Gamebet scam victim: I had a long debate regarding the Gamebet scam with ThePOGG service. The end result was anyway short of what I wanted. This criminal operator in question assisted by MGA has been withholding all my funds since early 2018.
I offered to give ThePOGG service undisputable evidence that I did nothing wrong in the form of my login details. My account transactions clearly prove that the operator accusation about arbitrage betting is wrong. They only kept telling that they can not comment whether or not my claim is right in spite of this undisputable evidence and basing the outcome only on the fact that Gamebet did not cooperate with ThePOGG and told MGA to shut up.
In this case there is every reason to suspect that MGA is assisting criminal activities and surely in that case silence is best. Take a look at this russian forum: bookmaker-ratings.ru/review/obzor-bukmekerskoj-kontory-gamebet/ and draw a conclusion yourselves. Bookmakers are not blacklisted in vain. As far as I know noone has been helped by MGA.
Why is ThePOGG not seeing the reality?
They keep repeating the same clause: “MGA has been helpfull in many cases with us.” Why does it not continue? Getting back to Gamebet victim cases things got even worse later when another victim appeared on ThePOGG site feeling helpless: thepogg.com/complaint/gamebet-non-payment
He was denied the help I could have given him by recommending a service which might really help referring to Game Protect. The sad reality is that only suing might help in this case and victims might even get it cost-free if total debts are big enough. Why does not ThePOGG direct customers to that?
Are they not supposed to help victims in best possible ways?
Game Protect statement Betcoin
We do not have any personal experience or took a deeper look into this service. Why? If a service declares a continuing fraud of 450 BTC as “resolved” thepogg.com/complaint/betcoin-ag-progressive-jackpot-was-not-paid-for-winning-spin/ you better steer clear.
To compare what really happened: Betcoin.ag extort 500 Bitcoins Jackpot winner for “settlement”
However, we are open to discuss about their service and invite readers to post in the comment section below.
ThePOGG statement Gamebet (1)
Hi GP Team,
This article has just come to my attention – https://game-protect.com/thepogg/.
Really? At the very least to maintain some professional standards you could have approached us and asked about these issues directly rather than simply accepting the player’s word for everything.
As has been explained to this player repeatedly, the supposed “undisputable evidence” (sic) of accessing their account has three major weaknesses:
i) It would be in violation of operator terms and conditions for the player to allow a third party access to their account. Even if everything the player claims is true, if our team were to sign-in to their account that would automatically justify the non-payment on the grounds of another breach of terms. We will NEVER log into a player’s account under any circumstances because this violates terms that require the player to ensure that their account data is kept secure and not shared with anyone.
ii) Arbitrage betting – as I’m very sure your aware – usually requires placing bets at MORE THAN ONE BOOKMAKER to lock in a profit. Looking at this player’s bets in their GameBet account wouldn’t confirm they had not engaged in arbitrage betting. It would have just been a list of transactions that did not prove or disprove anything. However, the operator may have access to more information on the player’s activities at other properties (we have reason to suspect this particular group may own more than just GameBet) that we do not have.
iii) Whether or not the player has engaged in arbitrage betting is utterly irrelevant – this is a legal practice and not something we would support non-payment of the player based on unless there were other term breaches. However, operators regularly give this justification to players when they’ve found other suspect activity that they don’t want to discuss to avoid educating the player as to how they were caught doing whatever it was they were detected doing.
If you have any knowledge relevant to managing situations like this I would think that the above three points would have been self-evident to you. That being the case I can only conclude that your issue isn’t actually anything to do with this case but that you have some other axe to grind with our service.
And this is where your post gets really ridiculous – we ruled in favour of the player! The player’s problem here isn’t that we didn’t support them, it’s that they wanted us to go further and attack the MGA for not supporting them.
We ruled in favour of the player, not because we have any grounds to believe or not believe their claims, but because the operator were non-cooperative. If one party in a complaint is non-cooperative then the ruling automatically goes in favour of the other party. The system sanctions the party that creates the barrier to management. GameBet are not constrained by either law or license and can choose to discuss any complaint as long as they take the correct action to ensure that they comply with data protection laws. Like yourselves, we make no statement about whether the player is right or wrong because we have no sound ground to draw a conclusion. We do however highlight that GameBet have engaged in what we view as poor practice by refusing to act in a transparent fashion when it comes to the management of complaints.
Where the regulator are concerned, they could not legally discuss the case with us. They don’t have that option. The case obviously involves data that belongs to the operator. The operator have refused to provide that directly to our service. They are not going to provide the regulator permission to provide the data to us when they wouldn’t do so directly. So unlike the operator the regulator are legally constrained from engaging with us on this matter. We are not going to be able to obtain the regulator’s justifications for the rulings they reached. And we are not about to take a position on an issue where only one of the parties can offer their side of the story. That would be patently unfair on every level and effectively just taking the player’s word for what’s gone on.
This player has been systematically working to try and create conflict between our ThePOGG and Game-Protect. I’m not going to pretend I like everything your team has been doing over the last few years – I think the fundamental intent is likely positive but the execution is unlikely to achieve any positive results and potentially harms players more than it helps – but I would never have allowed our service to publicly criticise you because you are at least trying to help players and there are so few services out there that are genuinely trying to help players for reasons beyond putting money in their pockets’. It’s really sad to see you so quickly swing to this type of attack where you have zero information, haven’t even attempted a dialogue, and yet make sweeping claims about the practice of one of your competitors. That comes off as both petty and unprofessional.
Even if ThePOGG had something solid to work with we wouldn’t represent this player any further. We are a private business and have the right to refuse service for any non-discriminatory reason. Where a complainant is actively trying to damage our business of course we’re going to decline to assist them further. Trying to stir up conflict between our services is something I consider to be ‘looking to damage our business’. It’s really disappointing to see your team go exactly the opposite direction and act on behalf of the player to start the very conflict we’ve looked to avoid without any sound ground to draw the conclusion that the player is in the right. You actions are partisan in the extreme.
ThePOGG statement Betcoin (1)
As to your issue with our management of Betsoft jackpot case I’ll tell you the same thing I told this player earlier this week – we assisted that player and due to our efforts the player got a 5 figure payout rather than nothing. While I make no comment on whether the outcome that occurred would have been our preference, the player was given the choice of accepting the offer negotiated or declining it. Had they chosen to decline it our response and subsequent actions would have been different.
Had they declined that offer I strongly believe that the end outcome would have been them receiving no payment what-so-ever. They chose to take the money. As they agreed and signed a legally binding contract that we negotiated, our involvement in the case ended based on the player’s decision. We facilitated the agreement that got the player some of the balance paid. If we then turned round and facilitated the player breaching that agreement that would be both entirely unprofessional and a fundamental breach of trust.
No operator in the business would ever discuss any issue with our service again having seen that. We’re not about to sell out every other player that gets money back via our help simply to support a player who agreed to a settlement then changed their mind later on, in a case where in my professional opinion there was zero realistic possibility of any further payout anyway. That would be self-defeating in every respect. If the player wants to risk the consequences of breaching the settlement agreement that is entirely their choice, but it has to be done via services other than the one that negotiated that settlement.
On a side note, you might want to ask yourselves if your own strategies actually got the player any money back or just allows you to prop up your own ego in terms of ‘protecting players’ by shouting loud but achieving no results. Who really did the player the bigger service here? The party that got them a partial payment or the party that screamed and shouted but didn’t get them any money back?
At the end of the day you are entirely entitled to publish your own opinions and attack whoever you wish. If you feel that out of all of the questionable goings on in this industry that ThePOGG really deserves your animosity and attention that is entirely up to you. From our perspective it’s really disappointing to see you discredit your service in this manner by attacking one of the few groups in the industry that consistently fights to make things fairer and see players treated right all based on issues that you have minimum actual knowledge of what went on.