Juraa wrote on 19/08/2021 at 11:56: The money was transferred to me . However, my Platincasino account is blocked
Supposedly I have admitted that the money came from a loan. And out of goodwill (which Platincasino does not have to according to your statement, the win was transferred to me
1. Now my view: I have never admitted anything because it is also not a loan
2. even if, it is so not the case: makes no sense why should I take a loan of 10,000 € in April and then wait until December. So that I can then gamble the money in the casino
3. the decision of Platincasino I can not understand at all
As I had just told you via Communicator, this statement regarding the goodwill of Platincasino was not expressed.
I think there was probably a small communication misunderstanding in our conversations, because I just wanted to tell you that there would be some casinos that would have taken the situation as a reason to also withhold the win.
Of course, I understand that you are a bit disappointed that this decision was made.
And I personally am very sorry that we could not help you to keep the account, but at least you were able to keep your win.
The official response from Platincasino was as follows:
"Because the department came to the conclusion that he played beyond his means. If we think that and still let him play, we are in violation of MGA regulations. Even if it is unfortunate that it had to take this outcome. At least the player got his win in full. For both sides this was the best solution."
Julian wrote on 19.08.2021 at 12:23 pm
As I had just told you via Communicator, this statement regarding the goodwill of Platincasino was not voiced so.
I think there was probably a small communication misunderstanding in our conversations, because I just wanted to tell you that there would be some casinos that would have taken the situation as a reason to also withhold the win.
Of course I understand that you are a bit disappointed that this decision was made.
And I personally am very sorry that I could not help you to keep the account, but at least you were able to keep your win.
The official response from Platincasino was as follows:
"Because the department came to the conclusion that he played beyond his means. If we think that and still let him play, we are in violation of MGA regulations. Even if it is unfortunate that it had to take this outcome. At least the player got his win in full. For both sides this was the best solution."
So so. So the casino argues that they would be violating the MGA requirements if they don't check.
Didn't the casino already violate this last year when the player deposited such high sums (and paid out nothing) and the casino didn't check this immediately last year?
Now to argue that because of the MGA requirements they have to check this (yes, now that the player wants to pay out a large sum), I think is absolutely ridiculous
My opinion is that if the casino has violated the requirements already last year and not only now.
Thanks to GJ the player has at least received his money (win), without GJ this would probably have looked very different
Advanced verification
Nobody has liked this post so far
As I had just told you via Communicator, this statement regarding the goodwill of Platincasino was not expressed.
I think there was probably a small communication misunderstanding in our conversations, because I just wanted to tell you that there would be some casinos that would have taken the situation as a reason to also withhold the win.
Of course, I understand that you are a bit disappointed that this decision was made.
And I personally am very sorry that we could not help you to keep the account, but at least you were able to keep your win.
The official response from Platincasino was as follows:
"Because the department came to the conclusion that he played beyond his means. If we think that and still let him play, we are in violation of MGA regulations. Even if it is unfortunate that it had to take this outcome. At least the player got his win in full. For both sides this was the best solution."
This post has been translated automatically
Advanced verification
Liked this post:
Juraa, 
Muratc111, 
Niroht
So so. So the casino argues that they would be violating the MGA requirements if they don't check.
Didn't the casino already violate this last year when the player deposited such high sums (and paid out nothing) and the casino didn't check this immediately last year?
Now to argue that because of the MGA requirements they have to check this (yes, now that the player wants to pay out a large sum), I think is absolutely ridiculous
My opinion is that if the casino has violated the requirements already last year and not only now.
Thanks to GJ the player has at least received his money (win), without GJ this would probably have looked very different
This post has been translated automatically