Ηello, I would like to open the specific discussion about whether casinos serve their specific obligation or instrumentalize it to their advantage.
My intention is also to be informed about the rights we have as players, since personal data is sensitive and especially in the European Union there are strict laws for their protection.
First, I think we all agree on the importance of having laws and measures for Anti-money laundering.
My experience with 2 Greek casinos when I first underwent EDD process raised several concerns.
- Misrepresenting the purpose for which they are requesting them: they stated that this is done in the context of enhanced identification, of course also mentioning the initials EED. I had a hard time learning what this process was until I discovered for myself that it is actually Enhanced Due Diligence. So, what was the purpose of misleading?
- This happened after submitting a withdrawal request. I guess they always activate the process at times like this. I read that they are obliged to do so when the total of deposits and withdrawals exceeds an amount in a certain period (I think €15,000) and they involved multiple transactions. Given my history, this could happen at any time. Why do they insist on linking them to withdrawal requests?
- In my case the EDD procedures were as follows: one casino asked me to report various things about my financial situation and sources of income. When I asked them to state the purpose and what legitimizes them for such a thing, after two days, and their initial insistence, they replied to forget the whole event. The second casino asked for biometric material: selfie holding the ID and a piece of paper with the date written on it. A fact I did. However, the photo did not show all ID and the number and they asked for new one. However, because they were already late in processing the withdrawal request (1 week already had past since the request) I felt like they were making fool of me or that they were idiots if they couldn't tell from the metadata of the photo its authenticity, or if they thought I had such graphic skills (3/4 of the ID were distinct and clear). I submitted a complaint to the casino, which did not accept it, and a complaint to the authorities. In the next few days they approved the withdrawal asking me just to send a new selfie to complete the enhanced identification process (lol identification again). Are their procedures really that sketchy and revocable?
- The most important. My transactions was clearly because I had a streak of casino wins. My gaming activity involved regular slot or live casino play, no safe bets, or anything that meant I wasn't risking my balances. The connections were permanently from my house with a certain IP. My payment method was a visa debit card, what could be cleaner. So what triggered their advanced monitoring systems to warrant a thorough inspection? So as a conclusion it comes out that those players who happen to have continuous profits should be submitted to the EED? The same players who in previous periods were showing losses and no one was checking?
- I have an account and I play in several casinos in Greece. Playing activities, deposit and withdrawal amounts are more or less the same. In some of them, there have even been large amounts of profit. Why were these two the only ones to initiate the EDD process?
- Let's not forget that in the concession contract that we accepted during our registration for receiving the services of the casinos, there is also the condition of the maintenance and validity of the laws of the country. Is there a map of rights against any kind of abuse and arbitrariness on the issues of identification and the expression of suspicion which constitutes an insult to personality? Beyond the presumption of innocence...
Postscript: there are casino behaviors and practices that almost all of us have experienced. It is an industry that exists and is maintained based on human desperation, addiction to gambling or even the desire to get easy money. If they were just based on entertainment it would have gone bankrupt before long. I personally do not accept them as guarantors of legitimacy nor as substitutes for official state authorities.
