Privacy settings

We use a number of cookies on our website. Some are essential, while others help us improve our portal for you.

Privacy settings

Here is an overview of all the cookies we use. You can choose to accept whole categories or view more information and select only certain cookies.

Essential (6)

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the website to function properly.

Statistics (3)

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
If the statistics cookies are subsequently deselected, they will remain on the computer until the expiry date. However, they are neither updated nor evaluated.

Deposit and withdrawal methods: Instant bank transfer by bank chargeback (Page 7)

Topic created on 04th Sep. 2020 | Page: 7 of 8 | Answers: 72 | Views: 13,754
Anonym
Will777 wrote on 09/06/2020 at 07:44 AM
@jokerboy you don't really grasp much. Your way of dealing with ignorance is beyond appalling.

In addition, you drift extremely quickly from the topic. This happens to you but rather unconsciously...but does not make it less sad. Quite the opposite.

The only thing I find frightening is that the recurring people who insist that gambling on the Internet is illegal don't even bother with it. I researched it and I'm also satisfied with the result that the first person who commented on this changed his mind from "fact is" to "gray area" in the course of the conversation

Sadly, I find your rabble-rousing yapping and when I look at your profile here your non-existent own opinion. Only dogs are like that

This post has been translated automatically

u****n
Jokerboy wrote on 07.09.2020 at 06:21
The only thing I find scary is that the perpetual people who insist that gambling on the internet is illegal don't even bother with it. I researched it and I'm also satisfied with the result that the first person who commented on this changed his mind from "fact is" to "gray area" in the course of the conversation

Sadly, I find your rabble-rousing yapping and when I look at your profile here your non-existent own opinion. Only dogs are like that.

just the people who insist on it, seem to have dealt with the issue in contrast to you. I do not know what or where you have researched, but that you generally have comprehension problems with legal texts and legal topics, you have already proven several times in this thread.

Once again as short and understandable as it goes, just for you
In 2017, the Federal Administrative Court ruled that Germany's ban on organizing or brokering casino, scratch card and Poker games on the Internet was upheld after providers based in Malta and Gibraltar sued against the prohibition order under gambling law.

Specifically, the court declared three types of gambling on the Internet to be illegal, namely casino games, scratch card games and poker games. Casino games include Slot machines as well as classic table and card games such as Roulette, Blackjack and baccarat. In addition, this also includes gambling that is not handled via software, but via the live casino.

Sports betting and lotteries offered online are excluded from the prohibition in terms of the State Treaty on Gambling. However, a license is required for both.

If you only use sports betting or lotteries, you do not have to worry about anything with an officially licensed Provider in Germany. He is on the safe side. For Online Casinos that also offer slots, card games and Scratch cards, there is theoretically always the Risk that these casinos will be closed by the German authorities and thus the funds on the customer accounts disappear. De facto, however, corresponding casinos are not prosecuted at the moment

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
unicorn wrote on 07.09.2020 at 11:55 am
the very people who are harping on this seem to have researched the subject, unlike you. I don't know what or where you have researched, but that you generally have comprehension problems with legal texts and legal topics, you have already proven several times in this thread.

Once again as short and understandable as it goes, just for you
In 2017, the Federal Administrative Court ruled that Germany's ban on organizing or brokering casino, scratch card and Poker games on the Internet was upheld after providers based in Malta and Gibraltar sued against the prohibition order under gambling law.

Specifically, the court declared three types of gambling on the Internet to be illegal, namely casino games, scratch card games and poker games. Casino games include Slot machines as well as classic table and card games such as Roulette, Blackjack and baccarat. In addition, this also includes gambling that is not handled via software, but via the live casino.

Sports betting and lotteries offered online are excluded from the prohibition in terms of the State Treaty on Gambling. However, a license is required for both.

If you only use sports betting or lotteries, you do not have to worry about anything with an officially licensed Provider in Germany. He is on the safe side. For Online Casinos that also offer slots, card games and Scratch cards, there is theoretically always the Risk that these casinos will be closed by the German authorities and thus the funds on the customer accounts disappear. De facto, however, corresponding casinos are not prosecuted at the moment


Look how sweet you can write

I completely agree with you. That's exactly how I read it. Nevertheless, there are gaps and somewhere they have to come from and there it simply offers itself to read between the lines. I can understand a legal text. Especially if it is written as vague as it is formulated. There is no clear limit, otherwise the casinos and we would not have such an easy game to play

This post has been translated automatically

u****n
Jokerboy wrote on 07/09/2020 at 13:59
Look how sweet you can write

I totally agree with you. That's exactly how I read it as well. Still, there are gaps and they have to come from somewhere, so it just lends itself to reading between the lines. I can understand a legal text. Especially if it is written as vague as it is formulated. There is no clear limit, otherwise the casinos and we would not have such an easy game to play

There is nothing to read between the lines. That the ban is not enforced has 2 simple reasons.

1. The casinos are located in Malta and Gibraltar, and can thereby evade enforcement under German law for lack of international agreements.

2. The German regulatory authorities have no interest in suing the omission before the European Court of Justice, because such a process is lengthy and next year anyway comes the new State Treaty on Gambling, which legalizes online casinos. However, probably with massive restrictions such as a betting or loss limit or similar.

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym

Jokerboy wrote on 07/09/2020 at 13:59
Look how sweet you can write

I totally agree with you. That's exactly how I read it as well. Still, there are gaps and they have to come from somewhere, so it just lends itself to reading between the lines. I can understand a legal text. Especially if it is written as vague as it is formulated. A clear limit does not exist, otherwise the casinos and we would not have such an easy game to play

Hey boy, sorry but I have no desire to communicate via PN with you

First, I do that only with people who are sympathetic to me and secondly, you can also write here

Especially since you me/us further in front first full laberst we would be "...the spinners who always book their money back..." and then send me a judgment what should prove that this is actually garni feasible

Notice what?
Probably not...

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
Tribeholz wrote on 09/09/2020 at 10:51 AM

Hey Boy, sorry but I don't feel like communicating via PN with you

First, I only do that with people who are sympathetic to me and second, you can also write it here

Especially since you me / us further in front first full laberst we would be "...the spinners who always book their money back..." and then send me a judgment what should prove that this is actually garni feasible

Notice what?
Probably not...

Right, there are points if you write it here purely. I have only given you proof that what you have written cannot be 100 percent
Here for all the judgment, which was made against chargebacks: "In contrast, there is a judgment from October last year from the Wuppertal Regional Court, which decided exactly the opposite. A plaintiff had deposited here likewise by PayPal on a Casino side money and after he gambled away the money, it again reclaimed. "The plaintiff has no claim against the defendant for repayment of his gaming stakes." the court ruled in its judgment at the time."

Every judgment that has been rendered has been against card settlement or paypal. There is no verdict on Trustly or on Sofort Überweisung where people got right. Even lawyers point out that if you want your money back, it can only be Paypal payments or credit card charges. This simply bites and I wanted you as described only the other side explain what I have now done with this. And like you I got 15 points for it now, which brings me closer to a paysafe card early next month. For this I thank you very much!

This post has been translated automatically

Mo1985
Amateur
Unicorm deliberately forgets the most important argument in its justification why the German authorities do not take action against their colleagues from Malta or Gibraltar: because the ruling of the Federal Court of Justice would not stand a chance before the European Court of Justice.

If "Europe" once a corresponding judgment, all lawsuits against casinos from Deutschlnd are automatically and immediately lost.

Even if some Soieler reaches a success before a German court: Before the European Court of Justice he loses to 101%

This post has been translated automatically

u****n
Mo1985 wrote on 09.09.2020 at 18:06: Unicorm forgets in his justification why the German authorities do not proceed against the colleagues from Malta or Gibralter quite deliberately the very most important argument: Because the judgment of the Federal Court of Justice would have no chance before the European Court of Justice.

If "Europe" once a corresponding judgment, all lawsuits against casinos from Deutschlnd are automatically and immediately lost.

Even if some Soieler reaches a success before a German court: Before the European Court of Justice he loses to 101%

Believe me, I have tried to explain to Jokerboy umpteen times, also via PN, that European law breaks national law, and that the German authorities therefore shy away from a lawsuit before the ECJ. Therefore, only the two simple, understandable for him reasons.

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
Mo1985 wrote on 09.09.2020 at 18:06: Unicorm forgets in his justification why the German authorities do not proceed against the colleagues from Malta or Gibralter quite deliberately the very most important argument: Because the judgment of the Federal Court of Justice would have no chance before the European Court of Justice.

If "Europe" once a corresponding judgment, all lawsuits against casinos from Deutschlnd are automatically and immediately lost.

Even if some Soieler reaches a success before a German court: Before the European Court of Justice he loses to 101%

He has really written that a few times. There have also been no charges for illegal gambling in Germany. Neither against players nor against Casinos. The only thing there have been so far were charges for money laundering or embezzlement, which is indeed punishable
And if it is illegal, then I as a state can turn off the oven if I really want to. But if I see that there are daily turnovers in the high 8-digit range, then I might overlook one thing or another and open up a gray area for myself so that I can really profit in the end and not obstruct it

At the end of the day, jobs are attached to this whole apparatus and it secures livelihoods

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym

Jokerboy wrote on 09/09/2020 at 15:06
Right, there are points if you write it in here. I just gave you a proof that what you wrote can't be 100%
Here for all the judgment, which was made against chargebacks: "Against this is a judgment from October last year from the Wuppertal Regional Court, which decided exactly the opposite. A plaintiff had deposited here likewise by PayPal on a Casino side money and after he gambled away the money, it again reclaimed. "The plaintiff has no claim against the defendant for repayment of his gaming stakes." the court ruled in its judgment at the time."

Every judgment that has been rendered has been against card settlement or paypal. There is no verdict on Trustly or on Sofort Überweisung where people got right. Even lawyers point out that if you want your money back, it can only be Paypal payments or credit card charges. This simply bites and I wanted you as described only the other side explain what I have now done with this. And like you I got 15 points for it now, which brings me closer to a paysafe card early next month. For this I thank you very much!

What does such a verdict say if you don't know the frame at all? There have also been acquittals in trials for possession of cocaine or cannabis - that's why the drugs are still not legal in our country.


Why do some banks actually make stress with some users here? The account of gambler XYZ was cancelled because there were constantly transferred coals from and to Maltese OCs.

Absolutely unclear!
Because if you transfer 10x a day money to Amazon happens but also nothing......

This post has been translated automatically

Hot Topics22nd Nov. 2024 at 02:02 pm CET

Community Forum-Moderators

Members who assist the GJ team in moderating the forum.
Profile picture of AndreAndre
Profile picture of gamble1gamble1
Profile picture of Langhans_innenLanghans_innen
Profile picture of SaphiraSaphira
GambleJoe is aimed exclusively at user whose allowed to play legally with his current location in online casinos and does not violate the current law.
It is the responsibility of the user to inform himself about the current legal situation. Gambling is prohibited for children and adolescents under the age of 18.
GambleJoe is a registered trademark with the EUIPO of GJ International Ltd.

© 2012-2024 GambleJoe.com

Forgotten your password?

Create a new password here

  • 1. Fill in the 3 fields carefully and click on the green button
  • 2. Check your email inbox for a message from GambleJoe
  • 3. Click on the confirmation link in the email and your new password will be active immediately