino....and unfortunately it seems to be industry tandard in crypot gambling.

Why would you waste time and resources on people who may not even play? Or people that lose and therefore are unable to cause an action that breaks the TOS (the relevant part here) to begin with? You need to learn a thing or two about running a business.

For company to "reserve right to qualify accounts as multiaccounts", company has to perform KYC check prior to customer depositing funds. Other practices are very...questionable.

Even a more regulated part of our ecosystem, i.e. that of exchanges, does not do this (albeit they "do not confiscate all funds", they just freeze them or delay ad naseum). It is not uncommon that people have funds locked up for months until public pressure makes them return the initially deposited funds. Also deposited funds =/= winnings.

^{Note: I feel like I have to leave this here, I have nothing against the signature campaign members of FJ or FJ altogether. I believe a better environment can be made for the punters. From learning from these cases and embracing the technology which is publicly available. Also, I'm not getting paid by or am I linked with @amelik2. All of what I have said are my genuine concerns. I never take part in dramas, I let the big boys do that but if this is the industry standard then people are literally burning their money away as if they weren't going to anyway. With that being said I'm gonna hit the sidelines and see how this situation develops.}

If you want to improve the industry without just cherry picking and damaging certain service providers, you can do the following:
1) Make a thread about the importance of reading TOS before using something and keep promoting it to educate the masses.
2) Make a thread that will encourage and demand "all" gambling providers around here to have a clearer and fixed set of rules for this. e.g. KYC before deposits, which I would strongly argue against. e.g. Additional clauses for these multi-account scenarios, where some of the money is still given to the user and then banned for good - This I would argue for (albeit I am leaving the details of this example to others - it is just a very abstract idea).

[allahabadi]

-
1) KYC is useless and does not work.
-

If KYC is useless, then why did FJ take a Skype KYC for that other alleged multi-account that was allowed to withdraw funds ??

[FortuneJack]

Hi Dear Community,

I believe, even the data and ToC was clearly enough to consider this case closed for further development, there still are some questions to be addressed. I am here to make a quick recap of the situation and vocalize the official position of FortuneJack.

1. Accounts amelik2 and PatDugan were created on March 25, 2019.  Nothing special here, accounts get created every day. Still, as from operating this business for ages, we are aware of patterns of behaviors various types of players develop. I will make one of the public - players who love to win large or bet large, sometimes create two accounts. For obvious reasons: to avoid casino restrictions, to get more bonuses, cash backs, to rest one account if they fill it has gone unlucky, etc. It's impossible to detect if the accounts are created with this pattern on the day of creation (hundreds of accounts are created every day). Still, during the play, it gets obvious.





2. PatDugan occurred to be a great player. Even he took good advantage of us, still having a good player on you casino, is a pleasure of every business owner. PatDugan's playing pattern was a little bit abusive to the casino, but still on edge, not crossing the line. A player would make a bet on sports, get this bet approved by the casino. As it happened, he would throw lots and lots of other games in the bet slip, thereby going bigger and bigger. Yet, the practice is abusive, and the Player somehow managed to be in the rules. But if the play with casino gets out of hands, the casino reserves the right to restrict some aspects of the game with the Player. To be perfectly clear here: Adding option is a willing offer from casino to players, keeping the game going, like a cashback or other promotion. Every casino ever receives the right to restrict players' gaming practice, if the playing pattern seems to be abusive to its promotions. Hereby, here is an example of betslip PatDugan used to win some big bucks, the + sign indicates, that game was added in the bet slip using the promotion.






3. PatDugan was restricted this option on February 11. Surprisingly, account created the exact same day, on March 25, 2019, that has not logged in since June 28, 2019 logs on FortuneJack. Here you see Amelik2's log-in history.




4. But this is fine as well, people log in and log out, sometimes years later. Weird thing here is that, those two accounts get linked on two similar IP's.





5. Even more suspicious is that after logging in, first time after June 28, 2019, on the same day, when PatDugan was restricted options letting Player abuse the promotion, Amelik2 (hasn't been on the website for eight months) starts to play with the precisely same pattern. Making the first easy bet, to get it approve by casino and throwing in lots and lots of other games. Notion again: + signs are identifying the games that were added into bet slip using this very promotion option, PatDugan used.





6. So, as far as casino is concerned, two accounts registered the same day, getting linked with two similar IP's, using absolutely identical patterns of playing, abusing similar promotion are two accounts owned by one person and on FortuneJack (as on most of other casinos) multi-accounting is a strict violation of rules and will not be tolerated.



7. Bottom line of this is that, the ToC clearly identifies that YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO REGISTER ONE ACCOUNT. And is clear about family, coworker, friend or friend of friends situations as well.


In addition to all this, PatDugan is indeed approved Player on FortuneJack and already has complete the KYC procedure. The Player has all the right to continue playing on the website, and none of his/her withdrawals will be withheld. In the case of MultiAccounting, and it is a common practice, Player Is always allowed the keep one, verified account.  But no player can or will abuse casino promotions, especially with multi-accounting, which is so obvious and easy to detect by experienced casino staff.


With this, we apologize to be linking this information public. Still, as the community has been involved in the case so actively and the Player has been so vocal, we believe that full transparency of the case is crucial. So all the information is decided to be public, to avoid any misjudgments over the matter.

[donsifon]

Hi Dear Community,

I believe, even the data and ToC was clearly enough to consider this case closed for further development, there still are some questions to be addressed. I am here to make a quick recap of the situation and vocalize the official position of FortuneJack.

1. Accounts amelik2 and PatDugan were created on March 25, 2019.  Nothing special here, accounts get created every day. Still, as from operating this business for ages, we are aware of patterns of behaviors various types of players develop. I will make one of the public - players who love to win large or bet large, sometimes create two accounts. For obvious reasons: to avoid casino restrictions, to get more bonuses, cash backs, to rest one account if they fill it has gone unlucky, etc. It's impossible to detect if the accounts are created with this pattern on the day of creation (hundreds of accounts are created every day). Still, during the play, it gets obvious.





2. PatDugan occurred to be a great player. Even he took good advantage of us, still having a good player on you casino, is a pleasure of every business owner. PatDugan's playing pattern was a little bit abusive to the casino, but still on edge, not crossing the line. A player would make a bet on sports, get this bet approved by the casino. As it happened, he would throw lots and lots of other games in the bet slip, thereby going bigger and bigger. Yet, the practice is abusive, and the Player somehow managed to be in the rules. But if the play with casino gets out of hands, the casino reserves the right to restrict some aspects of the game with the Player. To be perfectly clear here: Adding option is a willing offer from casino to players, keeping the game going, like a cashback or other promotion. Every casino ever receives the right to restrict players' gaming practice, if the playing pattern seems to be abusive to its promotions. Hereby, here is an example of betslip PatDugan used to win some big bucks, the + sign indicates, that game was added in the bet slip using the promotion.






3. PatDugan was restricted this option on February 11. Surprisingly, account created the exact same day, on March 25, 2019, that has not logged in since June 28, 2019 logs on FortuneJack. Here you see Amelik2's log-in history.




4. But this is fine as well, people log in and log out, sometimes years later. Weird thing here is that, those two accounts get linked on two similar IP's.





5. Even more suspicious is that after logging in, first time after June 28, 2019, on the same day, when PatDugan was restricted options letting Player abuse the promotion, Amelik2 (hasn't been on the website for eight months) starts to play with the precisely same pattern. Making the first easy bet, to get it approve by casino and throwing in lots and lots of other games. Notion again: + signs are identifying the games that were added into bet slip using this very promotion option, PatDugan used.





6. So, as far as casino is concerned, two accounts registered the same day, getting linked with two similar IP's, using absolutely identical patterns of playing, abusing similar promotion are two accounts owned by one person and on FortuneJack (as on most of other casinos) multi-accounting is a strict violation of rules and will not be tolerated.



7. Bottom line of this is that, the ToC clearly identifies that YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO REGISTER ONE ACCOUNT. And is clear about family, coworker, friend or friend of friends situations as well.


In addition to all this, PatDugan is indeed approved Player on FortuneJack and already has complete the KYC procedure. The Player has all the right to continue playing on the website, and none of his/her withdrawals will be withheld. In the case of MultiAccounting, and it is a common practice, Player Is always allowed the keep one, verified account.  But no player can or will abuse casino promotions, especially with multi-accounting, which is so obvious and easy to detect by experienced casino staff.


With this, we apologize to be linking this information public. Still, as the community has been involved in the case so actively and the Player has been so vocal, we believe that full transparency of the case is crucial. So all the information is decided to be public, to avoid any misjudgments over the matter.

Good explanation FJ, about betting on sports u dont need to show his bets, its no sense.

I guess that, everybody knows that IF this user didnt win 5 BTC and his "multiaccount" was loosing,, nothing of this will happens and you will let him DEPOSIT AND PLAY AGAIN AND AGAIN "ONLY" if he loose.

On the other hand, Amelik2, it will be like impossible you will get your profit, there are too many facts against you. It shows clearly, that you did something wrong, FJ did a big investigation to prove whats happened with you account.

After all this, uou know whats gonna happen now, do not try to play with MOBILE, only with u IPs home, because with mobile if they see that there are 2 IPS (public wifi) at same time login or playing with FJ,, now FJ has a great excuse to avoid pay the withdrawals.

I like you site, I been playing and withdrawal without problems, and as I said before, if you block or ban this "multiaccount user" immediately after create or deposit in his account, you will avoid all this theme.

[Lauda]

After all this, uou know whats gonna happen now, do not try to play with MOBILE, only with u IPs home, because with mobile if they see that there are 2 IPS (public wifi) at same time login or playing with FJ,, now FJ has a great excuse to avoid pay the withdrawals.

This is incorrect - will not lead to problems either. FJ does not need to change their TOS. It is very simple if you want to be honest: Register -> KYC -> play from this account. Even in cases where new users for whatever reason have the same IP as you, your winnings will not be affected by their accounts being frozen or deleted.