pinnit2015

Withdrawal still pending, looks like they're voiding the Playojo winnings. Might just reverse it and spunk it on 10 quid spins in Viking Runecraft/Gemix for the world/level bonus.

I say BTG, more like Bonanza. Plus side is that the annoying lag/no lag is gone cf NYX/SG one. Some appear to have no autospin though which is more than off putting.

Wouldn’t pay much attention to Trust Pilot. Look at comments on most casinos - I lost money! Bad site! Er... it’s gambling. Gee whiz. Providing you’re not a BF employee trying to PR them ;-) They’re a UK bookie. Not as good as Willhill but better than Ladbrokes. But not as good as the non high street brands. average at best.

Probably already seen but BTG now on QF... any MG sites will now have going forward should they wish...

I think for all those bees and the fact PG slots have literally no base game it should be 500 x as a minimum. The swarm started off well. Got a chest and expanding wild. Wilds either side of the middle reel but just missing the link. One of my pals got a 12x on two quid plus. You’d need therapy after that.

Set him up like woody the woodpecker so that his nose is just hitting the space bar every 2 seconds :-p

Don't let the UKGC find out about this novel way of getting round the 100 autospin rule

And as for what constitutes player fraud... I’ll defer to Mr Valdes here who through his work will probably have seen and know of this more than me :-) Ones persons bonus abuse ring is another’s ‘evening the playing field’ :-p

Thing is with online casinos, bar bitcoin( though now falling under the money laundering regulations now), is that it’s all so traceable... ML loves faceless cash. You ever noticed shops with no customers but open 16 hrs a day? Noticed the tanning and nail salons that pop up on every high street if you’re in the UK anyhow? Ripe for ML. Casinos? Withdrawal back to same method of deposit for most, can check names to sort codes and bank accounts etc. That’s why I think, if I was a ML, I’d not go to a casino. If I did? It’d be land based :-)

I think it’s pretty common. I was talking to someone who works within one of their departments and they were telling me they cut back on their bonus offerings until they worked out how to combat some of the rings. Anyone who deals with complaints in MGA or here for example will tell you all the tricks ;-) There was a publication somewhere I’ll try find. In terms of how common...the UKGC think casinos are an easy target for money laundering etc. I’m not so convinced but certainly it’s on people’s agenda. All of it’s not helped by these Money laundering Directives. They aren’t rule based - they don’t say exactly what casinos must do - rather they say ‘must have controls in place’. I agree with this approach - having worked in audit, rules based approaches don’t work. Downside is that it leaves it to the casinos to determine their procedures that meet the requirement. This is why we’re seeing different approaches to how things are implemented - some are common sense, some are mental quite frankly. The UKGC, finally, has started to say that casinos shouldn’t withhold money from people without due reason. No doubt things like pending periods are a ploy for more revenue. Casinos requiring more verification even though it was done months ago - they claim they do it as the ML regulations require continuous reviewing of clients, for example. That’s nonsense. The regulations ask them to look for triggers to changes in circumstances, not arbitrarily re checking people. Again, an example of how some get it wrong. What we may see is, as mooted, pre registration KYC checks. Hopefully that will cut back on some of the issues. I agree that, unlike many businesses, the ability of online casinos to withhold money is an issue. They know people won’t have the time, nor money, to take it further to a court etc. But hopefully the ADRs can, and do, help here. Me? Any unreasonable withholding of funds would be met with a fine every time. You’d be amazed how that would serve as an incentive. I may be tempting fate but....i only play at places I have reasonable faith in. Play at these places and, providing you play nice, you’ll not have a problem in the main. Play at not so reputable places? Well...

could have been worse....but meh. Think i'm done with this slot

oops forgot to post

i was doing down to 250 before leaving for another day....i've a feeling this is going to be @@@@. On a quid.

Bee 85 now. The CIA should have used this to torture people. On quids as well. Luckily the free spins have been ok and the chests have dropped in regularly. It’s building up to a 12000x I’m sure of it. Or not

I can't say with any conviction but i'm under the impression they're two of the fastest....Certainly not as slow as Posh Casino's 2 months. Not as fast as here whereby places like Mr Green pay in literally 2 seconds (yes, 2 seconds) As for average times...pass..I think you're doing well to find a place in the US that actually allows you to play so slow pays will just need to be accepted unfortunately...

Bee 60 now on Max.....lord this game sucks the life out of you. It's a matter of principle. And payday loans.

Also quite odd that they never required you to submit that info when you were merely depositing. Just sayin'in

Could put in their terms that i must handover my second born child to their Coven, doesn't mean it would be legally required Same for places requesting stuff under SOW - you don't need to. It just means it will be passed/referred to the (in the UK at least) the SOCA and, upon their review, will either be kept/released and your account closed should they wish. Anyhow, not helped by the fact (as shown by referencing only the e-wallets) the new 5th AML directive specifically singles out prepaid/e wallet methods at high risk of money laundering. What i don't get is....Neteller/Banks are bound by AML so surely if they deem your sources to be 'ok' then it should be good enough for the casino. I'd this convo with a place once - Royal Bank of Scotland are happy that I'm not a money launder so why's that not could enough for a casino who despite having, arguably, less qualified staff in that field, feel the need to trawl through transactions.

It's the same as max bet breach...yes, it's against the terms. But tell me this? Why do casino allow you to exceed the max bet, why do some allow you to play restricted games? Again....to safeguard them...well, if they want safeguarded then why not use the technology at their disposal to do so. They donlt because they can trot out the old terms breached, should you beat the house... Some casino's are excellent in how they manage the genuine 'mistakes' - they void the winnings from the spin, they offer a second chance (Trada casino being one of the equitable and ethical out there in doing this)...some use it as a way of confiscating all the funds. What i've found as a player is that if i play at a decent place, make a genuine mistake that they can see, I'll be OK. We all have thoughts on this - i get that terms are there for a reason but it's a sad day when common sense and fairness falls by the wayside.

I agree to an extent....not everyone is clued up....i think it's reasonable that a person who, whilst having a coffee and decides to sign up via their wifi (not recommended as it's frequently unsecure!), doesn't necessarily think 'oh, public wifi, same IP address, better not!' It's there as a rule to protect casinos. But i'd be very disappointed if a casino adopted a literal, hard, enforcement of their terms especially if they were assured these were two different people. Case by case basis would provide the best remedy - as in my case above. I'm not a contract lawyer but there are the principles of equity in it - i think a court, having seen how the casino knew it was 2 different person but yet was still a breach, may not necessarily come down on the side of the casino despite it being a term. We'll probably never know though as few cases go that far. But lets think of why the term is there in the first place....player fraud. We greedy individuals have our part to play. Can't remember the stats but there is by far more player fraud on the go that any rogue casino - just to give it context and maybe show why casinos adopt this approach...

Good news for me, bad news for everyone else. Case i was to go to was settled at preliminary so I'm free to 500 x this bad boy

3 Jammin Jars are all you need mate. Oh you were talking about the baby....silly me

But lets not pretend otherwise - there are a lot of casino abusers in the business. Sometimes the casinos aren't the bad boys funnily enough...

Common term across 99% of casinos. Personally, they should be following it up by linking the 'other' person to the same address and/or seeing if the 'other' person actually exists (electoral register checks and/or many of the other data points). Personally, if i logged into a hotels wifi....registered...won and got it refused because there were another 300 users with the same IP address I'd not be a happy bunny. That's not protecting against abusers, that's just taking someone's winnings. Just my view and i'm sure Valdes may disagree... Happened at Betat...asked me there was a user with same IP. I said yes, Mrs Pinnit. Is it ok? They confirmed she existed and all was fine. So we have 2 accounts at the address. We have many a 2 accounts at our address - all approved, presumably because they know we are 2 separate people. Well, the good casinos anyway.

I imagine they’ll honour the winnings - did last time. If anyone wins 20k from them, that may be subject to change. Goes to show the difference though between wagering and non wagering. Genuine excitement on 5 quid wagerless spins....wagering? Not so much. Hope they don’t sack the person but promote them :-)