Are UKGC's rules being ignored?

[danbyr2]

Hi,

 

I recently became aware of UKGC's Fair and Transparent Terms and Practices document where they list what the licensees must comply with. Hereunder, it states the licensee cannot "confiscate all or part of the funds in a consumer’s Deposit Balance, or otherwise deduct any amount therefrom on the basis that the consumer has failed to comply with any identity and/or age verification requirements set by the operator (including, but not limited to, a request to provide specific documents or information)" where deposit balance means "The total funds in an account belonging to the player (other than the bonus balance/ restricted funds) and always includes (...) all winnings from wagers made with the deposit." And furthermore, the guide says "Players must not be asked for information at the point they request a withdrawal from their account if the operator could reasonably have asked for this information at an earlier time."

And yet, there's plenty of  complaints that reference requests that are not in line with this. Two examples below:
https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/888-casino-withdrawal-delayed-since-1st-september-2021
https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/slot-strike-casino-completely-ignore-my-emails-account-restricted-as-soon-as-i-withdrew

Am I wrong to think that these are breaches of the licence? Furthermore, does this just apply to ID/proof of address, or is SoF/SoW also not a legitimate reason to prevent a withdrawal if it could have been requested before?

[pinnit2015]

Yeah, basically it means if you w/d they can't hit you with a document request if 'reasonably' they could have done it earlier - reasonably is a bit subjective though

Eg. Dr Bet asked me for a card 5623, expired in May-21 this year, in Sept. They refused to release, quoting regulations. Long Story, after an email, quoting the above, it was magically paid! Like Houdini, the need for it disappeared so yes, a lot of places are breaching this - hello Casumo being one of them

Yes, it applies to all requests, SOW etc included 

[ValDes]

On 10/3/2021 at 1:02 AM, danbyr2 said:

Hi,

 

I recently became aware of UKGC's Fair and Transparent Terms and Practices document where they list what the licensees must comply with. Hereunder, it states the licensee cannot "confiscate all or part of the funds in a consumer’s Deposit Balance, or otherwise deduct any amount therefrom on the basis that the consumer has failed to comply with any identity and/or age verification requirements set by the operator (including, but not limited to, a request to provide specific documents or information)" where deposit balance means "The total funds in an account belonging to the player (other than the bonus balance/ restricted funds) and always includes (...) all winnings from wagers made with the deposit." And furthermore, the guide says "Players must not be asked for information at the point they request a withdrawal from their account if the operator could reasonably have asked for this information at an earlier time."

And yet, there's plenty of  complaints that reference requests that are not in line with this. Two examples below:
https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/888-casino-withdrawal-delayed-since-1st-september-2021
https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/slot-strike-casino-completely-ignore-my-emails-account-restricted-as-soon-as-i-withdrew

Am I wrong to think that these are breaches of the licence? Furthermore, does this just apply to ID/proof of address, or is SoF/SoW also not a legitimate reason to prevent a withdrawal if it could have been requested before?

Hey there @danbyr2 and welcome to the AskGamblers Forum  

Well, I don't think there's another UKGC licensed big casino and/or group which could come even close to the huuuuge AGCCS history which 888 is currently holding with us.  888's AGCCS history here. 

... And, at the same time, check their sanctions records within the UKGC register here. Erm, surprised?