Dear annaheidswier,
I completely understand your frustration, and I appreciate your patience throughout this process.
After reviewing all the available information, I would like to share our position on the matter:
Funding a casino account from third-party sources is indeed considered a serious breach of Terms & Conditions and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) policies at most online casinos. It is the casino's right and obligation to verify the origin of funds to ensure their legitimacy. As such, players are typically required to use only their own personal funds for deposits.
However, in your case, it appears that the funds originated from a joint bank account held by both you and your husband. This is a common and accepted financial practice among married couples. According to the available information, both names are displayed on the bank statement you provided, confirming your (partial) ownership of the account.
Given these circumstances, we believe that the decision to confiscate your balance and close your account solely due to the use of a joint account was disproportionate. In our view, the winnings in question should be honored.
Dear Instant Casino,
Thank you for providing additional context and for addressing the situation externally.
As I mentioned in my response to your message, while we understand that your Terms & Conditions include a clause prohibiting the use of joint accounts, we respectfully believe that the enforcement of this rule in this specific case may not be entirely fair or justified.
Based on the available evidence, it appears that the bank statement submitted by the player includes both her and her husband’s names, confirming her (partial) ownership of the account. Furthermore, the player claims she successfully completed an extended verification process, which reportedly included the submission of her husband's passport, and complied fully with your verification requirements.
In light of these factors, we see no compelling reason for such strict measures to be applied. I would therefore like to kindly ask you to reconsider your decision in the interest of fairness and maintaining a player-friendly approach.
Thank you again for your cooperation. I look forward to your response.
Dear annaheidswier,
I completely understand your frustration, and I appreciate your patience throughout this process.
After reviewing all the available information, I would like to share our position on the matter:
Funding a casino account from third-party sources is indeed considered a serious breach of Terms & Conditions and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) policies at most online casinos. It is the casino's right and obligation to verify the origin of funds to ensure their legitimacy. As such, players are typically required to use only their own personal funds for deposits.
However, in your case, it appears that the funds originated from a joint bank account held by both you and your husband. This is a common and accepted financial practice among married couples. According to the available information, both names are displayed on the bank statement you provided, confirming your (partial) ownership of the account.
Given these circumstances, we believe that the decision to confiscate your balance and close your account solely due to the use of a joint account was disproportionate. In our view, the winnings in question should be honored.
Dear Instant Casino,
Thank you for providing additional context and for addressing the situation externally.
As I mentioned in my response to your message, while we understand that your Terms & Conditions include a clause prohibiting the use of joint accounts, we respectfully believe that the enforcement of this rule in this specific case may not be entirely fair or justified.
Based on the available evidence, it appears that the bank statement submitted by the player includes both her and her husband’s names, confirming her (partial) ownership of the account. Furthermore, the player claims she successfully completed an extended verification process, which reportedly included the submission of her husband's passport, and complied fully with your verification requirements.
In light of these factors, we see no compelling reason for such strict measures to be applied. I would therefore like to kindly ask you to reconsider your decision in the interest of fairness and maintaining a player-friendly approach.
Thank you again for your cooperation. I look forward to your response.