The Fortune Lounge casino group is trying one of the most brazen sleights of hand I believe I have ever seen to ensure a player cannot be paid - the perfect
catch 22 situation: in both cases, the player cannot be paid.
An English player cashed out £12,104 from 7 Sultans Casino, part of the extended Fortune Lounge family. The casino refused to pay, accusing him of fraudulent activity with other players. They had the following to say to Gambling Grumbles, when they contacted them on behalf of the player:
Waiting for 42 more players
On our casino this player is linked to another player who uses the same computer and software. When we enquired with our processor, who processes transactions for several other casino operators, they informed us that, not only does he share these identifiers with a player who plays with us, but also with several other players playing with the other operators.
Our reality is that someone in this link is creating other identities to open accounts and across the group of players they were asked to return "know your customer" documentation so we can ascertain the legality of these players.
(The player) may have returned his documents to us but none of the other players have. So we have no way, at this stage, to ascertain whether (the player) is the person creating these accounts or not. As soon as we receive the KYC documents from this other player and our processors have received confirmation that the other operators have received KYC documents from the other linked players, (the player's) cash-in will be released.
The author of the Gambling Grumbles article I've quoted from above, Steve Russo, illustrates the absurdity of the casino request:
The one player that the casino said played at 7Sultans is not owed any money, so he has little reason to fill out the forms. Are the others waiting to be paid?
"I cannot comment on the other players who are on the processor's list as they will not supply me with that information," the casino rep told us.
It's quite possible that none of the "other players" have any reason to respond to the documentation request, as they are not owed money; this is one obvious reason why they have not done so.
The matter has also been posted at
Casinomeister.
There are two possibilities: guilty or innocent.
He's innocent: the other players are unconnected, and since at least one is owed nothing and has absolutely no reason to supply documents on behalf of a player they've never heard of, at least this one, and possibly many more, will never supply the required documentation; therefore, he can never be paid.
He's guilty: the "other players" who are owed nothing will only supply verification documents at the behest of the the player in question, to facilitate his cashout - they are his "clients" and are happy to cooperate; they will then be verified as accounts infringing the casino "no multi accounts rule" after the casino does its fraud checks; therefore, he can never be paid.
What an absurd, irrational catch 22 situation: the only information the casino will accept to exonerate the player is information that completely incrimintates him.
I put up a
Fortune Lounge warning on the main site some time ago; these recent developments are not encouraging me to reconsider it.
0 Previous Comments
Post a Comment