Topic: Are no KYC casinos taking risks? - page 3. (Read 495 times)

we have several casinos in this forum that don't require kyc, but they have gained loyal patrons thru the years already. this is why maybe they are not looking at licensing their site because they still have the players to sustain their site.
but since the trend is also changing in this online business, most new casinos and bookies are implementing kyc owed to their gambling license.

They're probably registered but they're not following the rules intended for casinos. With that, the gamblers will be put at a high risk. KYC should be made compulsory so that if there will be unpredicted money laundering at the middle of gambling, the casino will immediately identify who is at fault, otherwise if they fail to do that, the regulators or the people in authorities might put the casino subject for investigation.

KYC procedures are implemented primarily for safety and the prevention of fraud and illegal activities. However when you share your personal documents with a casino, they gain access to a literally a lot information about you, which could potentially be used to track you in case of any suspicious activities.

This type of regulation is typically not found in smaller casinos, as they may lack the financial resources to set up such procedures on their websites. However, I think as these smaller casinos grow and accumulate a larger customer base, they may eventually be compelled to introduce these regulatory measures and start to request their customers to complete the KYC procedure and verify their accounts.

You do not understand the whole idea behind this "NO KYC" strategy, because it is done to acquire startup funds for the legitimate phase that follows that phase. The majority of the smaller casinos start out with the "NO KYC" thing to gain as much new gamblers as possible and then once enough startup capital are raised.... the start to enforce KYC requirements. 

Some people say the smaller casinos operate under the radar of the authorities and that the authorities are looking the other way... but once they grow big enough.... regulators start taking notice and they force them to require verification.

Maybe it was the case that you asked the following:

How many casinos that have a license in Curacao have already been inspected by the government of Curacao?

How many casinos have already been fined by the Curacao government?

How many casinos have been closed by the Curacao government because they considered the casino was stealing people's money?

How many people have complained about casinos to the Curacao government and those same people have gotten their money back?

I think these were the questions you should have asked yourself first before getting to the question about kyc, I say this because when you have answers to these questions I asked, you will see that the Curacao license provider is not like a license provider with a great reputation and who keeps inspecting casinos to the point that if any casino does not comply with kyc then the casino will be fined, we have to start seeing what type of license provider we are dealing with and talking about before we get into thoughts that If a casino does not comply with kyc then it will be sanctioned.

Look, I'm not against kyc, but I think it's not necessary to force people to do kyc at the time of creating an account or at the time of withdrawal, I don't see any reason for them to do that. I think that kyc should be for cases in which suspicious activities are detected and also for those who voluntarily do it as soon as they create an account to have a higher withdrawal limit. There are many ways to combat money laundering without having to force people to do KYC right away. In the real world when a person enters a physical casino they show their ID and play at the casino and when paying they receive their money without much bureaucracy, I saw this on TV. I could be wrong because I've never been to a physical casino

but honestly, I see a lot of online casinos going overboard and using kyc as a way to steal customers' money, and the license provider simply does nothing. So how will the license provider know that a casino is not asking for KYC even though it has a license? and was it the license provider that forced casinos to ask for kyc when creating accounts? where is this written? Can anyone show us what rules the Curacao license provider places in relation to kyc?

Hey, you've hit the nail on the head there! With all the sneaky stuff going on in the gambling world, I'm honestly surprised some casinos are still playing it fast and loose with KYC. I mean, c'mon, skipping the identity check might sound all chill and user-friendly, but it's basically a neon sign saying "Potential shady business ahead!"

I'm with you; seeing a casino with no KYC is a big-time side-eye from me. And the fines? Pshh, good luck to those casinos that think they can just dodge the system. They're setting themselves up for some real headaches. Thinking they can roll without AML policy is just... well, naive might be putting it kindly. Makes you wonder if they've even got their papers in order, right? 

The KYC procedure is of great importance both for tracking the winnings of users from gambling and for tracking the customer portfolio. It is also very important to ensure the safety of users. Every legal casino is required to comply with this procedure and this proves the legality of the casinos that implement the procedure. This requires casino to comply with the procedure if it is legal.

The reason why I generally don't prefer casino services that don't comply with the KYC procedure is that I doubt their legality and they create problems in the perception of trust. Since it is mandatory to track users earnings and report them to the government, every casino must comply with this procedure. The fact that casino services that don't follow this procedure are likely to be illegal and my funds are at risk accordingly is definitely an important red point for me.

In summary, it is important to choose casino services that apply the KYC procedure as it proves that mandatory transactions have been implemented, such as user earnings can be tracked by the government, the real customer base can be determined and the legal obligation is fulfilled by the casino business. There is no difference between handing over your money to an illegal casino and handing over your money to someone you don't know.

That is why everything will be a choice for us. If we like the casino, we can register and deposit the money. But if we can still look for other casinos. The important thing is that we know which casino we want so we don't feel forced to register. Also, if it is a casino that we want, we will agree to the conditions at the casino and will comply with them even if it means having to do KYC. And there are still many casinos out there that might be the casinos we are looking for and finding them on this forum is the best thing we can do to avoid scam casinos.

You don't need to be suspicious, though, as we are dealing with a system. The information they require is for everyone who would sign up. It's very simple; the answer is only yes or no. If we don't like their system, then we shouldn't sign up. That way, we will avoid complaining later if they make the withdrawal process difficult for us or, worse, if they go bankrupt. You know they could use that as an excuse, but in reality, they plan to scam us.

Even if a casino is not registered but asks their customers to do KYC, we should be suspicious because we do not know their reason for asking us to do KYC. But for now, casinos already have a license and ask their customers to do KYC so that the casino knows who their customers are and ensures that their customers do not do illegal things that could harm their business. But customers can still rest easy because there are casinos that are not too strict regarding KYC, so only customers who use large amounts of money will be asked to do KYC. So we as gamblers can only follow the rules so that we don't get into any problems.

Well, I'm not sure if they actually don't know the consequences or not, but they most probably do it because of the demand by the gamblers that don't want to submit their personal information to a casino. So casinos that come up with the policy that they won't require KYC from gamblers are basically targeting the audience that don't like the concept of KYC and they wish to get more engagement because they are not forcing users to submit KYC.

I believe a casino that registers itself and acquires a valid license to operate won't be able to run without asking customers for KYC because registered and licensed casinos are compelled to comply with KYC and AML rules and they can't offer services without asking for KYC. So, no KYC casinos are probably unregistered.

Isn't it silly how some casinos operate with such sloppiness? increased fraud cases? It's no mere coincidence. Please, it's the year 2023. How can these businesses believe that skipping KYC is "cool"? Do they intend for their company to fail or what? You invite regulators to your door by ignoring basic identification and compliance.


When I see a casino with no KYC, I immediately think, "What else are they neglecting?" Are the games manipulated? Are their means of payment insecure? The longevity of their firm and its reputation, as well as customer trust, are more important considerations than just fines. Do they seek long-term success or just short-term fame? Casinos, gather yourselves. You're experimenting with fire.

Apart from KYC, there are also other means of dictating these violations of the terms of service. KYC shouldn't be the only means of dictating these violations because personal details can be faked or falsified.

I also think that not asking for KYC is cool because it protects the identity or personal information of the client. It will also attract more customers to the casino. If not asking for KYC doesn't violate the license terms of the regulator, there is no cause for alarm.

This is applicable only if the regulator asks for such details from the casino. And I think that casinos should obey or abide by the rules of the regulator.  But the license issuer is care less about KYC, no one can blame the casino.

Every casino should follow the law and if it is violating such regulatory laws, it could be dangerous. Their license can be withdrawn. There is no data bank where you can access all the registered casinos in the world. The only way you can access such details is to contact the license provider. So I can not conclude that casinos who don't ask for KYC are not registered. 

I think that KYC can do harm and a safeguard at the same time especially if we're talking about online casinos. I don't think that one casino can be regulated without the AML policy, because the first thing that a casino must ensure is that their customers are safe and protected from any money laundering activities. If a casino failed to do so, then they are not trustworthy and it's normal for a customer to be doubtful. Remember that in this kind of industry, building a trust with your customer is a rightful thing to do since it involves money and funds. So, every casino should employ KYC or any alternatives to verify the identity of their customers to prevent fraudulent activities.

KYC has its flaws and also has its merits, though at this point, I’d say that it’s doing more harm than good, especially in an age wherein personal information is king and is being used in a lot of things online. People who have your personal information, signature, and picture can easily do anything that they want with what they have. That is scary, and imagine how many leaks of such info are happening on a daily basis. This is not to discount KYC and all its applications, but I guess by this time we could have switched into another method of securing our accounts.

Its not about paying taxes but also gambler identity not privacy again because he must upload document ID with first time joining gambling as anonymous have been use real data. But have reason with money laundering make some gambling platform hasn't many choose with government regulation for all gambling have been pass KYC for available active here.
Don't worry for gambler, seems have many gambling site allowed although not verifying KYC but risk when huge amount withdrawing the gambling site require for KYC, maybe withdraw small fund and never huge amount withdrawing is good solution if won't verifying KYC in gambling website.

As far as most users are concerned, they tend to choose a regulated casino in most cases. Therefore, for gambling site owners, having their site registered is a plus point to somehow attract users to take part in their platform. The AML policy is part of the regulation and we should understand that it's already a usual thing in gambling.

The KYC-related concerns are only a big deal here in crypto-gambling because, in the first place, crypto is not supposed to be like that. In online fiat gambling sites, almost the majority of gambling platforms are regulated and KYC is a must and even asked directly at the registration page.

About the last questionm if we talk about fiat online casinos, yes it's possible that if a gambling site doesn't have KYC stuffs, they are probably not registered. But if we talk about crypto-gambling, there are decentralized gambling platforms in crypto where KYC is out of context.

The Kyc may seems not an good one,because the gamblers need to pay tax after enrolling to the gambling.But the real fact is most of the gambling site which ask the KYC will not scam us by random shutdown.The security of the KYC compulsory gambling site will be more,because the gambling site also includes their original wallet in their gambling sites.The money laundering was the important reason to avoid of gambling site with KYC.The wallet of the gambling sites will be managed by the site owners by their own money.

I share the same sentiment as you. Sure, KYC is not a good feature in the long run, but we don't have any great alternatives at the moment so it's best to have a feature that does its job but not in the optimal way, against not having anything at all and risking yourself having no recompense after getting hacked, scammed, or whatnot. I know for a lot of people this may not sit well especially since it's for the most part choosing between the lesser evil between the two, but in the matters of safety and security when we're at the height of a brooding issue in the industry. To some people not having KYC is a blessing especially for those who value their privacy the most, but for the others who wish to value their security more, KYC casinos is the way to go.

We all love to have the no AML policy and no KYC but we are not protected and the bad actors could just use the casino platforms to wash their dirty money the AML and KYC are there to protect the good players and the platforms so they can continue having smooth operations.

When there's money coming in and out the authorities will always check if the platform is not being used by terrorist hackers and scammers and what the best way to do it by the platform is by knowing who are their users and what's their intention.