There is growing governmental, and public concern over the amount of our personal data being held by internet based companies, and the use they make of it. Gambling sites looking to access more of it, completely flies in the face of these concerns, whether it is due to new regulations or not.
On most, if not all, of the sites I play on I have been asked to provide information from time to time. This is completely standard for an industry that has stringent rules regarding money laundering amongst other things to comply with. Sometimes it seemed to be for no particular reason, other times it was when I was trying to increase deposit or transfer limits etc.
Money laundering is of increasing concern, for lots of banks you cannot now pay money into someone else's account.
People trying to second guess what has gone on wont really help. Also sites aren't going to divulge too much information otherwise someone trying to bypass their rules would have a better idea on how to do it.
Having seen quite a few posts like yours on various forum, one issue is you saying I have done nothing wrong is what most people say before they are later found out to have broken rules/ToC etc. Some haven't but quite often people say they are innocent when they are not as they are desperate to get their money off a site. Not saying you have done something wrong but it is rare that someone openly admits wrongdoing.
On most, if not all, of the sites I play on I have been asked to provide information from time to time. This is completely standard for an industry that has stringent rules regarding money laundering amongst other things to comply with. Sometimes it seemed to be for no particular reason, other times it was when I was trying to increase deposit or transfer limits etc.
Money laundering is of increasing concern, for lots of banks you cannot now pay money into someone else's account.
People trying to second guess what has gone on wont really help. Also sites aren't going to divulge too much information otherwise someone trying to bypass their rules would have a better idea on how to do it.
Having seen quite a few posts like yours on various forum, one issue is you saying I have done nothing wrong is what most people say before they are later found out to have broken rules/ToC etc. Some haven't but quite often people say they are innocent when they are not as they are desperate to get their money off a site. Not saying you have done something wrong but it is rare that someone openly admits wrongdoing.
On occasion on this forum you can look at a particular poster, and predict what their opinion is likely to be. Your post is completely missing the points I have tried to make. This may be because you haven't quite understood, or because you are trying to prove a completely different and irrelevant point. What is crystal clear from my communications with pokerstars is that they have asked for extra id documents on the basis that I have transgressed their rules in some way. This has been clearly stated in a number of emails. They were not asking for the documentation due to any new regulations. I have previously supplied them with all the documentation they were asking for, not due to a rules transgression, but due to something I would agree may have looked suspicious. They had frozen my account and on the basis that they were happy with the documentation allowed me to continue to play. You can only assume that the purpose of supplying this documentation is to prove your identity beyond all doubt. There couldn't possibly be another purpose. I would therefore ask you the following questions,
Why do they refuse point blank to tell me in which way I have transgressed their rules, and allow me to avoid doing so again in the future?
If I transgressed the same rule or rules next week, through this lack of information, would they again ask me to supply the same documentation?
If you have previously supplied the identical documentation, how can repeating this possibly prove anything further?
How could I possibly be laundering money by losing money playing poker, and never transferring any money on their site?
Why have they unfrozen my account and allowed me to continue to play, despite the fact that I have not provided the documentation that they demanded, and requested that they closed my account?
Poker sites that demand documentation to comply with regulations is unavoidable, but shouldn't anyone supplying them with documentation for "no particular reason" be regarded as somewhat foolish?
Should we really comply with any request that a poker site may make without question?
To ask for additional id documentation can serve only one purpose and that is to prove someones id beyond doubt, where it is in doubt. So in the examples you quote where you have been asked for additional id when you have requested increased deposit, or transfer limits, doesn't this only go to prove that the site must have had some doubt over your id? Shouldn't they have asked for this id before allowing you to play in the first place?
Glad you go your account back. I agree photos etc and that should be sorted prio to being able to play. Sky poker let me make an account and I played for a few months and not untill I emailed them to ask about a promotion, I had my account suspended because I hadnt passed security checks, it took about a week of supplying them with what They wanted and needed. I would much rather of sorted that out when creating my poker account than having my account suspended when racing for priority for example.
Whilst I recognise that poker sites have regulations to enforce, I think they could act more transparently, rather than infer that you have done something wrong. Id documentation can only prove identity, nothing else. If a poker site is uncertain of your identity, why would they allow you to play in the first place? Some of the things that they allow players to do encourage illegal activity. Allowing players to transfer funds to other players, is a means to launder money. If they stopped this practice, it would probably end any suspicion of money laundering. Banks are the place to transfer money, not poker sites.
I just got an email from the WSOP. When I was last in Vegas, I joined their site to play their on line World Series tourney, and had a few dollars left in the account when I left. You can only log into the site if you are physically located within the State of Nevada. Due to the fact that I have been in Swansea rather than Vegas lately, I haven't logged in for 11 months. As a result my account has become dormant. I am, in theory, able to withdraw the remaining funds, except that the minimum withdrawal allowed is $50. So as my balance is below that figure, I cant. They therefore intend to absorb my balance into their coffers by charging me $5 per month, until the balance is gone. Probably a new regulation?
I just got an email from the WSOP. When I was last in Vegas, I joined their site to play their on line World Series tourney, and had a few dollars left in the account when I left. You can only log into the site if you are physically located within the State of Nevada. Due to the fact that I have been in Swansea rather than Vegas lately, I haven't logged in for 11 months. As a result my account has become dormant. I am, in theory, able to withdraw the remaining funds, except that the minimum withdrawal allowed is $50. So as my balance is below that figure, I cant. They therefore intend to absorb my balance into their coffers by charging me $5 per month, until the balance is gone. Probably a new regulation?
Nah not a new regulation, loads of sites use the "admin fee" thing on inactive accounts to siphon off an unused balance. IMO should be banned industry wide because it's scummy.
In future, it's easier to just punt some Roulette (or SNGs if the site doesn't have online casino, idk if Nevada is allowed) until you reach the minimum withdrawal or bust, and save youself the hassle. Not much point leaving a few dollars in an account on the basis that you might use it next time you're in Vegas, and the amount of EV you lose to reach a minimum withdrawal is negligible.
If you explain the situation, they will likely waive any fees or manually process a withdrawal below the minimum amount (You are allowed to withdraw from anywhere). Obvs be polite because it's not the poor customer service guy's job to make the scummy rule about dormant account fees, and he ultimately decides whether to allow you to withdraw less than minimum balance or rigidly stick to the rules.
The account fee isn't a regulation its a site policy. Party had it for a long time but it was removed a year or two back after lots of complaints about it.
The account fee isn't a regulation its a site policy. Party had it for a long time but it was removed a year or two back after lots of complaints about it.
No I was thinking more about the stars regulations mentioned earlier. Where I haven't provided all the documentation they asked for to satisfy their regulations, my account is unfrozen, and I have access to my funds.
The GC give a lot of advisory recommendations, which are not instructions or regulations, & are subject to different interpretations.
Makes it a little awkward for those with gaming Licences, & then of course customers beat them up if they interpret them differently to each other.
It's become a very highly regulated industry these days, & very complex to stay exactly in line, unlike some industries where there is little regulation & all sort of skullduggery is possible, such as, for example, Time Share, & those sort of things. Shocking industry, that, full of skullduggeryers.
I need to win a few quid to fund my legal team if the number of actionable posts keep growing. I am not arguing against regulations. Regulations are good and keep things above board and fair, which is where we all want things to be, but not all regulations are sensible, and some companies try to enforce regulations that don't really exist. I will try to concisely make my point. Documentation in respect of your identity can only prove your identification, nothing else. It cant prove that you are not a crook, timeshare salesman or a money launderer. I appreciate the necessity for poker sites to ask for proof of identity. Since 2009 I have deposited more than I have withdrawn, but have only deposited, withdrawn, and played poker on the site. In February they asked me to provide this identification documentation, presumably to conclusively prove my identification. However I have previously provided them with all the documentation they were asking for. So when I previously provided them with all this documentation, did it not conclusively prove my identification, to their satisfaction? If it did then why do they need it again? If it didn't, then whats the point of asking for it again? If this documentation did not prove my identification the first time I sent it, how could it prove it the second time around? Four months later good sense prevailed. In my view this just makes them look silly.
Any updates on the situation, and I don't mean Haysie lol
As to the deal with TSG (aka PokerStars) do you mean?
It remains BAU for now.
The deal was finalised last week, slightly sooner than expected, & 'TSG got all their financing sorted with ease.
The CMA are now looking at the deal, & that will not be resolved until around October time. Until the CMA give the green light, no integration can take place, so for now, it's just planning for the future. No other changes can or will take place until the CMA have finished their work.
And, ultimately, where will that leave Sky Poker, which I guess was the real question?
Put simply, we don't know yet. However, I'm far more confident now than I was at the time the deal was announced that a solution will be found which will please & maybe surprise the Sky Poker regulars.
Planning for SPT in 2019, for example, is currently in progress, as are many other 2019 based Promotions exclusive to Sky Poker.
Anything can or might happen, but I'm quite bullish that this is all going to turn out just fine for those who enjoy Sky Poker.
Comments
Gambling sites looking to access more of it, completely flies in the face of these concerns, whether it is due to new regulations or not.
Money laundering is of increasing concern, for lots of banks you cannot now pay money into someone else's account.
People trying to second guess what has gone on wont really help. Also sites aren't going to divulge too much information otherwise someone trying to bypass their rules would have a better idea on how to do it.
Having seen quite a few posts like yours on various forum, one issue is you saying I have done nothing wrong is what most people say before they are later found out to have broken rules/ToC etc. Some haven't but quite often people say they are innocent when they are not as they are desperate to get their money off a site. Not saying you have done something wrong but it is rare that someone openly admits wrongdoing.
We have fully reinstated your Stars Account. You are welcome to carry out your normal transactions and access our tables.
If there is anything else we can assist you with, please let us know.
just joking glad you got it sorted mate.
Your post is completely missing the points I have tried to make. This may be because you haven't quite understood, or because you are trying to prove a completely different and irrelevant point.
What is crystal clear from my communications with pokerstars is that they have asked for extra id documents on the basis that I have transgressed their rules in some way. This has been clearly stated in a number of emails. They were not asking for the documentation due to any new regulations.
I have previously supplied them with all the documentation they were asking for, not due to a rules transgression, but due to something I would agree may have looked suspicious. They had frozen my account and on the basis that they were happy with the documentation allowed me to continue to play.
You can only assume that the purpose of supplying this documentation is to prove your identity beyond all doubt. There couldn't possibly be another purpose.
I would therefore ask you the following questions,
Why do they refuse point blank to tell me in which way I have transgressed their rules, and allow me to avoid doing so again in the future?
If I transgressed the same rule or rules next week, through this lack of information, would they again ask me to supply the same documentation?
If you have previously supplied the identical documentation, how can repeating this possibly prove anything further?
How could I possibly be laundering money by losing money playing poker, and never transferring any money on their site?
Why have they unfrozen my account and allowed me to continue to play, despite the fact that I have not provided the documentation that they demanded, and requested that they closed my account?
Poker sites that demand documentation to comply with regulations is unavoidable, but shouldn't anyone supplying them with documentation for "no particular reason" be regarded as somewhat foolish?
Should we really comply with any request that a poker site may make without question?
To ask for additional id documentation can serve only one purpose and that is to prove someones id beyond doubt, where it is in doubt. So in the examples you quote where you have been asked for additional id when you have requested increased deposit, or transfer limits, doesn't this only go to prove that the site must have had some doubt over your id? Shouldn't they have asked for this id before allowing you to play in the first place?
Id documentation can only prove identity, nothing else. If a poker site is uncertain of your identity, why would they allow you to play in the first place?
Some of the things that they allow players to do encourage illegal activity. Allowing players to transfer funds to other players, is a means to launder money. If they stopped this practice, it would probably end any suspicion of money laundering.
Banks are the place to transfer money, not poker sites.
When I was last in Vegas, I joined their site to play their on line World Series tourney, and had a few dollars left in the account when I left.
You can only log into the site if you are physically located within the State of Nevada.
Due to the fact that I have been in Swansea rather than Vegas lately, I haven't logged in for 11 months.
As a result my account has become dormant. I am, in theory, able to withdraw the remaining funds, except that the minimum withdrawal allowed is $50. So as my balance is below that figure, I cant.
They therefore intend to absorb my balance into their coffers by charging me $5 per month, until the balance is gone.
Probably a new regulation?
In future, it's easier to just punt some Roulette (or SNGs if the site doesn't have online casino, idk if Nevada is allowed) until you reach the minimum withdrawal or bust, and save youself the hassle. Not much point leaving a few dollars in an account on the basis that you might use it next time you're in Vegas, and the amount of EV you lose to reach a minimum withdrawal is negligible.
If you explain the situation, they will likely waive any fees or manually process a withdrawal below the minimum amount (You are allowed to withdraw from anywhere). Obvs be polite because it's not the poor customer service guy's job to make the scummy rule about dormant account fees, and he ultimately decides whether to allow you to withdraw less than minimum balance or rigidly stick to the rules.
http://www.wsop.com/online-poker/play-in-nv/
http://www.wsop.com/online-poker/banking-options/
Do you know how much is in there? If it's like 2 dollars or something then it's probs not worth your time.
Makes it a little awkward for those with gaming Licences, & then of course customers beat them up if they interpret them differently to each other.
It's become a very highly regulated industry these days, & very complex to stay exactly in line, unlike some industries where there is little regulation & all sort of skullduggery is possible, such as, for example, Time Share, & those sort of things. Shocking industry, that, full of skullduggeryers.
I am not arguing against regulations. Regulations are good and keep things above board and fair, which is where we all want things to be, but not all regulations are sensible, and some companies try to enforce regulations that don't really exist.
I will try to concisely make my point.
Documentation in respect of your identity can only prove your identification, nothing else. It cant prove that you are not a crook, timeshare salesman or a money launderer. I appreciate the necessity for poker sites to ask for proof of identity.
Since 2009 I have deposited more than I have withdrawn, but have only deposited, withdrawn, and played poker on the site.
In February they asked me to provide this identification documentation, presumably to conclusively prove my identification. However I have previously provided them with all the documentation they were asking for.
So when I previously provided them with all this documentation, did it not conclusively prove my identification, to their satisfaction?
If it did then why do they need it again?
If it didn't, then whats the point of asking for it again?
If this documentation did not prove my identification the first time I sent it, how could it prove it the second time around?
Four months later good sense prevailed.
In my view this just makes them look silly.
Let it go , Let it go
It remains BAU for now.
The deal was finalised last week, slightly sooner than expected, & 'TSG got all their financing sorted with ease.
The CMA are now looking at the deal, & that will not be resolved until around October time. Until the CMA give the green light, no integration can take place, so for now, it's just planning for the future. No other changes can or will take place until the CMA have finished their work.
And, ultimately, where will that leave Sky Poker, which I guess was the real question?
Put simply, we don't know yet. However, I'm far more confident now than I was at the time the deal was announced that a solution will be found which will please & maybe surprise the Sky Poker regulars.
Planning for SPT in 2019, for example, is currently in progress, as are many other 2019 based Promotions exclusive to Sky Poker.
Anything can or might happen, but I'm quite bullish that this is all going to turn out just fine for those who enjoy Sky Poker.