How unbiased is ThePOGG handeling player complaints?

[jwholland]

L.S.,

Recently, after instantly refusing, and afterwards deliberately withholding the content from the public domain, I did several inquiries regarding ThePOGG.

With ThePOGG, being the assigned body for handeling many complaints submitted by players vs online casino, its independent position and expertise regarding should be 100% legit.

After some research, it turns out that this body:

- Consists of only 2 persons ( Duncan X and Lisa Y)

- Persons involved do not seem to get paid, but show a cycling transfer of shares within the holdings involved. All bit of abnormal for a ruling body

- There are no annual reports regarding number of cases handled and the outcome, why not?

-Address stated on the site is a PO Box, not actual registration.

-They use an offshore construction on Malta : Abacus Business Centre, Level 1, Triq Dun Karm, B'Kara Bypass, BIRKIRKARA, MALTA. This not being illegal, its somewhat concerning, and why don't-list this the site

-Questions regarding origin of funding are not addressed  after several requests. Why withhold this information?

 

This is not me accusing persons involved, merely a listing of facts derived from public domain. What concerns me, is the neglecting of information that should be not be ANY problem to provide.

 

In general: If you have to rule regarding the same hand that feeds you, that is bias in play. A ruling body, should be the last entity that should be vague regarding above. 

Attached several screens from The POGG online public docs, after some digging.

 

Gr JW

 

 

 

 

 

[jwholland]

email manuscripts, are available , further proving my point

[cocopop3011]

Why would you even consider using them when you're already using the best site to handle complaints? (Us of course!)

[pinnit2015]

What was Duncan’s response when this was put to him months ago? 

 

[jwholland]

"

As to your questions regarding the "financial structure" of this service - no we won't be publishing financial information that we are not otherwise required to do so by the various government or regulatory agencies we are subject to. If, as seems clear, you are looking to question the partiality of this service by suggesting that we have been 'bought' by the operator you are complaining about, in the first instance the corporate structure of this service has been reviewed and approved by multiple regulatory agencies including both the UKGC and MGA and in the second, if you are sceptical of our service's integrity there is no purpose in your request for us to act on your behalf as we end up in a position where you are holding a gun to our head - anything other than supporting your claims, which at the present time I'm unclear as to you having any sound basis for, results in your deceleration that we have acted improperly. From this point forward please keep you responses relevant to your complaint. Thanks, ThePOGG

"

[jwholland]

They came with an extensive reply today, how surprising. I will blind my personal details, and post it.

I do have to say, they reply for the first time regarding offshore construction, as they state it does not exist anymore. However, they state I'm being a ' grinch' for not allowing my complaint. I admit that this was my initiative for investigating, but with them closing the complaint before, it is not even in play during posting. 

And why is it so hard to provide information? I'm not asking information that is abnormal to provide by a 'regulating/independent body' ?

 

[jwholland]

3 hours ago, cocopop3011 said:

Why would you even consider using them when you're already using the best site to handle complaints? (Us of course!)

As many casinos hold this as ' independent complaint entity'.  Yes, 2 persons, will judge the case, that at this time,  will not show evidence of expertise nor provide evidence of financial structure ( or clear terms with) that rules out any form of bias. 

 

I fully agree that public forum is the best method, as this forum allows 

[jwholland]

Interesting that nobody finds this abnormal? 

[cocopop3011]

7 hours ago, jwholland said:

Interesting that nobody finds this abnormal? 

Can you pleae refrain from deleting posted content in other threads. You can message admin if you need anything removed. and we will look into it for you. 

[jwholland]

Yes I can, its stated in the post. Slotjoint provided me with a person look behind the scenes, that is why is revoked my claims. Slotjoint confirmed that players' questions regarding the topics I stated will be handled differently, as they eventually did in my case. This should be an example for other operators,  and hopefully the future for online gaming. 

 

But on topic,  thank you for looking into my questions.  The ADR should be able to provide clear answers, and why shouldn't  they, as it will strengthens its independent position?  ADR cannot sleep in the same bed with the operators, as mediator. Even if financing structure is linked directly to operators, that would not be a problem if they state clear independent position, legal binding. 

 

Regards JW

[jwholland]

Any update regarding you checking into this?

[cocopop3011]

On 9/8/2019 at 7:38 PM, jwholland said:

Any update regarding you checking into this?

Who was checking into for you?

[jwholland]

I though you were, but obviously not. Must have misread. 

Bizar that nobody finds it strange that a mediator ( unbiased by definition and valued because of this) is being extremely unclear regarding.  Especially for your veteran admins in here, I'm not a manic bashing at things without proper cause.. Providing information should never be a problem, if so, it raises major concerns.  We're not gambling in an illegal Nigerian casino,  that is located in the basement where te roulette wheel almost won't turn because its so of-axis, aren't we?  Or are we?

Why not share information that will actually empower your mediating position. A contradiction in terms.