Topic: STAKE IS SCAM ($12,000) - page 2. (Read 2197 times)

Lines are good. Wishing you luck on getting paid.

hello everyone!!! sorry for no updates. have been very busy and stressed out. i just wanted to let everyone know that my bank letter, payslips, and bank statements have all been uploaded! lets see how drake responds so we can end this mess lol

---

sure. i will post my bets. they were 3 or 4 different mma bets. once i find how to access history i will show you. i only try to withdraw a few thousand dollars of my profits and then this happened. definitely no money laundering flags.

it took me awhile to send these documents because i was waiting for stake response. i have sent stake around 15 different documents? various file conversions, file errors, i don’t even know where to start or begin. eventually this has become very stressful for me so you must understand that i have went from checking this everyday for 3 months straight to dreading even have to deal with this. please understand this from my shoes.

i am always very prompt with sending my documents and these sites make me seem like i am not prompt however i am more prompt than them.

---

---

please read my thread and understand that i provided stake all of what they requested within your “15 minutes” they just chose to deny everything that i sent them. please read my thread and casino guru page and ask gamblers page before spamming my thread. thanks. hope you enjoy my bets on a UFC title fight.


also thank you darkness for standing up for truth. words cannot describe my appreciation. i gave this guy my bets. he can contact stake to see if i placed anything else in the last year (my prior bets i lost thousands on stake like 2 years ago)

Agree 100%. These long investigations are scammy. They are looking to steal or hope the player loses money while the investigation is ongoing. Stake is guilty of it over and over again.

I wouldn't say it's unlawful or unfair to limit or to close accounts of such bettors. Or even to do that to just good bettors if it's clearly stated in ToS previously agreed by the customer at least. AFAIK fiat sportsbooks are doing it, but unlike those offshore crypto sportsbooks they will never keep customers' funds, and ask dubious extra KYC.
Some crypto sportsbooks will have no problem with users' KYC for receiving their funds, and to take their money when they are losing, even when amounts are way higher than what the user is usually betting and could be obviously critical for him, but weirdly they need highly private and specific documents when the user made some profits in order to withdraw his funds. It looks a scammy practice, bad for the reputation of crypto ecosystem for me.

I'm not saying some, I'm saying all bets at a line that is off. If a line is 2.2 everywhere he's betting 2.4 where he can arb or just take the off line, this guy is going to get banned or limited. In major markets you can use a line service and pick off bad lines manually whether just off or slow moving. Some people try to throw the book off by making some bad bets. Every single crypto book is going to ban or limit winning players that make bets on lines that are off. Always betting off lines in small markets screams bot use. There's a lot of arb software out there but sooner or later you'll get caught.

I wouldn't accuse someone of being a "casino scammer" just because he placed some weird bets, except maybe if it's not physically possible for a human being obviously. But betting history of plaintiffs would at least show if those offshore crypto casinos are only blocking suspected professional abuser, or any random bettor winning too much/too frequently according to their business model.

Example - We look at the players bets and his bets show that he limit bets many obscure markets and is picking off bad lines. No one can do this manually without electronic means. He's obviously using a bot. Now you go to Stake and ask for some proof that he's using a bot. Stake is really making it difficult too because they aren't telling you the infraction. Maybe they would if this type of evidence was open on the forum and the case would be closed in our minds.

Ahh! Do I understand that what you try to propose here is: if OP's profiling [shown from his betting history] come out questionable and indicates that he's the bad actor here, then it'll safe us all our time if we just leave this be as it'll just a waste of time?

If so, I appreciate your concern and kind gesture. However, things can't simply be left behind just because the OP of a scam accusation is the guilty one. Speaking for myself, we are here simply to oversee cases. We couldn't [shouldn't] care less who come out to be wrong and who come out as the real victim. We get no benefits from the outcomes of every cases, thus we are neutral. We just have the concern to keep the forum a safe place for every user to roam.

And in the case where an OP of a case is the wrong one, then the case --IMO-- should still be seen toward the end of it, because the victim still needs to be proven not guilty, the narrative simply shifted, where the victim is the casino instead of the gambler.

The KYC goes on no matter what happens. What I'm doing is simple profiling and probability. With how long it's taken to get all of his documents together, profiling says he's going to be guilty. In the country that I'm in, if I were innocent I could produce my passport, utility bill and bank statement in 15 minutes. It could be a lot tougher for him because of the country he lives in and not having a utility bill in his name but an innocent person would figure out a way to get documents verified in under 4 months.

You are looking at it from a judge's perspective which you should do and is very valuable to the forum. I think your line of questioning would change and make it much easier if you knew exactly what he was betting. It's just a time saver for you and the posters.

Walk me through this, as I don't think you see the point I raised, so I'll try to see from your perspective.

Suppose he's innocent, his bets are clean, then what? Stake will not stop the KYC verification mid-way just because OP can prove it here that his bets are clean. Thus, the KYC goes on.

Suppose his bets are limit bets, or the likes, that'll indicate he's multi accounting, thus, he's the bad actor here, then what'll happen with the KYC? Should he stop the KYC progress? Because it'll help the casino identify him? That'll be an awful advice to give to OP as it'll awfully looks like people are suggesting a scammer a way to evade detection. Thus, the only way, will still be to have that KYC done.

Suppose his bets are mixed, and we can't conclude whether he's innocent or guilty, the KYC will have to continue.

Bottomline: the KYC goes, no matter what.

If all of his bets are limit bets in obscure markets or prop bets, 99% of the time he's going to be multi-accounting. These guys make money and get banned or limited everywhere they go. All of us get profiled by either the book or odds provider. If all of his bets were $500 in major markets at widely available lines in a non-restricted country, 99% of the time he'll be innocent.  If neither of these happen, his bets are a mixed package, then we don't know what happened.

The book can do whatever they want but us posters will have a good idea of what happened if it's scenario 1 or 2.

I still can't see the benefits of it. Suppose OP provided his betting history and prove to the overseers that his bets are legit, it still doesn't translate into OP not needing the KYC anymore. And suppose there is something odd with OP's betting history, then what? We'll gonna tell OP, "oh, there, you found cheating on that bet on date xx, on xx vs. xx, we don't think you need to pursue the KYC anymore, you'll lose the case anyway. If you complete your KYC, the casino will have your data and can block you from future attempt of abuse, so better not providing them that."?

I know you said that we are past the point of posting bets and that this verification must be done. For the sake of the posters, posting his plays could give us an immediate decision on whether there was wrongdoing or not. All of these sports cases are the same. Most could be solved in the minds of the posters in a day. It's different with casino play. That could take time.

Possible situation, that OP is guilty of wrongdoing, but he needed a lot of time to get all of his document together were [inferred from his explanation] more to a series of unfortunate events [I guess bad luck do happens?]. He initially can't provide utility bill because it is not under his name, took them a while to get through the proof of address, and they seems to finally get through it. And now, phase 4, SoW, he is once again meet with difficulties because his bank [as per the statement you quote yourself] can't provide the format Stake wanted.

I think if any of OP's explanations for his invalid documents are lies [the needs of notary, unsupported format, and the likes], CG and AG will point it out, as those arbitrator will [I somewhat believe] check the validity of his statement and will points out if the statement are false.

---

For this, I think it's actually "works in OP's favor". If AG simply closed the case and lowered Stake's rating, OP can say good bye to his fund. Sure, Stake's ranking got lower, but they can get it back up with other solved issues, while OP will forever be parted with USD 12,000.

Apparently, they don't even bother to wait till the last second to reply anymore, sadly. KosherMania has posted a message on April 12th at AskGamblers, but Stake representative has failed to reply within the 96 hours timeframe(ie 4 calendar days). So the case should have been closed and tagged as "Unresolved", and casino's rating downgraded accordingly. But Stake's representative seems to have made a request in order to reopen the case and AG has accepted it. I don't know if KosherMania is OK with that, but it shows a very low involvement from the casino in resolving the case, at least.

https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/stake-casino-stake-will-not-verify-me-for-a-long-time

Another thing to add, when it takes a player this long to get all their documents together, they are normally guilty of wrongdoing. When you are honest, it's fairly easy to get documents needed in a short period of time.

This is April 12 over at AG

Sorry that you misunderstood what I said, I believe you missed the part where that word, random, is placed on a quotation mark, as in conveying a message that it is said in figurative manner. I explained next to it, that at times, KYC are asked because the users triggered some flags, which some of them I also mentioned on the same sentence. They are all in the same paragraph.


I don't think it will affect the situation by much at this point. They're asking OP for KYC, and OP will most likely need to clear those up before they can proceed. They have not made what triggers them to ask for KYC known to public. Just because OP shows his bet and [suppose] it's legit, won't necessarily means Stake will instantly withdraw their KYC requirement and say, "our bad, you're good".

It'll be a different story if they've cleared the KYC and give their findings that OP's account is suspected for malicious bets. On this situation, then yes, showing his betting history will probably help him cleared the issue [or not].

I actually didn't know about the random checks. I always thought there was something that triggered a KYC request. Which casinos are doing random checks? It would help me since I do KYC rankings on the sportsbooks.

Putting the rest aside, if the OP shows his bets, it'll be obvious if he will be cleared or not.

I believe at this point you're quite well versed that casinos are asking for "random" KYC from time to time. Not necessarily due to multi-acc or AML, OP can simply triggered some flags because he won big or accessing his account from questionable IP or whatever reason they might think of.

I am not supporting these random KYC practices and I personally think that is quite unethical, but is that acceptable? Well, sadly, it is. As I believe you're also well acquainted, they have a clause on their ToS that allow them to ask for this.

OP just draw a short straw that he happened to be asked for high level KYC [and to make it clear, I personally think such level of KYC without any reason is very wrong, but again, it's sadly acceptable] and they made it further complicated for OP to get it done by keep rejecting his submitted documents.

Bottom line: the KYC request does not instantly OP is suspected of cheating a bet or multi-acc or being accessory to ML.

I go back to common sense again. Let’s see the wagers. If the OP plays obscure markets, prop bets, limit bets or makes steam plays then there’s a reason to multi-account and it should be looked into. AML isn’t a consideration in cases like this. He didn’t bet $100k and roll 1x.