1/12/2010 05:20 PM
SportsInteraction cooperates with SBR in confiscation investigationssportsinteraction (sbr rating c-) addresses a
sportsbook dispute from June 2007 . In that dispute, SIA closed a player's account for excessive winnings, then accidentally reopened the account. The player went on to win an additional $15,000. SIA canceled the player's winnings which prompted a rating downgrade to D+.
SportsBookReview and
SportsInteraction have discussed this dispute over the past two years via hundreds of emails, multiple teleconferences, both with SIA management and with the player. SIA established that the account was being controlled by a third party; a third party whose account was also closed for excessive winnings. The person owning the account in this dispute resided in England, and made deposits and withdrawals from that location. All bets were placed from Canda, despite the account owner spending a majority of time in England while the bets were placed. SIA has proven the account was accessed from an IP address shared by the third party. SIA was able to demonstrate irrefutable connections between the two players. SIA has requested that SBR not disclose its investigative methods to prevent compromising future fraud cases. Once SIA proved that the account was fraudulent, SBR agreed with the decision to confiscate winnings.
SBR's Justin worked the case.
Justin: "SportsInteraction has made great strides in its management, customer service and fraud prevention over the last three years including the implementation of several changes to its rules and procedures recommended by SBR to avoid disputes. This long-outstanding dispute represented the single worst issue I have ever tried to tackle with this sportsbook. Its resolution is a high-point in the massive amount of manpower spent. While the confiscation of winnings on fair bets is never, it was understandable in this situation.”
Case #2.
SIA reverses $1700 winnings confiscation. On October 21st, a player wrote SBR stating that his account was closed and winnings confiscated. SIA demonstrated that in one instance, two accounts made the same wager from the same IP address. The second account was opened at the friend's house, and had no other IP addresses associated with it. SIA noted that while the players were in violation of SIA's terms and conditions by operating two accounts from the same IP, they decided to give the player's the benefit of the doubt in the action not being maliciously taken to circumvent house rules.
Case #3
SIA confiscates €639 citing identity fraud. On August 10th, a
player wrote SBR indicating account closure and funds confiscation. SIA
proved that the passport submitted was forged. The player did not
dispute the finding. SBR agreed with SportsInteraction's decision to
confiscate winnings.
Case #4
SIA confiscates $9000 from player, citing multiple accounts and chargebacks. On November 5th, a player wrote SBR stating that his account was closed and winnings confiscated. Both player and sportsbook agreed on the facts: the account was opened on March 3rd 2009, deposited $750 via ACH; and the account's balance was lost in bets. The player's deposits bounced, resulting in a negative sportsbook balance. In November of 2009, the player proceeded to open an additional account with
SIA using his middle name as a last name, and using a different street address. The player won several parlays and increased his balance to roughly $10,000. SBR agreed with SIA's decision to confiscate winnings. SIA's terms and conditions disallow a person from opening multiple accounts. In this instance, the player circumvented the negative figure on his account from his first chargeback, and was a high risk to chargeback a second time should his parlays have lost.
Case #5
SIA reverses $5784 winnings confiscation. On October 27th, a
player wrote SBR indicating his account was closed with his funds
confiscated. SIA originally stated that the player's documents were
forged and suspected that the account was being controlled by a
previously restricted player. The player produced a barrage of
identification documents and cleared his account.
Case #6
SIA confiscates $1167 citing identity fraud. On June 25th, a player wrote SBR stating his account was closed and winnings removed. SIA documented that the person making the deposit was a former player that had outstanding chargebacks with another account. The bank card used to make the deposit was not authorized for use by the account holder. The player submitted a forged bank card image to circumvent this. SBR agreed with SIA's decision to confiscate winnings.
report written by Justin of SportsBookReview team.
6/15/2007 06:13 PM
sportsinteraction (sbr rating c-) deletes five months of player's wagering activity; states account was supposed to be closed in October 2006. SIA says the player was notified via email on October 8th that his "earnings with us have now exceeded the allowable income on an account" and that his account was closed. The player continued to wager until the end of March, five months after SIA claims they intended to terminate the relationship. The player did not receive his first withdrawal until April 2007. SBR is speaking to SIA management regarding voided wagers that resulted in approximately $15,000 in winnings.
12/22/2006 02:36 AM
sportsinteraction (sbr rating c-) confiscates over $5,000 in player winnings. The sportsbook states that the account was the 2nd from the same household and the first account had already been removed from the book due to sharp play. SBR Justin investigated the player’s dispute and found that the sportsbook did not list any rules prohibiting multiple users from the same household. SportsInteraction has taken steps to avoid similar disputes in the future by adding the following rule:
Only one Sports Interaction account per household or computer environment is permitted. A ’computer environment’ is one where multiple computers are located in one building. If fraudulent accounts are found in one household or computer environment, the other accounts in that household or computer environment will be held liable for any returned funds and the account balances will reflect this.Due to the fact that this rule did not exist prior to winnings confiscation and that family members have played at SIA in the past, SBR has argued that winnings should be honored. Current SIA players should take note of the book’s newly defined stance on more than one user per residence.
Read more on this player’s dispute
here and a 2nd SIA "alias account" dispute
here.
10/15/2006 11:04 AM
sportsinteraction (sbr rating c-) players request funds; sportsbook stalls for time. SIA admits to being one week behind with some larger payouts. The book has dealt with the issue by asking players to verify ID and to fax in the same documents multiple times. SBR has received nine payout complaints from players waiting for larger sums. When these clients have asked for the status of their payouts, accounting informs them that the documents are either not on file, not yet verified, or they must resend.
"
They first claimed they never got my fax...then I faxed it to them and they said they got it, and still they won’t do anything. I have sent it twice, they have verified that they received it, and still they do nothing". - N. A.
"The last correspondance received from SIA was October 5th. They claim to be making a short review of my account. A week seems a little more than short". - B. N.
"They suddenly asked for my SSN for so called ’’identity verification’’ purpose. After complaining with them, they are willing to accept photo ID, utility bill, etc as an alternative. That’s fine, and I sent them all the required documents on Oct 3rd. And confirmed with their live chat rep that documents have been received and forwarded to their accounts department for review. But after a whole week, I still have not heard of anything back from their accounts department. I talked with their live chat rep a couple of times, and heard some different kinds of excuse , documents not received, huge backlog, documents goes to supervisor first then to accounts department". - B.Z.