Mr Green Deliberately Refusing Verification Docs and attempting Theft. Despite being fully verified at Parent Company

[rosechambers]

Hello,

 

Mr green are attempting to refuse my verification docs and attempting €600 theft. For over a month i am fully verified at their parent company William Hill. I have had over 4k withdrawals/deposits there no problem. I signed up to Mr Green under their brand due to better game choices. I requested a withdrawal and uploaded the same docs as I did at Hills. I was told by mr green chat I was verified.

I then got an email stating they need another POA, card pics and selfie. I sent another two POAS (including a second bank statement with deposits to Mr Green on them) and card pics and two selifes. I told Mr Green I have no more POAs now (I sent three, a person only has so many). They responded (rudely) asking for more POAS and more seflies.

I refused to send in anything further (I have no more POAS) I pointed to the fact I have supplied all necessary KYC under MGA guidelines, the docs I supplied were verified at the parent company HIlls and I was told I was verified on Mr Green chat. I asked them politely to close my account and return my balance and I will play at Hills. They have refused and I have had to start ECOGRA, MGA complaints and have complained to Hills.

Can anyone else help here or offer advice? Or is it court next?

 

[BludMoon]

Hello!

Just my 2 cents...

I had something similar recently. After doing additional research I found that these companies (UKGC and MGA regulated) cannot request documents from you unless it's is obligatory according to the specific regulations they follow. If they have requested something from you, it's because they have to.

Giving what you have said, it sounds like the easiest option with the least stress for you, would be to to find a way of creating a new POA and submitting the other stuff they have asked for. I know they have to accept recent bank statements, utility bills, governments letters, motor/house insurance certificates, even mobile phone bills i think.

Otherwise, they will likely have the right to retain your winnings and return your deposits only (I could be wrong, but it's not a risk i would personally take, nor is it worth the hassle IMO).

On the flip side if you have clear evidence that they are just messing you around, trying to steal your money - then maybe court is the answer.

I've been on these sites for 15 years at least - in the beginning I was very skeptical - until i learnt more about the industry as time went on.

Hope you get your money!

[joshnadin]

On 08/12/2021 at 11:15, rosechambers said:

For over a month i am fully verified at their parent company William Hill. I have had over 4k withdrawals/deposits there no problem. I signed up to Mr Green under their brand due to better game choices. I requested a withdrawal and uploaded the same docs as I did at Hills. I was told by mr green chat I was verified.

Even though they may be under the same umbrella, the verification process can be different, and what was accepted by William Hill, may not meet Mr. Green's requirements; and/or the guidelines for verification are very dynamic and change regularly.

Also, remember that all casinos are petrified of the Anti Money Laundering and KYC regulations that are imposed on them. The amount of fines that are given out each year over procedure not being carried out properly are staggering, so even though the whole process is tedious, the casinos also wish they didn't have to be put in the position themselves. They have a legal obligation to cover their backs.

 

On 08/12/2021 at 11:15, rosechambers said:

I then got an email stating they need another POA, card pics and selfie. I sent another two POAS (including a second bank statement with deposits to Mr Green on them) and card pics and two selifes. I told Mr Green I have no more POAs now (I sent three, a person only has so many). They responded (rudely) asking for more POAS and more seflies.

I refused to send in anything further (I have no more POAS) I pointed to the fact I have supplied all necessary KYC under MGA guidelines, the docs I supplied were verified at the parent company HIlls and I was told I was verified on Mr Green chat. I asked them politely to close my account and return my balance and I will play at Hills.

Going straight to court over this issue seem a little... premature?

I'm sure something could be reasonably worked out between yourselves without starting legal proceedings.
I understand that the process is frustrating for you, however just flat out refusing to send in anything further and just asking for your account to be closed will likely not produce any beneficial result for either party. When the MGA or any other regulatory body look into your complaint for you, the first thing they will look into is if both you and the casino have given each other the opportunity to be reasonable and deal with the complaint and issue internally. In this case, I would say that the opportunity has not been given.

Have you asked Mr. Green why the documents that you have provided are not sufficient and what they need from you to proceed? If you can understand what they're after, maybe you'll be able to provide it. I get that multiple POA's can be hard to come by, but if it's as simple of printing out, or screenshotting a utility bill or something similar, then it's going to be a lot easier then starting court and complaint proceedings.

 

On 08/12/2021 at 11:15, rosechambers said:

They have refused and I have had to start ECOGRA, MGA complaints and have complained to Hills.

Again, even though they are under the same 'umbrella', complaining to a separate legal entity and company will bear no fruit on the issue. You can't treat Mr. Green and William Hill as the same company in this situation.

--

Either way, I hope it all works out for you and you get your money. I think that a little cooperation, even if it is a little painful, and getting hold of an experienced representative who is helpful, will likely resolve the issue for you. Good luck! 

Edited 9 December, 2021 by joshnadin

[rosechambers]

On 09/12/2021 at 19:08, joshnadin said:

Even though they may be under the same umbrella, the verification process can be different, and what was accepted by William Hill, may not meet Mr. Green's requirements; and/or the guidelines for verification are very dynamic and change regularly.

Also, remember that all casinos are petrified of the Anti Money Laundering and KYC regulations that are imposed on them. The amount of fines that are given out each year over procedure not being carried out properly are staggering, so even though the whole process is tedious, the casinos also wish they didn't have to be put in the position themselves. They have a legal obligation to cover their backs.

 

Going straight to court over this issue seem a little... premature?

I'm sure something could be reasonably worked out between yourselves without starting legal proceedings.
I understand that the process is frustrating for you, however just flat out refusing to send in anything further and just asking for your account to be closed will likely not produce any beneficial result for either party. When the MGA or any other regulatory body look into your complaint for you, the first thing they will look into is if both you and the casino have given each other the opportunity to be reasonable and deal with the complaint and issue internally. In this case, I would say that the opportunity has not been given.

Have you asked Mr. Green why the documents that you have provided are not sufficient and what they need from you to proceed? If you can understand what they're after, maybe you'll be able to provide it. I get that multiple POA's can be hard to come by, but if it's as simple of printing out, or screenshotting a utility bill or something similar, then it's going to be a lot easier then starting court and complaint proceedings.

 

Again, even though they are under the same 'umbrella', complaining to a separate legal entity and company will bear no fruit on the issue. You can't treat Mr. Green and William Hill as the same company in this situation.

--

Either way, I hope it all works out for you and you get your money. I think that a little cooperation, even if it is a little painful, and getting hold of an experienced representative who is helpful, will likely resolve the issue for you. Good luck! 

Unfortunately it is not working out.

Mr Green stated on chat I was verfied. I supplied them with this proof. They ignored it. They have had my bank POA, my online card bank POA, my interent bill POA. They are now saying these have been refused. I have told them there is literally nothing else in my name. Zero documents. I am also not prepared to fake one. They have not cared and told me their final position is they are keeping the money until I send in another POA and third selfie???

A casino cannot break consumer law. I have supplied everything listed on their site and on MGA site.

The casino is now refusing to answer my emails or be reasonable.

If now is not the time for court, when is?

I have no idea what to do in this situation....

 

[joshnadin]

3 hours ago, rosechambers said:

Mr Green stated on chat I was verfied. I supplied them with this proof. They ignored it.

Unfortunately, they are entitled to ask for further KYC and AML documents at any point. Even if you have been previously approved.

 

3 hours ago, rosechambers said:

They have had my bank POA, my online card bank POA, my interent bill POA. They are now saying these have been refused. I have told them there is literally nothing else in my name. Zero documents. I am also not prepared to fake one. They have not cared and told me their final position is they are keeping the money until I send in another POA and third selfie???

But for what reason? You need to ask Mr. Green why the supplied documents are not meeting their requirements so you know what you need to do in order to be able to supply them with documents that will be accepted.

From knowledge of being a customer there myself, and many online reviews, it's very out of character for such a mainstream, established casino to be flat out refusing suitable documentation for no reason. It feels like we're missing some very relevant and valid part of the story.

 

3 hours ago, rosechambers said:

A casino cannot break consumer law. I have supplied everything listed on their site and on MGA site.

If it was the case that consumer law was being breached, they would much rather break the law and pay a few thousand in court fee's and compensation rather than being fined potential millions for not adhering to AML and KYC regulations, then being investigated.

But, a platform for gambling does not fall under the the scope for consumer law. Any and all regulated U.K. casinos have to instead abide by The Gambling Act 2005, which is drastically different from standard U.K. consumer laws.

[rosechambers]

21 hours ago, joshnadin said:

Unfortunately, they are entitled to ask for further KYC and AML documents at any point. Even if you have been previously approved.

 

But for what reason? You need to ask Mr. Green why the supplied documents are not meeting their requirements so you know what you need to do in order to be able to supply them with documents that will be accepted.

From knowledge of being a customer there myself, and many online reviews, it's very out of character for such a mainstream, established casino to be flat out refusing suitable documentation for no reason. It feels like we're missing some very relevant and valid part of the story.

 

If it was the case that consumer law was being breached, they would much rather break the law and pay a few thousand in court fee's and compensation rather than being fined potential millions for not adhering to AML and KYC regulations, then being investigated.

But, a platform for gambling does not fall under the the scope for consumer law. Any and all regulated U.K. casinos have to instead abide by The Gambling Act 2005, which is drastically different from standard U.K. consumer laws.

They will not tell me why they have rejected them? They have said they do not need to give a reason. I originally sent my main bank statement POA. They then requested another one so I sent TWO and stated thats all I have in my name. They then requested ANOTHER POA.

Mr green have an awful reputation online after being taken over by WHG (Again Im verified at William Hill with the same documents Mr Green are rejecting). 

I have asked for clarity from Mr Green and they have said they will make no further comment and told me to go to ECOGRA (Which from my research is pointless).

Casinos and bookmakers are governed under EU Consumer law. I have checked this on Martin Lewis site and with CAB. 

I've submitted my EU court claim at this stage as they are leaving me with no other recourse.

I will keep this thread updated for others who run into this issue. 

[dagreenblazer]

Yo Rose, sorry to hear you're having trouble - the only thing i wanted to add regarding further POA was that you can also call HMRC and ask them to post/email a copy of last years tax record, a rebate award or a re-print a copy of anything recent, etc and/or if you're claiming any benefits, call DWP/Universal Credit, etc and also ask them to copy of latest claim payment, award letter, etc, etc as anything from HMRC & DWP on headed paper is accepted as POA too.

 

As @joshnadin rightfully says though, it is unusual for this casino to flat out refuse docs - i know from working with financial AML only that technically a company isn't supposed to tell a customer what is wrong with any submitted docs that get refused (cause otherwise you're potentially just helping criminals refine their forgeries!), yet it is reasonable to provide the customer with a general checklist of what docs are required to show and they should at least do that, if you ask simply what do submitted docs need to show.

Also, it could be there's no problems with the actual docs and it's just your submitted format that's a problem - some companies don't like screenshots and only want original PDF's, or they may just have wierd file upload requirements causing them to reject - so also get them to clarify how they actually want the docs to be sent & received too, and/or ask if there's any option for you to post them physical photocopies  - it may get round it instead.

 

The only other thing I'd say, and I don't want to sound like I'm taking sides here as i know you're probably already frustrated beyond belief, is make sure you stay calm, cool and non-sweary in all dealings with them!!

As Josh is also right in that if it goes to court, you do need to show you were fair & reasonable throughout AND tried escalating it with them numerous times, not just a few Live Chats. I would also recommend emailing any address for them you can, and if need be, write a physical letter to their head office explaining the situation and asking for help resolving - this may well actually achieve nothing but the reason i say to do it is because it gives you more evidence if you do end up in court to show you have been fair & reasonable and gives casino less chance to claim you never escalated it. Also, make sure you save each chat log with them or ask for copies to be mailed to you - keep all correspondence. And as long as you stay calm, polite & collected with them, whichever route it goes, it will definitely help in your favour.

 

 

Edited 14 December, 2021 by dagreenblazer

[joshnadin]

16 hours ago, dagreenblazer said:

As @joshnadin rightfully says though, it is unusual for this casino to flat out refuse docs - i know from working with financial AML only that technically a company isn't supposed to tell a customer what is wrong with any submitted docs that get refused (cause otherwise you're potentially just helping criminals refine their forgeries!), yet it is reasonable to provide the customer with a general checklist of what docs are required to show and they should at least do that, if you ask simply what do submitted docs need to show.

This was going to be the next avenue I would have suggested to explore if Mr Green simply wont tell you why your documents are being refused.

AML regulations prevent 'tipping off' as @dagreenblazer said. This would be the only reason I know of that they would not provide any indication as to why. They should usually tell you that "all four corners of the document aren't visible", or "the POA is not one of the accepted forms of official document" for example, when refusing.

--

Have you ensured that your account address when registering your account is exactly the same as what is showing on your docs? Even a 1 letter typo will be enough for them to refuse.

Also, casinos now perform a soft credit check when performing AML and KYC. Is there any reason why anything on your credit report would not be the same as the docs you are providing? Are you on the electoral roll?

Lastly, as part of the soft credit check, they also look customers up on the CIFAS database, which is a fraud prevention system. If you have been a victim of fraud, or have been indicated by any financial institution that you're suspected of fraud, they can and will ask for more documentation to make sure you really are who you say you are. You can check what information CIFAS holds about you (if any) by requesting a Subject Access Request (SAR) here.

 

21 hours ago, rosechambers said:

I have asked for clarity from Mr Green and they have said they will make no further comment and told me to go to ECOGRA (Which from my research is pointless).

If you have already told the casino that you want the complaint to move forward into 'deadlock' as you can't come to a resolution, or they have progressed the complaint to 'deadlock' stage themselves, then they will be telling you this as it is standard practice to no longer engage with the complaint until the ombudsman/regulator gets involved and their escalation and customer relations team hear from ECOGRA. This is to protect themselves and you as a customer, and there will likely be a notification on your account for all customer service reps to advise of you this and not engage the matter any further. As you've said you've notified them that you're going to court, this will likely be the case.

[rosechambers]

14 hours ago, joshnadin said:

This was going to be the next avenue I would have suggested to explore if Mr Green simply wont tell you why your documents are being refused.

AML regulations prevent 'tipping off' as @dagreenblazer said. This would be the only reason I know of that they would not provide any indication as to why. They should usually tell you that "all four corners of the document aren't visible", or "the POA is not one of the accepted forms of official document" for example, when refusing.

--

Have you ensured that your account address when registering your account is exactly the same as what is showing on your docs? Even a 1 letter typo will be enough for them to refuse.

Also, casinos now perform a soft credit check when performing AML and KYC. Is there any reason why anything on your credit report would not be the same as the docs you are providing? Are you on the electoral roll?

Lastly, as part of the soft credit check, they also look customers up on the CIFAS database, which is a fraud prevention system. If you have been a victim of fraud, or have been indicated by any financial institution that you're suspected of fraud, they can and will ask for more documentation to make sure you really are who you say you are. You can check what information CIFAS holds about you (if any) by requesting a Subject Access Request (SAR) here.

 

If you have already told the casino that you want the complaint to move forward into 'deadlock' as you can't come to a resolution, or they have progressed the complaint to 'deadlock' stage themselves, then they will be telling you this as it is standard practice to no longer engage with the complaint until the ombudsman/regulator gets involved and their escalation and customer relations team hear from ECOGRA. This is to protect themselves and you as a customer, and there will likely be a notification on your account for all customer service reps to advise of you this and not engage the matter any further. As you've said you've notified them that you're going to court, this will likely be the case.

The soft credit search etc is not applicable to me. I am based in the EU not the UK. 

As I've said previously I am verified at William Hill the parent company. I have contacted them for help and they have refused. I have asked if my documents are okay with them or do they need anything else. They have stated they are fine and I'm fully verified. So the casino using the absurd notion of AML and fraud etc is ludicrous. 

The reality is I stated clearly to Mr Green after sending three POAs and they have requested more, I have nothing else. The casino had no interest in being reasonable of acting fairly. I have asked for my money to be returned and they have refused, breaching consumer law. I asked for my deposits and they refused without a fourth POA and third selfie. 

It is theft. Simple as that. 

If I use ECOGRA I would suggest I have a zero chance or below of success if you look at their percentages for ruling in favour of the player. Who funds ECOGRA? The people they rule in favour of over 90% of the time.

My only recourse is EU court, which has cost me money. I have attached screnegrabs for you to see the absurdity. They want photo captured pictures of pdf documents?....The verification team has verified but they want things I do not have? I'm verified at William Hill with the same documents but they are not good enough at Mr Green?

[wertygo]

I once sent a screenshot from my county's e-community where my address was shown. Maybe try that. Screenshots and pdf bills may not work so it's better to send a photo of a paper bill

[joshnadin]

4 hours ago, rosechambers said:

As I've said previously I am verified at William Hill the parent company. I have contacted them for help and they have refused. I have asked if my documents are okay with them or do they need anything else. They have stated they are fine and I'm fully verified. So the casino using the absurd notion of AML and fraud etc is ludicrous.

Again, just because two companies are under the same umbrella, William Hill has nothing to do with your complaint with Mr Green. They will not be able to assist with the matter. You need to try and forget about the concept of them being 'the parent company' as this isn't going to be relevant or helpful to your situation.

 

4 hours ago, rosechambers said:

The reality is I stated clearly to Mr Green after sending three POAs and they have requested more, I have nothing else. The casino had no interest in being reasonable of acting fairly. I have asked for my money to be returned and they have refused, breaching consumer law. I asked for my deposits and they refused without a fourth POA and third selfie. 

It is theft. Simple as that. 

They are entitled under their terms and conditions whilst also having to abide by AML regulation that they can not even refund your deposits until satisfactory KYC is provided.

So to get this correct, you have provided three of the POA documents they have listed as being acceptable, that are dated within the past six months, plus a selfie holding your ID document next to your face, in clear, easy to read pictures? These have been taken with a high quality camera, fully showing the document, and you're able to see your face in a manner that would be easily recognisable as being the same person in the photo ID you have provided, and they have declined all three? I'm struggling to find any reasonable explanation as to why they would do this.

Can I ask just what documents you have provided them out of the list they have told you are accepted?

 

4 hours ago, rosechambers said:

If I use ECOGRA I would suggest I have a zero chance or below of success if you look at their percentages for ruling in favour of the player. Who funds ECOGRA? The people they rule in favour of over 90% of the time.

When it comes to complaints about casino's, and in fact most complaints in absolutely any industry that have progressed to the stage where an arbitrator needs to get involved, the vast majority of the people complaining are not being reasonable, are disgruntled, and have not shown much willingness to cooperate. Hence why the statistics show that most complaints do not result in the favour of the player or consumer.

However, EGOCRA are fully neutral when it comes to getting involved with the complaint. They have nothing to gain from ruling either way. They will take all evidence available from both parties, listen to both parties points of view, and make a decision based on the available evidence and guidelines that are in place. Just because the casinos 'fund' EGOCRA, doesn't mean they're bias towards them. The casinos have to pay the exact same fee to them with each and every complaint, win or lose, just for looking into the complaint.

 

4 hours ago, rosechambers said:

My only recourse is EU court, which has cost me money. I have attached screnegrabs for you to see the absurdity. They want photo captured pictures of pdf documents?....The verification team has verified but they want things I do not have? I'm verified at William Hill with the same documents but they are not good enough at Mr Green?

I personally can't see any absurdity in any of the screenshots you have provided. I can just see standard responses from CS reps that I would expect from any online casino. Okay, the communication in regard to the procedure for verification in the last one could be better in explaining the process, but I wouldn't call it absurd.

EU court is definitely not your only recourse. It's costly, takes a long, long time, and from the information you've provided, I can't see any case being ruled in your favour.

But I've just noticed a very relevant point. You've just said that you're providing screenshots of PDF documents. They are generally not accepted as they can be so easily manipulated as digital documents. You need to be providing photo's of original, physical documents to Mr Green, not screenshots or PDF copies of anything. 

[rosechambers]

5 hours ago, joshnadin said:

Again, just because two companies are under the same umbrella, William Hill has nothing to do with your complaint with Mr Green. They will not be able to assist with the matter. You need to try and forget about the concept of them being 'the parent company' as this isn't going to be relevant or helpful to your situation.

 

They are entitled under their terms and conditions whilst also having to abide by AML regulation that they can not even refund your deposits until satisfactory KYC is provided.

So to get this correct, you have provided three of the POA documents they have listed as being acceptable, that are dated within the past six months, plus a selfie holding your ID document next to your face, in clear, easy to read pictures? These have been taken with a high quality camera, fully showing the document, and you're able to see your face in a manner that would be easily recognisable as being the same person in the photo ID you have provided, and they have declined all three? I'm struggling to find any reasonable explanation as to why they would do this.

Can I ask just what documents you have provided them out of the list they have told you are accepted?

 

When it comes to complaints about casino's, and in fact most complaints in absolutely any industry that have progressed to the stage where an arbitrator needs to get involved, the vast majority of the people complaining are not being reasonable, are disgruntled, and have not shown much willingness to cooperate. Hence why the statistics show that most complaints do not result in the favour of the player or consumer.

However, EGOCRA are fully neutral when it comes to getting involved with the complaint. They have nothing to gain from ruling either way. They will take all evidence available from both parties, listen to both parties points of view, and make a decision based on the available evidence and guidelines that are in place. Just because the casinos 'fund' EGOCRA, doesn't mean they're bias towards them. The casinos have to pay the exact same fee to them with each and every complaint, win or lose, just for looking into the complaint.

 

I personally can't see any absurdity in any of the screenshots you have provided. I can just see standard responses from CS reps that I would expect from any online casino. Okay, the communication in regard to the procedure for verification in the last one could be better in explaining the process, but I wouldn't call it absurd.

EU court is definitely not your only recourse. It's costly, takes a long, long time, and from the information you've provided, I can't see any case being ruled in your favour.

But I've just noticed a very relevant point. You've just said that you're providing screenshots of PDF documents. They are generally not accepted as they can be so easily manipulated as digital documents. You need to be providing photo's of original, physical documents to Mr Green, not screenshots or PDF copies of anything. 

From your response I would assume you are a casino apologist, former employee or a former affiliate. That is the only explanation as to why you cannot see anything absurd here. You cant see any case being ruled in my favour? You clearly know nothing about consumer law (You weren't aware, or don't want others to know, casinos are governed by EU consumer law)

I've not said i provided screenshots of pdfs. Look at their emails. They are asking for camera taken pictures of pdfs? Again utter lunacy) 

TO REFRESH.....I HAVE PROVIDED:

- .PDF POA OF BANK STATEMENT DATED TWO MONTHS AGO, (DEPOSITS TO MR GREEN ON THIS)

- CREDIT CARD DATED TWO MONTHS AGO (PDF) 

- UTILITY BILL (INTERENT) PDF

- SELFIE WITH PASSPORT X 2

- CARD PICTURES X 1

- PASSPORT X 1

All taken (where applicable) with my sons new iphone with an amazing camera.

William hill being the parent company is extremely relevant as I used the same docs and was verified within minutes. Meaning the documents are okay for the parent company to complete KYC but not for the subsidiary? Thats absurd, even if they have different KYC procedures. You need to stop flogging a dead horse and arguing against this.

More absurdity - Mr Green asked for a FOURTH POA after I sent the second and third and detailed I had no more. Its COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE to expect an individual to have copious amounts of documents and they clearly asked for a fourth knowing I had nothing further. Its delaying tactics, classic behaviour of terrible casinos as most people give up and the casino collects the money.

Moreover (further absurdity) it is COMPLETELY AGAINST CONSUMER LAW for a vendor to refuse a refund to a customer if they reject their custom. They have everything they need detailed under KYC and are simply now (by the legal definition) attempting theft.

The reason I believe you are probably someway affiliated (or have been) with casinos is your points on AML. THEY ARE ABSURD AND IRRELEVANT. The casino had no issue letting me deposit multiple times with no KYC. The money could of been stolen or dirty, They were fine for me to deposit when they thought I would lose it.....

5 minutes research online will show anyone ECOGRA IS NOT NEUTRAL. Just look at the percentage of cases that go against the player.

Mr Green are refusing to respond to emails, refusing to acknowledge I do not have a fourth POA and refusing to return the balance. If you don't think this is absurd and disgusting behaviour I can only assume you are not a rational and fact finding individual.

Please stop dragging this thread into faff. 

9 hours ago, wertygo said:

I once sent a screenshot from my county's e-community where my address was shown. Maybe try that. Screenshots and pdf bills may not work so it's better to send a photo of a paper bill

Hi, 

What is this?

[wertygo]

Dunno how to call it, maybe it's e-residency orsomoething. Basically a secure goverment site/database where you can do most wthings assosiated with given country. 

You can't "fake"  your name and addressin goverment database, that's my point and they should accept that

[vanHooff]

Rose, I hope your issue with Mr. Green gets resolved.

From what I've read Josh has only tried to be helpful to you in this thread.

16 minutes ago, rosechambers said:

All taken (where applicable) with my sons new iphone with an amazing camera.

I am not trying to be rude, but maybe Mr. Green thinks your son is playing on his mother's account?
That would explain the extra PoA requests including selfies.

 

[joshnadin]

21 hours ago, rosechambers said:

From your response I would assume you are a casino apologist, former employee or a former affiliate. That is the only explanation as to why you cannot see anything absurd here. You cant see any case being ruled in my favour?

Personally, I don't think you are being reasonable looking at this from a neutral standpoint. If your opinion differs, that's cool.

 

21 hours ago, rosechambers said:

You clearly know nothing about consumer law (You weren't aware, or don't want others to know, casinos are governed by EU consumer law)

Sigh. I didn't want to get into the technicalities of what laws and regulations are applicable to offshore casinos licenced in certain countries and how it is relevant. But, I'm rather well versed in knowing how it all works. But again, cool.

 

21 hours ago, rosechambers said:

TO REFRESH.....I HAVE PROVIDED:

- .PDF POA OF BANK STATEMENT DATED TWO MONTHS AGO, (DEPOSITS TO MR GREEN ON THIS)

- CREDIT CARD DATED TWO MONTHS AGO (PDF) 

- UTILITY BILL (INTERENT) PDF

- SELFIE WITH PASSPORT X 2

- CARD PICTURES X 1

- PASSPORT X 1

All taken (where applicable) with my sons new iphone with an amazing camera.

As previously stated, you need to be providing physical copies of your documents. Not screenshots or pictures of digital PDF's.
This is likely where your issue is, and could have been easily avoided.

 

21 hours ago, rosechambers said:

William hill being the parent company is extremely relevant as I used the same docs and was verified within minutes. Meaning the documents are okay for the parent company to complete KYC but not for the subsidiary? Thats absurd, even if they have different KYC procedures. You need to stop flogging a dead horse and arguing against this.

More absurdity - Mr Green asked for a FOURTH POA after I sent the second and third and detailed I had no more. Its COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE to expect an individual to have copious amounts of documents and they clearly asked for a fourth knowing I had nothing further. Its delaying tactics, classic behaviour of terrible casinos as most people give up and the casino collects the money.

Moreover (further absurdity) it is COMPLETELY AGAINST CONSUMER LAW for a vendor to refuse a refund to a customer if they reject their custom. They have everything they need detailed under KYC and are simply now (by the legal definition) attempting theft.

It's not at all relevant. Ask any solicitor and lawyer. They're two separate legal entities and entitled to differentiate their policies how they want between the two companies.
I find it ironic how you keep quoting consumer law, and saying I didn't know anything about it when you're quoting things like this that are incorrect for so many reasons. But, for simplicities sake, AML regulations overrule this in each and every case. By law, they are not permitted to refund or send any funds your way until satisfactory KYC has been performed.

 

21 hours ago, rosechambers said:

The reason I believe you are probably someway affiliated (or have been) with casinos is your points on AML. THEY ARE ABSURD AND IRRELEVANT. The casino had no issue letting me deposit multiple times with no KYC. The money could of been stolen or dirty, They were fine for me to deposit when they thought I would lose it.....

I have worked in the industry, for many years, in different capacities, and have lots of inside knowledge you could have taken advantage of.
I promise that I would have been the first person to tell you exactly what to say to get your case resolved and how to go about it if I could see any casino acting in a manner that was not fair to any player. 

But, it is not in the casinos interest to just take your deposit and then lose you as a customer.
If they build a lasting relationship with their consumers who keep coming back, they are statistically more likely to profit more from you in the long run. A lot more. But, that doesn't fit your narrative, right?

 

21 hours ago, rosechambers said:

5 minutes research online will show anyone ECOGRA IS NOT NEUTRAL. Just look at the percentage of cases that go against the player.

Mr Green are refusing to respond to emails, refusing to acknowledge I do not have a fourth POA and refusing to return the balance. If you don't think this is absurd and disgusting behaviour I can only assume you are not a rational and fact finding individual.

Please stop dragging this thread into faff. 

As stated previously, there is a very relevant reason why ECOGRA and every ombudsman and intermediary in any industry, not just casinos, have far more cases that go against the player/consumer. That doesn't mean that they're not neutral. I've never seen a case where the player has a valid claim and has been treated unfairly.

No problem. I'll stop dragging your thread into 'faff'. If you've taken anything the wrong way, I've not intended to come across as anything but helpful and put some facts out there. Good luck with your issue mate.

[Davidr1978]

I once lost £200 at Mr green when asked for docs. I don't drive or travel abroad so could only send them birth certificate and utility bill. It wasn't worth me buying more ID for £200 so played high stakes and blew it.

I only play at sites that verify me digitally now.

Something needs to be done to stop casinos from asking for docs at the withdraw stage as they clearly use that moment to refuse paying out.

Age and address verification should be done at sign up then never requested ever again.

Only high rollers should be subjected to proof of wealth checks.

[joshnadin]

27 minutes ago, Davidr1978 said:

I once lost £200 at Mr green when asked for docs. I don't drive or travel abroad so could only send them birth certificate and utility bill. It wasn't worth me buying more ID for £200 so played high stakes and blew it.

I only play at sites that verify me digitally now.

Something needs to be done to stop casinos from asking for docs at the withdraw stage as they clearly use that moment to refuse paying out.

Age and address verification should be done at sign up then never requested ever again.

Only high rollers should be subjected to proof of wealth checks.

Unfortunately, it's getting more and more difficult.

The people to blame, are the regulators who impose that all these checks are mandatory for every player. The same regulators who decide things like auto-spins and bonus buys' apparently contribute to problem gambling, when in reality its just people sat in a boardroom making stuff up as they go along, and have never gambled in their lives, so don't have any first hand experience of how these things actually affect customers, and/or know if they're beneficial.

Verification should be mandatory at the point of signing up for an account though, I agree with you. Okay, it may put players off who want to play instantly, but it saves a lot of headache for the casino and customer at a later stage, and avoids issues like the one in this thread. Plus, casinos need to invest more heavily in the verification process to make it quicker and easier, it taking around a week to mess around with documents is painful.