Fraud bookmakers

[X_box_X]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason licensed bookmakers are obliged to ensure all deposited funds are turned over before the entire balance can be withdrawn is to prevent money laundering.

If a bookmaker limits your account and only allows you to bet on MBL events prior to having a chance to turn the initial deposit over on sport, THEN SURELY all you have to do is satisfy them the deposited funds wasn't intended for money laundering. I'm almost certain that would have to be the case, and surely if you were to follow the correct channels in requesting a full withdrawal, you'd be entitled to those funds as long as you can satisfy the licensee the deposited funds weren't laundered.

 

[sohohoho]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason licensed bookmakers are obliged to ensure all deposited funds are turned over before the entire balance can be withdrawn is to prevent money laundering.

If a bookmaker limits your account and only allows you to bet on MBL events prior to having a chance to turn the initial deposit over on sport, THEN SURELY all you have to do is satisfy them the deposited funds wasn't intended for money laundering. I'm almost certain that would have to be the case, and surely if you were to follow the correct channels in requesting a full withdrawal, you'd be entitled to those funds as long as you can satisfy the licensee the deposited funds weren't laundered.

most waive the turnover requirement if they do in fact force you into only MBL markets.

self excluding used to also force the withdrawal to happen without needing to turnover the funds, am unsure how that works now they have the NT self exclusion thing in

 

[PowerfulPies2023]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason licensed bookmakers are obliged to ensure all deposited funds are turned over before the entire balance can be withdrawn is to prevent money laundering.

If a bookmaker limits your account and only allows you to bet on MBL events prior to having a chance to turn the initial deposit over on sport, THEN SURELY all you have to do is satisfy them the deposited funds wasn't intended for money laundering. I'm almost certain that would have to be the case, and surely if you were to follow the correct channels in requesting a full withdrawal, you'd be entitled to those funds as long as you can satisfy the licensee the deposited funds weren't laundered.

I will correct you. You're wrong. And clearly you've never been through it otherwise you would know. Please explain? People don't have the time nor do they care. Just like they don't have time to be ****ed around by fraud campaigner book makers.

 

[X_box_X]

I will correct you. You're wrong. And clearly you've never been through it otherwise you would know. Please explain? People don't have the time nor do they care. Just like they don't have time to be ****ed around by fraud campaigner book makers.

Huh?

 

[Jugada]

Not the full set old PP

 

[St Steady]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason licensed bookmakers are obliged to ensure all deposited funds are turned over before the entire balance can be withdrawn is to prevent money laundering.

If a bookmaker limits your account and only allows you to bet on MBL events prior to having a chance to turn the initial deposit over on sport, THEN SURELY all you have to do is satisfy them the deposited funds wasn't intended for money laundering. I'm almost certain that would have to be the case, and surely if you were to follow the correct channels in requesting a full withdrawal, you'd be entitled to those funds as long as you can satisfy the licensee the deposited funds weren't laundered.

no you are correct, deposited funds are by regulations required to be turned over before any withdrawal should be processed. , yes related to money laundering rules.

there are few exceptions, for example if a customer joined and is on betstop register , and deposited prior to that being captured by the book, the funds would be returned and account closed. There is a bit of license on other exceptions.

restrictions to mbl's / non sports bets etc are not reason to bypass the rules generally, but there is some discretion/licence within the scope of that rule if that makes sense

 

[Bucking Bronco]

Just withdrew another 1.5K from Neds (Lads).

Totalling over 5K of withdrawals (all profit).

They are just mirror sites run by the same business from what I understand.

The posters never answered the question if they had ever done anything such as use the site while they had a VPN on, or deposited money using a card that didn't match the account holder's name.

Definitely leaning towards that being the case.