잘못된 판매자 카테고리 코드를 사용하는 Curaçao 라이선스가 있는 도박 웹사이트에 대한 질문 (101 페이지)

The providers are protected by the Visa / MasterCard guidelines, it feels like the VISA / MasterCard guidelines are above the law. As a consumer, you are screwed, the providers can launder money with almost no problems.

In Germany, credit card payments are particularly protected. Authorized transactions are only replaced under certain conditions. Banks very rarely refund such a secured transaction because the bank is liable if the opponent wins the chargeback. Therefore, the funds are usually not credited or the result of the chargeback is awaited.

If a transaction is not protected by 3DS, the merchant is liable. When I read that someone has authorized more than 40 transactions, it is clear why the banks are not reacting. Checking and complaining about 40 transactions in the MasterCard system is complex and time-consuming.

The banks believe that the payment is authorized; in addition, the person has received something in return, even if the card shows otherwise. There is no evidence in the form of invoices, so it is impossible to initiate a chargeback. From this point on, everyone should understand what this is about.

Die Anbieter werden durch die Visa / MasterCard Richtlinien geschützt, gefühlt stehen die Richtlinien von VISA / Mastercard über den Gesetz .Als Verbraucher bist du gefi.ckt, die Anbieter können so nahezu ohne Probleme Gelder waschen .

Im Deutschland ist eine Kreditkartenzahlung besonders geschützt. Autorisierte Transaktionen werden nur unter bestimmten Bedingungen ersetzt. Die Banken erstatten solch eine gesicherte Transaktion sehr selten, weil die Bank hier haftet wenn der Gegner den Chargeback gewinnt. Deswegen werden die Gelder in der Regel nicht gutgeschrieben, oder auf das Ergebnis des Chargebacks gewartet.

Ist eine Transaktion nicht geschützt durch 3DS haftet der Händler. Wenn ich lese, dass jemand über 40 Transaktion autorisiert hat, ist klar warum die Banken hier nicht reagieren, 40 Transaktionen zu kontrollieren und zu beanstanden im MasterCard system ist aufwendig und kostet Zeit.

Die Banken vertreten die Meinung autorisierte Zahlung; Außerdem hat derjenige eine Gegenleistung erhalten auch wenn die Karte etwas anderes anzeigt. Nachweise in Form von Rechnungen existieren nicht, daher unmöglich ein Chargeback einzuleiten. Ab hier sollte jeder verstehen worum es geht.

But on what grounds do you mean you would get the money back? The casino cannot know that you are addicted to gambling, if you have not told them. So the follow-up question is also - what did you try to report them to the police for? And finally - on what grounds did you request a charge back from the bank/what reason did you give?

Men på vilka grunder menar du att du skulle få tillbaka pengarna? Casinot kan ju inte veta att du är spelberoende, om du inte meddelat dem det. Så följdfrågan blir ju också -vad försökte du polisanmäla dem för? Och till sist -på vilka grunder begärde du en charge back från banken/vad uppgav du för anledning?

It's not about whether you have been addicted to gambling or not. It is a technicality in essence - the merchant is deliberately obscuring a transaction type to be retail when in fact it is a very high risk gambling transaction. This is a direct contravention of the rules set by Mastercard/Visa. It is also grounds for a player to say the merchant is not recognised and ask for a refund.

It is also grounds for a player to say the merchant is not recognised and ask for a refund.

However, the transaction was usually verified by the banking app, so the banks take this as recognition of the transaction. If you play at 123 Casino and see something else on the app when confirming, you would have to decline.

Doesn't really matter tbh. If you can show you did not receive anything from the merchant then that's pretty much good enough. Getting banks to understand what is happening is the toughest part.

Have 2 pending with Musicreverb...will let you know how it goes

Received this email when questioning goldenbet. Is this lies?

It's not lies. The third party payment processor is the one that needs to be taken to task. The casino won't give you any refund. You need to see what the amounts have come off as on your statements and find the 'merchant' if they exist, then you can build a case with your bank.

I have found the merchant on company house which is a photocopy company based in London?

Niko*FAQSOLUTIONS

Try and make contact with them mate. I can almost guarantee they won't have a clue, but you can then use that as evidence.

Unfortunately I've looked into and the company exists on paper but has no contact details. I have raised a chargeback with my bank on hope, the company it takes you to on company house is a photocopy company b6 description but with no contact detaila

Good luck mate, hoping it works. They will see it is clearly not coded as gambling.

Thanks very much, yeah I've sent the what evidence I have of the transactions with photos of the company number etc. to me it looks like a fake company was set up for this specific purpose, not sure if I'm overthinking though haha

Similar to cards, open banking transactions such as Trustly needs and should be processed with specific code, I think for open banking it was PCC 26 or something.

But, as with cards, there is of course ways to bypass this as many casinos will do.

Latest ones I have found are PayOp and PayDo...used by Santeda Group for all sorts of deposits from cards to neosurf vouchers! Will contact both payment providers and see what happens.

I'm on them at the moment and a few weird emails have been received for payment cancellations so will wait and see their final responses.

Just that there was potential payment fraud and they said they would investigate. Now have several automated emails through...but need to wait and see