Rich Palms Casino - プレイヤーのアカウントはブロックされています。

Account deactivated after having deposited twice and having sent all the necessary documentation (KYC). They insist on verifying some data over the phone when they could do it via chat as I have done for many other Australian casinos (privacy law).

Account disattivato dopo aver depositato ben due volte ed aver inviato tutta la documentazione necessaria (KYC). Insistono nel voler verificare alcuni dati tramite telefono quando potrebbero farlo tramite chat come ho già fatto per molti altri casinò australiani (legge sulla privacy).

Dear Nemokid,

Thank you very much for submitting your complaint. I’m sorry to hear about your problem. Please understand KYC is a very important and essential process, during which the casino makes sure that the money is sent to the rightful owner. Each casino is unique and requires different documents from players. Some casinos require phone or video calls, and it isn't anything unusual. If this is what the casino asks for in order to complete the KYC process, I would recommend that you agree with the phone call.

Nonetheless, could you please advise which documents you provided?

Also, please, forward any relevant communication between you and the casino to kristina.s@casino.guru.

Thank you very much in advance for your reply.

Best regards,

Kristina

I provided driving license and proof of residence address + selfie ID, the problem arose on their insistence on calling me at all costs to confirm one of the two deposits made via bitcoin, a procedure that I have already completed without any problem via chat on other Australian casinos similar to this one.

Ho fornito patente di guida e prova di indirizzo di residenza + selfie ID, il problema è sorto sulla loro insistenza nel volermi a tutti i costi telefonare per confermare uno dei due depositi effettuati tramite bitcoin, procedura che ho già espletato senza alcun problema via chat su altri casinò australiani similari a questo.

Thank you for your reply, Nemokid. Please note that each casino is different, and they can require different documents. The basic is usually the same - some kind of ID and proof of address. However, it is more than common for casinos to ask for additional documents or some other special ways to verify the players' identities.

I understand your frustration if you didn't have to do a phone call verification in the past, but that doesn't mean, that other casinos shouldn't request it. Such a call is very common and we don't see anything wrong with it. In fact, we often recommend it.

I would suggest that you agree with the phone call, otherwise, I am afraid the casino won't reopen your account.

I have opened other accounts this year in several Australian casinos that operate with the same platform and as an alternative to the fateful phone call that is unwanted for me they always offered me the verification in chat, which always happened without any problem (in the phone call among other things they ask you simply confirm if you have made the deposit of that amount which can be done easily in chat via customer service). There is a Privacy Law and therefore they cannot force a customer to have to answer the phone just because they decide it without giving a valid alternative for the verification to take place ...

Ho aperto altri conti in questo anno in diversi casinò australiani che operano con la stessa piattaforma ed in alternativa alla fatidica telefonata per me indesiderata mi hanno sempre proposto la verifica in chat, cosa sempre avvenuta senza alcun problema (nella telefonata fra le altre cose ti chiedono semplicemente la conferma se hai effettuato il deposito di quella somma cosa che si può fare tranquillamente in chat tramite il servizio clienti). Esiste la Legge sulla Privacy e pertanto non possono obbligare un cliente a dover rispondere al telefono solo perchè lo decidono loro senza dare un'alternativa valida affinchè avvenga la verifica...

I am sorry, Nemokid, but you cannot expect casinos to lower their basic verification standards just because you didn't have to do the phone call with other casinos in the past. Casinos don't have the luxury of being able to physically see all of the players and check their identification and documents, therefore they have to find other ways to complete the verification procedures. And as I already indicated, phone call verification is a basic practice, and we cannot force casinos to skip it if they believe that such verification is necessary.

I am afraid that if you refuse to cooperate with the casino, I will be forced to reject this complaint. Thank you for understanding.

Dear Kristina,

I do not expect any lowering of the standard levels of verification of any casino, indeed the chat and email have a much stronger evidential and verification value than a simple phone call: scripta manent, verba volant. Specifically, the phone call has the simple purpose of verifying whether a certain deposit has been made by the customer, this procedure can be easily carried out with one of the aforementioned means which in current jurisprudence are frequently used I repeat as significant evidence, as has already happened on other casinos much larger than this one without any objections being raised. Furthermore, the Privacy Law exists and if a customer prefers to verify some data not by telephone but in writing for personal reasons and for the protection of his private life, he is free to do so and this should not affect the verification of his gaming account (in Italy this obligation does not exist for example). I therefore believe that the casino's request to oblige the customer to carry out a simple verification of some data only by telephone is illegitimate when this verification can be easily carried out in writing via chat or email.

I remember that the current law on privacy protects the underlying principle just outlined and therefore this constraint appears to be purely vexatious.

Cara Kristina,

non pretendo nessun abbassamento dei livelli standard di verifica di alcun casinò, anzi la chat e la email hanno un valore probatorio e di verifica molto più forte di una semplice telefonata: scripta manent, verba volant. Nello specifico la telefonata ha il semplice scopo di verificare verbalmente se un determinato deposito è stato effettuato dal cliente, tale procedura è tranquillamente espletabile con uno dei suddetti mezzi che nella giurisprudenza attuale vengono utilizzati frequentemente ripeto come elemento probatorio significativo, come del resto è già avvenuto su altri casinò molto più importanti di questo senza che venisse sollevata alcuna obiezione. Inoltre esiste la Legge sulla privacy e se un cliente preferisce verificare alcuni dati non per telefono ma per iscritto per motivi personali e per una sua tutela della propria vita privata è libero di farlo e questo non dovrebbe pregiudicare la stessa verifica del proprio conto gioco (in Italia tale obbligo non esiste per esempio). Reputo pertanto illegittima la richiesta del casinò di obbligare il cliente ad effettuare una semplice verifica di alcuni dati solo tramite telefono quando tale verifica è facilmente espletabile per iscritto tramite chat oppure email.

Ricordo che l'attuale Legge sulla privacy tutela proprio il principio di fondo appena esposto e pertanto tale vincolo risulta essere puramente vessatorio.

The customer's security cannot and must not undermine the principle of individual confidentiality which is governed by a specific Privacy Law to which the customer can always have recourse at his total discretion. The verification of some data and deposits made in the casino can very well be done in chat or by email without compromising the level of security of the same. A limit can only be strengthened as what is written constitutes probative value much more effective than a simple unrecorded telephone call.

I am sorry, but I must disagree with you. A phone call is a legitimate (and often used) way of verification. Please understand that this casino doesn't have any unrealistic or unusual requirements. Casinos have free hands when it comes to the verification process, therefore we cannot and won't force them to change their requirements when we don't see any valid reason for it.

Unfortunately, without your cooperation, we are not able to proceed with this complaint and I am forced to reject it. Nonetheless, feel free to ask us to reopen the complaint when you change your mind about the phone call verification. Thank you for understanding.