Originally posted on 05/25/2011:

Why did they engage into business with him before verifying his identity or determining there was a "problem" with his documentation?

If they lack the ability to crosscheck the ID against a DB, why don't they flag the IPs/countries in question?

If you selectively engage in business where your increased levels of due diligence can only possibly result in financial windfall for you, is that fair and just? Is that in the idea of preventing money laundering and identity theft (the purpose of KYC)?

Seems like you don't understand the purpose of these regulations, the abilities of the said companies, or who has a vested interest in performing additional "fraud prevention". He fulfilled the requirements as laid out by the TCs. Any superior levels of KYC regulations should be clearly stated (photos of you with ID are not) and should be done to prevent money laundering/identity theft, not as a tool to rob players (and beguile the foolhardy) after already engaging in business and financial transactions with a said party.

Unstated withdraw vetting is simply a tool for thievery. Nothing more.