Statement of Wealth

[pinnit2015]

So...

 

After William Hill were fined 6.2 million for poor money laundering controls I envisioned a SOW flurry. So yep - got two in already. Told them I’m not sending my bank statement and gave a redacted payslip, but have a feeling theyll say they want more. If they do, it’s account closed. Iv also asked for their risk assessment of why I fall into the high risk category. Be interesting to see what comes back.

 

On the plus side, and iv been saying this for years, WH have moved their ops from Tel Aviv - the new hotspot for frauds and selling of customer details. Hopefully others will follow.

 

Feel free to post your experience of the new KYC headaches

[Piper89]

I'm quite new to online gambling but I can imagine when the commission started enforcing KYCc checks people starterd getting their goats up with these checks and trying to buck the system as we know the system always wins.

Personally I have no issue if they want to see bank statements they already know as much about us as we do or selfs and let's be realistic these checks are anti me money laundering if these go some way to preventing money going to organised crime and terrorisim then so be it.

[pinnit2015]

I'm quite new to online gambling but I can imagine when the commission started enforcing KYCc checks people starterd getting their goats up with these checks and trying to buck the system as we know the system always wins.

Personally I have no issue if they want to see bank statements they already know as much about us as we do or selfs and let's be realistic these checks are anti me money laundering if these go some way to preventing money going to organised crime and terrorisim then so be it.

I am not anti ML checks being performed, I am anti being asked for information that is not proportionate to the aim for which it is being requested. Why do you think that the risk assessment was built into the AML? - the whole ethos of data protection is based upon proportionately in terms of processing. Myself being asked for bank statements, will and testimony for inheritance and rental income of a property for a total of 250 quid in deposits in 12 months is not proportionate.  Terrorism might die out if they are reliant upon that donation. 

 

I actually agree with the ruling against Will Hill, for example. 

 

Some people hand out their personal data like confetti but many, myself included, don't. The UK has one of the highest rates of identity theft in Europe and to be perfectly frank we only have ourselves to blame for some of it. 

 

Why do you think the GDPR has came about. 

[Afi4wins]

Either the legislators who put out this requirement didn't give it much thought...or casinos are taking it up with eyes closed!

 

First of all, money laundering culprits DO NOT make small deposits! They have big money to launder and they cannot afford to repeat doing the same thing over and over again...at 20 quid, 20 EUR or twenty donkeys at a time! So it is blardy STUPID to try and catch small depositors...when they should only be looking at all those big depositors!

 

Casumo wanted to know where my 20 EUR deposit came from...they wanted to see my payslip, my inheritance certificate, or my jackpot win slip from any casino. Well...I could say to Casumo that I had put a knife to somebody's throat and stole his wallet, but his wallet only had 20 EUR, so that was where my 20 EUR deposit came from. And then maybe Casumo would ask me to show proof of the stolen wallet instead! Oh geeees!!! 

 

I mean, to implement checking of source of wealth is a good thing as an anti-money-laundering measure...but it must be done discreetly and intelligently...which the casinos aren't doing...or the legislators forgot to state clearly!

 

It's akin to the police force seeking out some bank robbers...but they are questioning all the hobos and the beggars on the streets instead! Isn't that stupid???!!! 

 

Artificial intelligence is improving by leaps and bounds nowadays...but humans are becoming more stupid instead! 

[pinnit2015]

Either the legislators who put out this requirement didn't give it much thought...or casinos are taking it up with eyes closed!

 

First of all, money laundering culprits DO NOT make small deposits! They have big money to launder and they cannot afford to repeat doing the same thing over and over again...at 20 quid, 20 EUR or twenty donkeys at a time! So it is blardy STUPID to try and catch small depositors...when they should only be looking at all those big depositors!

 

Casumo wanted to know where my 20 EUR deposit came from...they wanted to see my payslip, my inheritance certificate, or my jackpot win slip from any casino. Well...I could say to Casumo that I had put a knife to somebody's throat and stole his wallet, but his wallet only had 20 EUR, so that was where my 20 EUR deposit came from. And then maybe Casumo would ask me to show proof of the stolen wallet instead! Oh geeees!!! 

 

I mean, to implement checking of source of wealth is a good thing as a money laundering measure...but it must be done discreetly and intelligently...which the casinos aren't doing...or the legislators forgot to state clearly!

 

It's akin to the police force seeking out some bank robbers...but they are questioning all the hobos and the beggars on the streets instead! Isn't that stupid???!!! 

 

Artificial intelligence is improving by leaps and bounds nowadays...but humans are becoming more stupid instead! 

That's the whole concept of risk based - it's also things like if you wager constant large deposits only once; that could be a trigger etc. To be fair i think a lot are going to have knee jerk reactions to the Will Hill fines etc and it will calm down.

 

But for 250 quid, not a chance - still waiting on a response from them. 

 

But the main issue remains, and one which i still feel uncomfortable with, is that we constantly hand sensitive data over to companies - passports, dobs, addresses, bank details and rely on the casinos to handle correctly. Sign of the times i suppose.

 

You even see it when you're asked for your details if you want to download something from a site - they ask for dob etc - i never give my correct one (unless it's a financial institution/casino etc) because i know it's for marketing.

 

Read the precursor/narrative to the GDPR and you'll see how it doesn't quite square with the above.

 

Then again if we as citizens can't be a""" to safeguard our information, what hope is there :-)

[Afi4wins]

That's the whole concept of risk based - it's also things like if you wager constant large deposits only once; that could be a trigger etc. To be fair i think a lot are going to have knee jerk reactions to the Will Hill fines etc and it will calm down.

 

But for 250 quid, not a chance - still waiting on a response from them. 

 

But the main issue remains, and one which i still feel uncomfortable with, is that we constantly hand sensitive data over to companies - passports, dobs, addresses, bank details and rely on the casinos to handle correctly. Sign of the times i suppose.

 

You even see it when you're asked for your details if you want to download something from a site - they ask for dob etc - i never give my correct one (unless it's a financial institution/casino etc) because i know it's for marketing.

 

Read the precursor/narrative to the GDPR and you'll see how it doesn't quite square with the above.

 

Then again if we as citizens can't be a""" to safeguard our information, what hope is there :-)

 

Honestly speaking, sensitive personal data and info are freely available on the internet...from Google...from Facebook...from Amazon...from everywhere...and even from your own blardy smartphone...which is actually stupid enough to allow others to access whatever info is stored in the smartphone! But then again...those smartphones aren't really stupid...it's the people who designed those smartphones are smart! They make the users stupid! Hahaha.

 

No offence to anyone using a smartphone...please...but that is the whole truth! And the fact remains that only a very few 'smart' people still refuse to use any smartphone...as one recent published article puts it! Hehehe. 

 

This 'Source of Wealth' requirement is just like that smartphone! The people who designed it are smart...to an extent...but the users (casinos)...hmmmm! 

[pinnit2015]

I was at a conference and a guy called Bill Buchanan was talking about smartphones - he's some sort of expert at Edinburgh Uni and he was talking about Smartphones. Basically said - have you ever noticed that even when you're not on a call the phone is listening and gave an example of him talking about a band and in the hour getting spam/adverts inviting him to watch a folk band. Scary stuff.

 

You're right regarding some of the sites - however, don't give the facebooks etc your real dob: no need to.  Social engineering is increasingly one of the issues in ID thefts. 

[pinnit2015]

Another site that may be of interest in all this is 'pwned'  -see if your email has been linked to data breaches etc :-)

[Afi4wins]

Another site that may be of interest in all this is 'pwned'  -see if your email has been linked to data breaches etc :-)

 

Oh yes...I already knew that my Yahoo account had been hacked into before. The hackers hacked into Yahoo...then hacked into millions of accounts...and mine was one of them! 

[pinnit2015]

Oh yes...I already knew that my Yahoo account had been hacked into before. The hackers hacked into Yahoo...then hacked into millions of accounts...and mine was one of them! 

Yeah, sorry about that it - it was a tough month and needed to see if any money was lying about 

 

But be grateful those photos didn't make it onto the internet 

[Afi4wins]

Yeah, sorry about that it - it was a tough month and needed to see if any money was lying about 

 

But be grateful those photos didn't make it onto the internet 

 

Photos? 

 

If they are 'interesting' photos by any chance, most likely they are already in the possession of somebody else...even though not published in those 'hot' sites...hehehe. 

[ValDes]

Frankly speaking, I find all the fuss with the 'new/improved KYC procedures & requirements' as a typical example of how someone (casino operators) is reading without thinking and subsequently overreacting to a piece of information... Which is a shame considering the fact that all this came from UKGC with a certain aim which I'm pretty sure has absolutely nothing to do with the way in which most operators have already started to implement the new requirements.  

 

With all due respect to UKGC and their will and determination to fight terrorism and responsible gaming issues, in my humble opinion they have chosen once again the wrong way to address the problem/s and to find the complete solution/s.

 

Account verification a.k.a. KYC must take place BEFORE first deposit, not on some stage afterwards! 

 

If that was required by the UKGC a couple of years ago when they finally started to realize problem gambling is problem of gigantic proportions among UK punters and their licensed operators have implemented it accordingly there wouldn't be any Cassava case, William Hill case and suchlike at all! 

[pinnit2015]

Frankly speaking, I find all the fuss with the 'new/improved KYC procedures & requirements' as a typical example of how someone (casino operators) is reading without thinking and subsequently overreacting to a piece of information... Which is a shame considering the fact that all this came from UKGC with a certain aim which I'm pretty sure has absolutely nothing to do with the way in which most operators have already started to implement the new requirements.

 

With all due respect to UKGC and their will and determination to fight terrorism and responsible gaming issues, in my humble opinion they have chosen once again the wrong way to address the problem/s and to find the complete solution/s.

 

Account verification a.k.a. KYC must take place BEFORE first deposit, not on some stage afterwards! 

 

If that was required by the UKGC a couple of years ago when they finally started to realize problem gambling is problem of gigantic proportions among UK punters and their licensed operators have implemented it accordingly there wouldn't be any Cassava case, William Hill case and suchlike at all! 

We know one of the reasons it doesn't take place...casino's who implement it will lose custom as punters will go to another. No doubt the casinos have done some lobbying :-)

 

Same for the 'close account if we can't verify in 72 hrs' - only 2 i know implement this.

 

Seems like open season on the casinos recently - AML and Res Gambling. Not helped by papers like the Guardian waging a one man war on people who like to punt. 

 

Going to speak to our Fraud Team in the company to see where's the best place to get a nice summary of ML figures to see where online casinos fall into the mix.

 

Hammer to break a nut spring to mind.

 

I remember the days Bet Victor used to let you withdraw to another non deposited card that wasn't even in your name! Now all that's been tightened up as well. 

[ValDes]

The truth which we all know deep down is quite simple and it is that there is 5% AML and 95% Responsible Gaming involved into all this weird 'movements'... It's just covering the real problem with convenient and popular terminology such as 'money laundering', 'terrorist financing' and other ***** while the responsible authority is immensely afraid to provide a clear answer where were they during all that time when 2 out of every 3 UK punters turned into existing or potential problem gamblers.... 

 

Time for all the relevant responsible authorities to stop burying their heads deep down and start calling the real problems with their real names! 

 

Oh, and one more thing... Helping players in reality often means taking actions different than mostly business oriented ones!