Topic: Account wiped with $64k on Rollbit.com - page 4. (Read 2523 times)
Womp womp, go start a club about it where you can combine your shit posts to perhaps come up with one decently, comprehensive post. It's tiring to get tagged by users like you two when you've never done anything of actual value around these parts. Just virtue signaling and word salads being forced upon other members.
It seems Rollbit Razer abandoned the topic after this posts he [they] thinks there are no need for anything else. Nothing better I can expect from them.
Fun fact: There are many members in the forum who are advertising Rollbit in their signature, you will see them making posts in other scam accusations but after 7 pages of comments you are not going see any posts from any of the signature campaign managers. You will also not going to see a comment from the members who joined the last UCL prediction pool because Rollbit was their sponsor.
Well said.
Seems like Razor, as in any other accusation he replied in, doesn't deem it necessary to follow up stuff. Rollbit is always right and the customer is 100% at fault, always. Nice approach they are presenting here.
And about the signature guys, this also jumped out for me. When I represented BC and thought they handled the case wrong I also called them out and even spoke to the representative in private to find a good solution for both sides.
Even the rollbit campaign manager gave me an unpleasant feedback for calling the site out, basically feedback abuse.
Quote
Used to be, in my eyes, a respected and reputable member of Bitcointalk but in recent times they've turned incredibly vindictive while virtue signaling to the extreme. Sad to see.
Many will say it's a neutral, so no hardtalk, easy to ignore. But it shows that when you protest something strongly, you will be given a feedback. When Rollbit is scamming selectively a mojor responsibility goes to Hhampuz and the signature campaign members.Rollbit knows it better that sponsoring big events like UCL, running a long term signature campaign is always a good way to promote their site. Many of these members receive money from them so obviously they will not see the wrongs Rollbit plans to save their business. There used to be another sportbook Betnomi finally thought enough and then left the community. Let's just hope Rollbit does not follow the same path and they are not dishonest.
It seems Rollbit Razer abandoned the topic after this posts he [they] thinks there are no need for anything else. Nothing better I can expect from them.
Fun fact: There are many members in the forum who are advertising Rollbit in their signature, you will see them making posts in other scam accusations but after 7 pages of comments you are not going see any posts from any of the signature campaign managers. You will also not going to see a comment from the members who joined the last UCL prediction pool because Rollbit was their sponsor.
Well said.
Seems like Razor, as in any other accusation he replied in, doesn't deem it necessary to follow up stuff. Rollbit is always right and the customer is 100% at fault, always. Nice approach they are presenting here.
And about the signature guys, this also jumped out for me. When I represented BC and thought they handled the case wrong I also called them out and even spoke to the representative in private to find a good solution for both sides.
Even the rollbit campaign manager gave me an unpleasant feedback for calling the site out, basically feedback abuse.
OP, Petermario, it seems I have to derail your thread a bit. There is currently someone who apparently got butt-hurt for something that I accidentally did to him in the past, not sure what or where, but I guess he need to vent out a bit so...
Hmm... nitpicking your every post? This is awkward. Let's cross-check the fact here, shall we?
I believe it started here, from page 5, perhaps from half part of page 4 where you actually began to insist on that residency and saying about someone playing as the book's lawyer, but I'll forgo that page as things were become more obvious on page 5.
I literally was not addressing your post, I replied in general upon OP's update, giving him suggestion that might help put things forward, as he asked. Of which you jump to criticize, insisting that I'm taking the book's side, probably without even trying to read and digest what I really suggested. So who exactly nitpick whose post?
And I'll add my personal opinion that it probably happened because at that point, it didn't matter much to you what I said, you're seeing red, all that matter to you at that time was to prove me wrong, as evidenced by how my repetitive attempt to clarify that what I try to do is to help OP disprove his previous statement of residency faced with a statement, "I’m out because no matter what I say, you aren’t changing your mind." and me making things difficult for him.
Prove me wrong that you're not seeing red and actually digest my post carefully, that you didn't made all of those post with sole agenda to paint me bad to the readers. What mind do you exactly wanted me to change? I'm giving OP suggestions to get things moved. You want me to change mind and start prosecuting OP, insisting that he's wrong? Wouldn't that lead to a situation where you'll say "as always, holy, you take side of the casino"?
You insisted that, according to the terms OP is not a resident or something. You claimed that you're familiar with sportsbetting, that it's your field. This whole territory situation should have been a familiar matter to you too, so it's kinda questionable how or why you insist on it. Is it because you're actually not familiar with how sportbooks terms work, or is it simply to enforce your agenda against me, to paint me black, that you're blinded?
And after all those, insisting that I [always] taking the book side and residency situation cleared, without bother to be brave enough to admit your mistake, faced with an undeniable proof through my PM to Razer, that I stay unbiased on this thread and attempting to achieve the best for every side, you once again didn't bother to own your mistake. Instead, you grasp another straw: fairlay. Which, on itself, is another lie inserted between facts in that situation.
As you wished and as I think will be better fit, I'll break things down on that thread, let it out in the public of what actually happened and what your narrative tries to spoon into peope's mind.
I won't mind people calling me names and will gracefully accept critic, input, and people pointing me out that I'm wrong [as evidenced by those "slander" you brushed], but when someone shoves wrong narrative about me? Expect me to strip those words and expose the truth behind it.
I've said my piece, in order to not derail [yet another] thread, I'll address you on PM or other thread you want to create about me if you want to, but I'll focus on OP's case on this thread... actually, I don't think you'll dare enough to address all of those points above, because it's all valid, and addressing it will directly make you admit you're wrong, which I understand that you won't make such statement. And that's fine. But answer me this: will this be what happen from this time forward? You trying to drive a narrative about me and paint me bad, breaching a topic being discussed in a thread instead of focusing on case being presented?
I need to know because if the answer is yes, then it'll be simpler to ignore you altogether, you'll be very detrimental to the development of any cases if you keep going like this, just as evidenced on this thread where you brought a [more than] rather useless points. Otherwise, air those laundry you have, and return to this board with cleared mind.
Oh, by the way, you don't need to shower people with merits to woo them into your side. They're grown ups, they've read and know better about the true nature of what you tried to do.
[...]
Quote from holydarkness
This is my last post in this thread since I've asked you to stop nitpicking my every post. I've also asked to take Fairlay to the Fairlay thread. [...]
Quote from holydarkness
Quote
Now, Fairlay.
To say that we [or I] did not give them a chance to provide evidence is extremely misleading. They came, asking for arbitrator, the overseers suggest a panel of three mediators to maintain fairness, the player nominates two, Fairlay withdraw their request of arbitration for their own reason.
To say that we [or I] did not give them a chance to provide evidence is extremely misleading. They came, asking for arbitrator, the overseers suggest a panel of three mediators to maintain fairness, the player nominates two, Fairlay withdraw their request of arbitration for their own reason.
This is my last post in this thread since I've asked you to stop nitpicking my every post. I've also asked to take Fairlay to the Fairlay thread. [...]
Hmm... nitpicking your every post? This is awkward. Let's cross-check the fact here, shall we?
I believe it started here, from page 5, perhaps from half part of page 4 where you actually began to insist on that residency and saying about someone playing as the book's lawyer, but I'll forgo that page as things were become more obvious on page 5.
I literally was not addressing your post, I replied in general upon OP's update, giving him suggestion that might help put things forward, as he asked. Of which you jump to criticize, insisting that I'm taking the book's side, probably without even trying to read and digest what I really suggested. So who exactly nitpick whose post?
And I'll add my personal opinion that it probably happened because at that point, it didn't matter much to you what I said, you're seeing red, all that matter to you at that time was to prove me wrong, as evidenced by how my repetitive attempt to clarify that what I try to do is to help OP disprove his previous statement of residency faced with a statement, "I’m out because no matter what I say, you aren’t changing your mind." and me making things difficult for him.
Prove me wrong that you're not seeing red and actually digest my post carefully, that you didn't made all of those post with sole agenda to paint me bad to the readers. What mind do you exactly wanted me to change? I'm giving OP suggestions to get things moved. You want me to change mind and start prosecuting OP, insisting that he's wrong? Wouldn't that lead to a situation where you'll say "as always, holy, you take side of the casino"?
You insisted that, according to the terms OP is not a resident or something. You claimed that you're familiar with sportsbetting, that it's your field. This whole territory situation should have been a familiar matter to you too, so it's kinda questionable how or why you insist on it. Is it because you're actually not familiar with how sportbooks terms work, or is it simply to enforce your agenda against me, to paint me black, that you're blinded?
And after all those, insisting that I [always] taking the book side and residency situation cleared, without bother to be brave enough to admit your mistake, faced with an undeniable proof through my PM to Razer, that I stay unbiased on this thread and attempting to achieve the best for every side, you once again didn't bother to own your mistake. Instead, you grasp another straw: fairlay. Which, on itself, is another lie inserted between facts in that situation.
As you wished and as I think will be better fit, I'll break things down on that thread, let it out in the public of what actually happened and what your narrative tries to spoon into peope's mind.
I won't mind people calling me names and will gracefully accept critic, input, and people pointing me out that I'm wrong [as evidenced by those "slander" you brushed], but when someone shoves wrong narrative about me? Expect me to strip those words and expose the truth behind it.
I've said my piece, in order to not derail [yet another] thread, I'll address you on PM or other thread you want to create about me if you want to, but I'll focus on OP's case on this thread... actually, I don't think you'll dare enough to address all of those points above, because it's all valid, and addressing it will directly make you admit you're wrong, which I understand that you won't make such statement. And that's fine. But answer me this: will this be what happen from this time forward? You trying to drive a narrative about me and paint me bad, breaching a topic being discussed in a thread instead of focusing on case being presented?
I need to know because if the answer is yes, then it'll be simpler to ignore you altogether, you'll be very detrimental to the development of any cases if you keep going like this, just as evidenced on this thread where you brought a [more than] rather useless points. Otherwise, air those laundry you have, and return to this board with cleared mind.
Oh, by the way, you don't need to shower people with merits to woo them into your side. They're grown ups, they've read and know better about the true nature of what you tried to do.
Thanks for posting this here.
OP has been given a detailed response about this in 3 seperate locations today. First via our support, then via my X DMs and finally via a public response to a Tweet made by OP.
OP had their deposit returned (including an extra $1,357.41) and account closed after their own admission of playing from Spain and the UK. We are prohibited from accepting players from these regions, as per the terms of our license.
OP claims to be residing in Luxembourg, but our data does not support this, nor does it negate the fact that they've been playing from restricted regions.
I ran a query that looks at every request we've had from their player account. From the 1,872 unique IP addresses, here is the breakdown:
Spain: 1,420 (75.85%)
United Kingdom: 442 (23.61%)
Other (mostly attributed to VPN activity): 0.54%
Out of all 1,872 unique addresses, not one is from Luxembourg.
Furthermore, OP would have seen a warning stating they are connecting from a restricted region upon each connection from Spain or the UK.
It seems Rollbit Razer abandoned the topic after this posts he [they] thinks there are no need for anything else. Nothing better I can expect from them. OP has been given a detailed response about this in 3 seperate locations today. First via our support, then via my X DMs and finally via a public response to a Tweet made by OP.
OP had their deposit returned (including an extra $1,357.41) and account closed after their own admission of playing from Spain and the UK. We are prohibited from accepting players from these regions, as per the terms of our license.
OP claims to be residing in Luxembourg, but our data does not support this, nor does it negate the fact that they've been playing from restricted regions.
I ran a query that looks at every request we've had from their player account. From the 1,872 unique IP addresses, here is the breakdown:
Spain: 1,420 (75.85%)
United Kingdom: 442 (23.61%)
Other (mostly attributed to VPN activity): 0.54%
Out of all 1,872 unique addresses, not one is from Luxembourg.
Furthermore, OP would have seen a warning stating they are connecting from a restricted region upon each connection from Spain or the UK.
Fun fact: There are many members in the forum who are advertising Rollbit in their signature, you will see them making posts in other scam accusations but after 7 pages of comments you are not going see any posts from any of the signature campaign managers. You will also not going to see a comment from the members who joined the last UCL prediction pool because Rollbit was their sponsor.
I just got confirmation from my UK provider that my location will show in the UK when I am connecting from LUX.
Also, for transparency, this is the email I just sent to them.
Just to address your points one by one, I am able to prove that I still live and reside in Luxembourg and I can provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg. I am also happy to share my utility bills for the months of June and July (when available) to prove that I am still living in Luxembourg.
The reason I do not use Wifi on my phone is that I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
Just to address your points one by one, I am able to prove that I still live and reside in Luxembourg and I can provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg. I am also happy to share my utility bills for the months of June and July (when available) to prove that I am still living in Luxembourg.
The reason I do not use Wifi on my phone is that I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
Very well written I think.
Also everything is basically explained good enough to at least make them hopefully look deeper into the whole thing. Refusing to see any evidence from your side would just look even more shady.
I mean what is the problem with hearing you out and look at the documents you are willing to provide, I really don't get it. They can't just judge and confiscate such a large about just because of their opinion it MIGHT be the right thing, it's ridiculous.
Hopefully they come to their senses and at least do the extended KYC, good luck for that!!
Quote from holydarkness
Quote
Now, Fairlay.
To say that we [or I] did not give them a chance to provide evidence is extremely misleading. They came, asking for arbitrator, the overseers suggest a panel of three mediators to maintain fairness, the player nominates two, Fairlay withdraw their request of arbitration for their own reason.
To say that we [or I] did not give them a chance to provide evidence is extremely misleading. They came, asking for arbitrator, the overseers suggest a panel of three mediators to maintain fairness, the player nominates two, Fairlay withdraw their request of arbitration for their own reason.
This is my last post in this thread since I've asked you to stop nitpicking my every post. I've also asked to take Fairlay to the Fairlay thread. You want to post it here. Now you are being untruthfull about Fairlay. Fairlay asked efaltis to arbitrate, he said "no". Fairlay asked me to recommend and arbiter. I recommended you since Fairlay wanted a sole arbiter so as not to post private information to the public. You didn't accept. They didn't want a 3 panel board since it stated in their email that they were looking for one arbiter. Paraphrasing, they wanted someone to apply so that they could be vetted and heard privately. You tried to force rules upon Fairlay to post publicly and a 3 man board would decide. Fairlay posted multiple times that they were looking for an arbiter to apply by email. Fairlay has all the evidence, but you decided to make a decision without any evidence. It's now all out there in public. The names, the teams and associations of the fixed matches. Some books are no longer accepting wagers from teams. I'm out.
You raise a good point here, although I also have plenty of travel plans for the summer and probably will also need to account for them, not sure how feaseable it is considering that if they call and I come back with "I am away on holiday", I probably wont get another shot. [...]
I understand.
Considering this, then your email on post #118 above is the best one so far to "challenge" them, persuading them to re-try your case, as well as not placing you in a rather difficult position. Please keep us posted on their reply.
Also, for transparency, this is the email I just sent to them.
Just to address your points one by one, I am able to prove that I still live and reside in Luxembourg and I can provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg. I am also happy to share my utility bills for the months of June and July (when available) to prove that I am still living in Luxembourg.
The reason I do not use Wifi on my phone is that I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
Just to address your points one by one, I am able to prove that I still live and reside in Luxembourg and I can provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg. I am also happy to share my utility bills for the months of June and July (when available) to prove that I am still living in Luxembourg.
The reason I do not use Wifi on my phone is that I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
Very well written I think.
Also everything is basically explained good enough to at least make them hopefully look deeper into the whole thing. Refusing to see any evidence from your side would just look even more shady.
I mean what is the problem with hearing you out and look at the documents you are willing to provide, I really don't get it. They can't just judge and confiscate such a large about just because of their opinion it MIGHT be the right thing, it's ridiculous.
Hopefully they come to their senses and at least do the extended KYC, good luck for that!!
Also, for transparency, this is the email I just sent to them.
Just to address your points one by one, I am able to prove that I still live and reside in Luxembourg and I can provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg. I am also happy to share my utility bills for the months of June and July (when available) to prove that I am still living in Luxembourg.
The reason I do not use Wifi on my phone is that I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
Just to address your points one by one, I am able to prove that I still live and reside in Luxembourg and I can provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg. I am also happy to share my utility bills for the months of June and July (when available) to prove that I am still living in Luxembourg.
The reason I do not use Wifi on my phone is that I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
First of all, I would have to agree that you make a good point on post #107. Given HR letter and transfer instruction letter are out of question, if you can provide such documentation you mentioned on the post [perhaps the most important one will be the utility bill], it will very likely defeats the UK residency permit [as I'll assume you're yet to have one]. How possible is it to procure utility bill not only until 10th June [where this situation began] but to the date far beyond it, like July's bill perhaps? It'll rather more definitively shows that you're still here in LUX even after the situation.
Next, your draft, it's nicely written, and what I suggested might sound superfluous, but the idea I have in my mind is to "raise" your "bet" with Rollbit's staff who handle this case to a point he has to "check" [forgive the terms]. They probably already will reconsider to let you perform enhanced KYC with those documents you offered you'll provide, but what about raising the bet by to a point they're question their position by telling them that you're more than willing to do a video KYC at a random time [clearly should be done on LUX timezone, and at the time you'll likely to be available, so at 23:00 is clearly out of the table] at one or two hours notice?
So they don't have to give you the schedule ahead of time [this is what usually happen for a video verification, they give the date and time far ahead]. Rather, it's at one or two hours notice, of which you'll also offer to take the video call with LUX landmark being visible [perhaps a simple restaurant sign, street sign, billboard, or other thing that clearly shows you're in LUX]. I believe they'll have to agree that such feast is rather impossible if you currently resides in UK, to arrange a flight, buy a ticket, board, fly, land, and drive to a visible sign of LUX within two hours, not to mention clearing the immigration.
If I were the officer tasked to handle your case, I think I'll seriously consider your living situation in UK if you dared to provide such arrangement. The downside of this will be that you have to constantly monitor your email, waiting for their invitation, as the window is very narrow.
You raise a good point here, although I also have plenty of travel plans for the summer and probably will also need to account for them, not sure how feaseable it is considering that if they call and I come back with "I am away on holiday", I probably wont get another shot.
I think providing my water/energy bill for example for the month of June (latest I have) as well as for the month of July (I could potentially provide this in a couple of weeks) will be ample proof that I am still living in my house in LUX.
I really appreciate your inputs here, I will suggest to them for now that I provide the bills for June and July (when available) to prove that I am still in LUX.
OP, my reply to you is at the last part of this post.
To be fair, they said that the point is moot since OP admitted of being a resident of UK, so whether they accept it or not is actually still unclear, but the paragraph [IMO] should be safe to be translated as a corporate language to say that they acknowledge that their previous call is unfounded and to be revoked.
In case you somehow still don't get it, be it due to miscommunication, misunderstanding, or your post this far is just an attempt to prove me wrong for whatever reason, instead of doing what you claimed you always do [helping the player], that is what we [well, other people and I, not sure about you] try to do.
OP said he just made up that statement [and I'll say again, just to be clear of any confusion of my stance regarding this very particular part, not sure why OP made it and what's the outcome he expected] just to get away with KYC. He's in LUX the whole time, he's yet to be UK resident. That's what I tries to help and provide to OP, a suggestion to [dis]prove his UK residency.
And in case that above is still doesn't able to penetrate your skull, here, OP gets it, this is what we try to achieve,
First of all, to address the "let's not talk further about Fairlay", why not? You're the one who bring Fairlay to the table, creating an impression here on this thread that I am not giving fairlay chance, and I shouldn't clarify the situation you created here? I should address your "accusation" on the other thread, while people reading your statement here might misunderstood what really happened, thanks to your statement? Yeah, very nice.
Now, Fairlay.
To say that we [or I] did not give them a chance to provide evidence is extremely misleading. They came, asking for arbitrator, the overseers suggest a panel of three mediators to maintain fairness, the player nominates two, Fairlay withdraw their request of arbitration for their own reason.
It's not the case of not giving fairlay a chance to prove themselves, they withdraw themselves before the mediation can even begin. The overseers of that thread regrets Fairlay's unilateral decision to withdraw. My last post on that thread clearly outlined the path I am planning to take, questions I prepared, suppose they go with mediation.
So, not giving a chance? Not, giving, a, chance? I can't think of any better word for your statement other than misleading [since throwing muds is apparently out of the window right now].
That said and clarified on this thread, if you have other dirty laundry to air about Fairlay, or other cases, feel free to bring it back up on the respective thread, I'll be more than happy to address you there.
Next, decision, decision. I believe I've answered that on previous post? I don't pass judgment, I don't make a ruling. Both on this thread and on Fairlay's thread, I didn't say which side I decide, with evidence or not, is right or wrong.
Here on this case, I simply help suggesting to OP to provide proof that can get him out of the situation, which... eagle-eyed overseer will easily understand that it's actually a double edged sword. If OP can provide what's asked, then there's a chance he's not guilty. If he refuses to provide, for questionable reason, then there are probably more than meet the eyes.
Thank you for waiting and sorry for the wall of text above, some things need to be cleared.
First of all, I would have to agree that you make a good point on post #107. Given HR letter and transfer instruction letter are out of question, if you can provide such documentation you mentioned on the post [perhaps the most important one will be the utility bill], it will very likely defeats the UK residency permit [as I'll assume you're yet to have one]. How possible is it to procure utility bill not only until 10th June [where this situation began] but to the date far beyond it, like July's bill perhaps? It'll rather more definitively shows that you're still here in LUX even after the situation.
Next, your draft, it's nicely written, and what I suggested might sound superfluous, but the idea I have in my mind is to "raise" your "bet" with Rollbit's staff who handle this case to a point he has to "check" [forgive the terms]. They probably already will reconsider to let you perform enhanced KYC with those documents you offered you'll provide, but what about raising the bet by to a point they're question their position by telling them that you're more than willing to do a video KYC at a random time [clearly should be done on LUX timezone, and at the time you'll likely to be available, so at 23:00 is clearly out of the table] at one or two hours notice?
So they don't have to give you the schedule ahead of time [this is what usually happen for a video verification, they give the date and time far ahead]. Rather, it's at one or two hours notice, of which you'll also offer to take the video call with LUX landmark being visible [perhaps a simple restaurant sign, street sign, billboard, or other thing that clearly shows you're in LUX]. I believe they'll have to agree that such feast is rather impossible if you currently resides in UK, to arrange a flight, buy a ticket, board, fly, land, and drive to a visible sign of LUX within two hours, not to mention clearing the immigration.
If I were the officer tasked to handle your case, I think I'll seriously consider your living situation in UK if you dared to provide such arrangement. The downside of this will be that you have to constantly monitor your email, waiting for their invitation, as the window is very narrow.
I did not know whether Rollbit accepted the contents of the email and either way adding a screenshot of the output from his phone browser will not take time. Still, if that part of the issue has been resolved because Rollbit have accepted it, that is a good thing and the other issues can be addressed. [...]
To be fair, they said that the point is moot since OP admitted of being a resident of UK, so whether they accept it or not is actually still unclear, but the paragraph [IMO] should be safe to be translated as a corporate language to say that they acknowledge that their previous call is unfounded and to be revoked.
thanks for the clarification. If the OP admits to playing from the UK, the penalty seems stiff that all winnings can be confiscated. I think it more fair to void winnings while in restricted areas. If he won all his money while in LUX and then starts playing from the UK, he should be paid winnings.
In case you somehow still don't get it, be it due to miscommunication, misunderstanding, or your post this far is just an attempt to prove me wrong for whatever reason, instead of doing what you claimed you always do [helping the player], that is what we [well, other people and I, not sure about you] try to do.
OP said he just made up that statement [and I'll say again, just to be clear of any confusion of my stance regarding this very particular part, not sure why OP made it and what's the outcome he expected] just to get away with KYC. He's in LUX the whole time, he's yet to be UK resident. That's what I tries to help and provide to OP, a suggestion to [dis]prove his UK residency.
And in case that above is still doesn't able to penetrate your skull, here, OP gets it, this is what we try to achieve,
[...]
Proving that I am still living in LUX will by consequence prove that I currently do NOT live in the UK.
Proving that I am still living in LUX will by consequence prove that I currently do NOT live in the UK.
you can’t make an easy decision now with all the evidence out yet you did it with Fairlay without giving them a chance to provide evidence. Names, teams, associations are now publicly posted of the fixed matches.
The OP has rental agreement, residence and bank statements. There is nothing that can trump that. This decision can be made now. How would you rule right now if you were the arbitrator and there is nothing else to be presented?
Let’s not talk further about Fairlay. That can be done in the other thread if wanted.
The OP has rental agreement, residence and bank statements. There is nothing that can trump that. This decision can be made now. How would you rule right now if you were the arbitrator and there is nothing else to be presented?
Let’s not talk further about Fairlay. That can be done in the other thread if wanted.
First of all, to address the "let's not talk further about Fairlay", why not? You're the one who bring Fairlay to the table, creating an impression here on this thread that I am not giving fairlay chance, and I shouldn't clarify the situation you created here? I should address your "accusation" on the other thread, while people reading your statement here might misunderstood what really happened, thanks to your statement? Yeah, very nice.
Now, Fairlay.
To say that we [or I] did not give them a chance to provide evidence is extremely misleading. They came, asking for arbitrator, the overseers suggest a panel of three mediators to maintain fairness, the player nominates two, Fairlay withdraw their request of arbitration for their own reason.
It's not the case of not giving fairlay a chance to prove themselves, they withdraw themselves before the mediation can even begin. The overseers of that thread regrets Fairlay's unilateral decision to withdraw. My last post on that thread clearly outlined the path I am planning to take, questions I prepared, suppose they go with mediation.
So, not giving a chance? Not, giving, a, chance? I can't think of any better word for your statement other than misleading [since throwing muds is apparently out of the window right now].
That said and clarified on this thread, if you have other dirty laundry to air about Fairlay, or other cases, feel free to bring it back up on the respective thread, I'll be more than happy to address you there.
Next, decision, decision. I believe I've answered that on previous post? I don't pass judgment, I don't make a ruling. Both on this thread and on Fairlay's thread, I didn't say which side I decide, with evidence or not, is right or wrong.
Here on this case, I simply help suggesting to OP to provide proof that can get him out of the situation, which... eagle-eyed overseer will easily understand that it's actually a double edged sword. If OP can provide what's asked, then there's a chance he's not guilty. If he refuses to provide, for questionable reason, then there are probably more than meet the eyes.
Sure, I can hold off until you get back
Thank you for waiting and sorry for the wall of text above, some things need to be cleared.
First of all, I would have to agree that you make a good point on post #107. Given HR letter and transfer instruction letter are out of question, if you can provide such documentation you mentioned on the post [perhaps the most important one will be the utility bill], it will very likely defeats the UK residency permit [as I'll assume you're yet to have one]. How possible is it to procure utility bill not only until 10th June [where this situation began] but to the date far beyond it, like July's bill perhaps? It'll rather more definitively shows that you're still here in LUX even after the situation.
Next, your draft, it's nicely written, and what I suggested might sound superfluous, but the idea I have in my mind is to "raise" your "bet" with Rollbit's staff who handle this case to a point he has to "check" [forgive the terms]. They probably already will reconsider to let you perform enhanced KYC with those documents you offered you'll provide, but what about raising the bet by to a point they're question their position by telling them that you're more than willing to do a video KYC at a random time [clearly should be done on LUX timezone, and at the time you'll likely to be available, so at 23:00 is clearly out of the table] at one or two hours notice?
So they don't have to give you the schedule ahead of time [this is what usually happen for a video verification, they give the date and time far ahead]. Rather, it's at one or two hours notice, of which you'll also offer to take the video call with LUX landmark being visible [perhaps a simple restaurant sign, street sign, billboard, or other thing that clearly shows you're in LUX]. I believe they'll have to agree that such feast is rather impossible if you currently resides in UK, to arrange a flight, buy a ticket, board, fly, land, and drive to a visible sign of LUX within two hours, not to mention clearing the immigration.
If I were the officer tasked to handle your case, I think I'll seriously consider your living situation in UK if you dared to provide such arrangement. The downside of this will be that you have to constantly monitor your email, waiting for their invitation, as the window is very narrow.
Even though you are in Luxembourg it should show a Spanish IP address, this is a very simple thing for you to do. I understand the point about unlimited data on your sim therefore you have no need to use wifi however you could have taken screenshot of what you see when you open the following website: whatismyipaddress.com
To address the Wifi point, I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as even youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
For clarity, if you are currently in Luxembourg, can you use your phone with your regular Spanish sim and open a browser without using any sort of VPN and then take a screenshot of what you see when you visit this website: https://www.whatismyip.com
According to the screenshots you provided earlier, it should be showing a Spanish IP address because of EU regulations (even though most would have thought it would be a local Luxembourg IP address) but a screenshot can settle the issue.
According to the screenshots you provided earlier, it should be showing a Spanish IP address because of EU regulations (even though most would have thought it would be a local Luxembourg IP address) but a screenshot can settle the issue.
Please find snip attached, I covered the IP for security - it shows I am in Spain.
Even though you are in Luxembourg it should show a Spanish IP address, this is a very simple thing for you to do. I understand the point about unlimited data on your sim therefore you have no need to use wifi however you could have taken screenshot of what you see when you open the following website: whatismyipaddress.com
To address the Wifi point, I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as even youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
For clarity, if you are currently in Luxembourg, can you use your phone with your regular Spanish sim and open a browser without using any sort of VPN and then take a screenshot of what you see when you visit this website: https://www.whatismyip.com
According to the screenshots you provided earlier, it should be showing a Spanish IP address because of EU regulations (even though most would have thought it would be a local Luxembourg IP address) but a screenshot can settle the issue.
According to the screenshots you provided earlier, it should be showing a Spanish IP address because of EU regulations (even though most would have thought it would be a local Luxembourg IP address) but a screenshot can settle the issue.
OP, I'm on a very tiny screen of a mobile phone right now and it's rather inconvenient to type on this and it will probably take me around two or three hours before I can access the forum from my usual device. In case you're about to send that reply, do you mind to hold until I can make a proper post? I might have something to add that's helpful
Sure, I can hold off until you get back
OP, I'm on a very tiny screen of a mobile phone right now and it's rather inconvenient to type on this and it will probably take me around two or three hours before I can access the forum from my usual device. In case you're about to send that reply, do you mind to hold until I can make a proper post? I might have something to add that's helpful
Please see below my draft reply for the Rollbit team, I will be addressing their points one by one in red. Do you suggest I add more content to my email?
"Thank you for getting back to us."
"Talking about this case in a forum is not part of the official complaints process, so we won't be providing replies through that medium, only here."
"Upon further investigation it would indeed appear that it is possible for a mobile data package to determine your IP based geolocation."
"However, that point is moot as you have admitted to living in the UK, a restricted territory. Even if you were able to produce documents that you have recently lived in Luxembourg, there is no way for you to prove that you do not currently live in the UK after admitting it to us twice."
I am able to provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg.
"Furthermore, there is no IP based evidence that would place you in Luxembourg. It is extremely likely that you would have at least one IP hit over this period of time that would connect you to Luxembourg, but we fail to locate one."
"Is there a reason why you always use mobile data, and do not connect to a Wifi network even in your own home?"
I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as even youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
"We look forward to hearing from you."
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
"Thank you for getting back to us."
"Talking about this case in a forum is not part of the official complaints process, so we won't be providing replies through that medium, only here."
"Upon further investigation it would indeed appear that it is possible for a mobile data package to determine your IP based geolocation."
"However, that point is moot as you have admitted to living in the UK, a restricted territory. Even if you were able to produce documents that you have recently lived in Luxembourg, there is no way for you to prove that you do not currently live in the UK after admitting it to us twice."
I am able to provide rental agreement, utility bills, residence permit and even employment contract that will prove that I not only was living in Luxembourg at the time of opening the account, but I am still living in Luxembourg.
"Furthermore, there is no IP based evidence that would place you in Luxembourg. It is extremely likely that you would have at least one IP hit over this period of time that would connect you to Luxembourg, but we fail to locate one."
"Is there a reason why you always use mobile data, and do not connect to a Wifi network even in your own home?"
I spend a lot of time at work where the Wifi is capped (cannot access many sites such as even youtube), therefore I always keep the Wifi setting off on my phone, given that I have unlimited mobile data anyways this has never been a problem for me.
"We look forward to hearing from you."
Additionally, I would like to point out that allowing me to complete an exhaustive KYC will shed light to the questions you are asking and will clarify where I was when using the Rollbit account.
Sportsbet.io
Stake, Sportsbet and Pinnacle all use "or", meaning there is a difference. Even if I'm wrong on "resident", for the sake of argument, you are just looking for gotcha moments just like any scam book looks for one little thing to hold on too. Look for reasons to pay the player, not for reasons not to pay the player. For the 100th time, he said he was a resident after playing, not while he was playing. You're looking for another gotcha moment for the book by repeating over and over again a clip of what a poster said, ignoring that he said after playing he became a resident. Who would you rule for at this point? I noticed you are avoiding it.
How did he play from UK?
[image snip]
Quote
Restricted jurisdictions are specific countries or territories that are restricted by our gaming license, and as a result, users located in or from these regions are prohibited from registering and playing on Sportsbet.io.
Stake Quote
14.3 Persons located in or reside in
Pinnacle Quote
and any other country which may prohibit the offering of online gambling to its residents or to any person within such country
Stake, Sportsbet and Pinnacle all use "or", meaning there is a difference. Even if I'm wrong on "resident", for the sake of argument, you are just looking for gotcha moments just like any scam book looks for one little thing to hold on too. Look for reasons to pay the player, not for reasons not to pay the player. For the 100th time, he said he was a resident after playing, not while he was playing. You're looking for another gotcha moment for the book by repeating over and over again a clip of what a poster said, ignoring that he said after playing he became a resident. Who would you rule for at this point? I noticed you are avoiding it.
How did he play from UK?
[image snip]
Oh, look at that, some casinos actually made a better detailed ToS regarding restricted territory and residency. When the case initially arised and I gave an explanation about how those residency works according to some casinos' representative, IIRC, there was some interesting discussion about how will it affect the player's financial report, tax-wise. I guess this tackles it, so kudos to SB, Stake, and Pinnacle.
Now, moving to your post, that quotes above prove that you are wrong, not just for the sake of argument, it is the fact. It's clearly written, what three of them [and other casinos, though they might not as detailed as above] consider as a resident is someone who located in or within the country. It doesn't need those earlier requirement of residency you insisted and persistently lectured me. The second someone set foot on that soil, they're considered to be located in or within that territory. I'm not here to rub it in, though, so I take that topic to rest, glad it's cleared to you.
Next... me and gotcha moment? Looking for a little thing to hold on to? What do you even mean by these? If I have to repeat, which you can prove yourself by re-reading the entire thread [this time, try to not wearing that myopic glasses of "holy always taking side of the books"] I literally tries to get OP free from this "hold". I suggested ways for him to show Rollbit that his case worth reconsidering, that he didn't breach ToS here. I suggested way for OP to convince Rollbit to pay the player. Get that "Holy always side with casino" idea from your head, and you'll start to see this thread from different perspective.
As for who will I rule for at this point and me avoiding that question? First, I'm not avoiding it. It's missed simply and purely because I don't even realize it's a question. And second, as I've also repetitively answered on way too many different occasions, I am not calling a decision/ruling. I deemed myself not wise enough to know what transpires behind each and every cases, both sides always hide something, so I prefer to questions and ask for proof until one thing became evident.
For the sake to prove it to you [and anyone who questions my side, though I honestly think it's just you] that I am not defending Rollbit or that I didn't have OP's best interest at heart 1, here, it's what I wrote to Razer when OP gave me a go.
1guess sharing my side of PM is allowed and won't be considered as a breach of privacy? And if I am not mistaken, the rule said sharing it for the sake of investigation is allowed? Well, since I am being investigated here...
The OP has rental agreement, residence and bank statements. There is nothing that can trump that. This decision can be made now. How would you rule right now if you were the arbitrator and there is nothing else to be presented?
Let’s not talk further about Fairlay. That can be done in the other thread if wanted.
Additionally Rollbit argues that
"However, that point is moot as you have admitted to living in the UK, a restricted territory. Even if you were able to produce documents that you have recently lived in Luxembourg, there is no way for you to prove that you do not currently live in the UK after admitting it to us twice."
Proving that I am still living in LUX will by consequence prove that I currently do NOT live in the UK.
"However, that point is moot as you have admitted to living in the UK, a restricted territory. Even if you were able to produce documents that you have recently lived in Luxembourg, there is no way for you to prove that you do not currently live in the UK after admitting it to us twice."
Proving that I am still living in LUX will by consequence prove that I currently do NOT live in the UK.
How would you rule as is? Rollbit has IP. OP has resident, rental agreement and bank statements saying he's a LUX resident at the time of his play.
that's exactly what I tried to convey and made you understand. That's what I suggested OP to submit to disprove his own statement. For the love of all holy and dark being. Let me try again,
OP made a bad decision by giving a statement that he's a UK resident. Regardless of the meaning of resident that OP gave, be it an extended stays, a short visit, one [week] night stand, he admitted to Rollbit that he's in UK. OP instantly violates Rollbit's ToS by his own statement because they'll assume OP accessed Rollbit with those two big feet of his on Canary Wharf or somewhere else. It further proven by Rollbit's detection of IP that's pinged to UK instead of LUX.
As it seems Rollbit uses this against OP, I proposed OP to disprove his own statement, that he's not staying more than what his working hours require, and commutes back to LUX when it's over [thus, the chance to actually play from UK is significantly smaller compared to if he's there for extended period like being on permanent basis]. I honestly don't know what to suggest to OP if Rollbit asked him to prove that he's truly never, not even once, played from UK, perhaps during his lunch break, and I really hope we don't have to come that way. Though I've propose it to you, suppose you have a good way for OP to prove this.
I read your stuff but it doesn't matter. I took the resident argument from AHOY. Go with your definition of resident.
Oh? What did Ahoy said about resident?
AHOYBRAUSE, my apology, it seems you're dragged into this [I assume] rather unwillingly. But do you mind to tell us what exactly the definition of residency you gave to Peeps?
And no, Peeps, it's not my opinion, it's an explanation from several casinos. It is what applies throughout casinos. I am not the one who make that rule according to myself. It's simply a "fact" of definition agreed amongst casinos.
The OP moved. It would have been better if you sent it for better chance of reply, but I sent this
Cancel all the bets from the UK
Quote
Hey Razer,
The thread is getting fairly long on the $64k case. Is there anything that the OP can provide, per suggestions in the thread, that will help his case or is the decision final by Rollbit? Thanks
The thread is getting fairly long on the $64k case. Is there anything that the OP can provide, per suggestions in the thread, that will help his case or is the decision final by Rollbit? Thanks
Cancel all the bets from the UK
Quote
Spain: 1,420 (75.85%)
United Kingdom: 442 (23.61%)
Other (mostly attributed to VPN activity): 0.54%
United Kingdom: 442 (23.61%)
Other (mostly attributed to VPN activity): 0.54%
Great. I wished you good luck and we can hear from Razer from your side.
Sportsbet.io
Quote
Restricted jurisdictions are specific countries or territories that are restricted by our gaming license, and as a result, users located in or from these regions are prohibited from registering and playing on Sportsbet.io.
Stake Quote
14.3 Persons located in or reside in
Pinnacle Quote
and any other country which may prohibit the offering of online gambling to its residents or to any person within such country
Stake, Sportsbet and Pinnacle all use "or", meaning there is a difference. Even if I'm wrong on "resident", for the sake of argument, you are just looking for gotcha moments just like any scam book looks for one little thing to hold on too. Look for reasons to pay the player, not for reasons not to pay the player. For the 100th time, he said he was a resident after playing, not while he was playing. You're looking for another gotcha moment for the book by repeating over and over again a clip of what a poster said, ignoring that he said after playing he became a resident. Who would you rule for at this point? I noticed you are avoiding it.
How did he play from UK?
The hard block restriction for UK users was only recently added, (around the middle of June afaik), priror to that there was a warning as follows:
"For legal reasons, this website and its services are not available in your country. If you are using a VPN, please disable it and try again" - This message would appear every time the user loaded the site, and they would have to close the notification in order to use the site.
The hard block for UK users as mentioned has only recently been put in place, likely to better direct users to the upcoming UK Rollbit site.
From my knowledge of sites, although its stated that you must reside in the allowed region, if you are using the site from a restricted region (the OP admitted to playing in from the UK) that is also a breach of the TOS as the site does not have a license to allow the user to play there.
Jump to: