[sia30k]

long story short, & sorry for the english since im not a native speaker.

facts of the case:
my computer has access to 6 sia accounts, all account holders are my friends (& one is mine).

in august and sept we won over 25k at sia under 6 accounts. i requested a 10k withdrawal in late sept from my account and that was rejected, sia said the account was under investigation.

sia security then requested an id, address proof and neteller screenshot of a deposit to sia from each account. my friends and me sent them all the requested docs, some sooner than others, but all done within 3 weeks.

sia then emailed us that fraud has been committed in our accounts and that all accounts have been closed, any winnings was void, they sent our deposits back to our neteller accounts.

as i contacted sia today, they said there is no need to have further communication because my account has been closed, I asked them if litigation is the only way to get around this, their answer is "Good luck to you".

problem:
the problem, i guess, is that my computer was logged into different accounts under the same ip at almost the same time, max bet and winning

my argument is that, me and my friends were actually staying in my house (as a small group of syndicate) in the last two months and some of them followed my actions, we used the same computer to place bets.

money involved:
1 acc with 19k+
1 acc with 9k+
1 acc with 1.8K+

advice anyone? sia is not a pubicly traded company as i recall, i do have a lawyer frd in canada but i hope to get this sorted without litigation. my frds are obv concerned about the "void winnings" part, sia do not respond to my emails now (as they said there is no need for further communication), so i feel the need to post this in a forum, please help.

[Santo]

I think it's a fairly clear rule breach and you have little to no chance of getting anything above the deposit.

[numptie]

You got your deposit back. Consider yourself lucky. Don't try this at Sportsbook.com

[jjgold]

I am glad they caught you

[Stumpage]

Yeah, I've got to echo the others here. This will go nowhere should you pursue it. According to yourself there are 6 accounts in the same household; max bets (all the same) at almost the same time; an admitted syndicate.

You have absolutely no chance of recovering any further funds apart from your deposit.

[ShamsWoof10]

WELL AIN'T THAT A B*TCH!!! Just yesterday I am going back and fourth with some people on this forum about Sportsbook.com not taking correlated parlays which almost no books take for good reason... They took them though but SIA took there wagers too then didn't give them their winnings... Sportsbook.com had one isolated incident of this and then fixed their software but SIA has this happen more then once ....more then twice... more then three times and they string the person(s) along for months before they f*ck them...

For one situation "THEY ARE CROOCKS" but here "GOOD I AM GLAD THEY CAUGHT YOU"... WTF is that.? I am starting to think some of you need to google the word "FAIR"...

You wouldn't have to try this at Sportsbook.com because their limits are more then 5 cents...

Like I said you people.. JJ.. are as consistant as SW10 from 51 yards out..

[Justin7]

SIA30k,

I'm sorry you are having trouble at SIA. They have had similar disputes to this in the past.

After the last barrage, they clarified their rules. They are CRYSTAL CLEAR that only one account per computer environment or household is allowed.

While I may not like this rule at SIA, it covers this situation, and the rule isn't inherently unfair. With the amounts you and your friends won, I would expect that you're professional, and are able to read a site's rules before the group sends thousands of dollars.

While I'm sorry that we can't put pressure on them for this dispute, you have other options. SIA abides by the laws of the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake ("Kahnawake"). You might check out this link:
http://www.kahnawake.com/gamingcommission/

[raiders72002]

Lots of books have the rule one account per household, computer or IP.

Don't try this anywhere unless you get an email stating that it's OK for you to do this.

My guess is that you were circumventing limits.

[JoshW]

Six accounts on one computer is just insane. As others have said is the reason players can get a bad image with sportsbooks.

[DrunkenLullaby]

Originally Posted by ShamsWoof10

Sportsbook.com had one isolated incident of this and then fixed their software

Shams buddy, you might want to do your homework on that. An acquaintance of mine says he just parlayed Dolphins & Under at Sportsbook.com. They haven't done a damn thing with their software to lock these out. That's a very crucial point in the whole discussion.

[ShamsWoof10]

Originally Posted by DrunkenLullaby

Shams buddy, you might want to do your homework on that. An acquaintance of mine says he just parlayed Dolphins & Under at Sportsbook.com. They haven't done a damn thing with their software to lock these out. That's a very crucial point in the whole discussion.

Well that's my point... If he is your acquaintance I imagine he knows that it's not supposed to be done or that he should ask their CS first... The first time... ok but now it's known... In other situations when you do something you know a book doesn't like people here will say "good I am glad you got caught" but in this case "hey those crooks are still taking them.."

Drunkin' I hear what you're sayin' but you should also consider that it is likely they will allow some but not others for parlays... I wonder if all the parlays that were not granted were bases..? The software no longer allows bases as correlated ones but still allows football... Someone said TheGreek allows some but not others and it seemed ok there... There is a serious double standard here..

Willie Bee to snap... Dozer will hold... and SBR_John who has made only 2 of his last 7 from outside 30 will try and tie the game... This will be from 34 yards out... You gotta' give it to Willie Bee though his snaps have been on the mark and his rear end has kept the DLine from providing any pressure.... There's the kick...and it is ....SHORT!!! as he continues to struggle and his contract just might be getting inside his head!

[DrunkenLullaby]

...but you said they fixed their software. They didn't.

On top of that, they don't warn players that they're doing anything wrong before confiscating.

On top of that, and perhaps most importantly, they selectively choose to void one player's parlay because he is a net winner and NOT void another player's parlay because he's a net loser.

[the outlaw]

I can't believe people do this kind of stuff and then run to the forums and cry when they get bounced. This is not even questionable.

[ShamsWoof10]

Originally Posted by DrunkenLullaby

...but you said they fixed their software. They didn't.

On top of that, they don't warn players that they're doing anything wrong before confiscating.

On top of that, and perhaps most importantly, they selectively choose to void one player's parlay because he is a net winner and NOT void another player's parlay because he's a net loser.

Well the bold are valid points but as I mentioned this is an isolated incident and I said they fixed their software assuming it's bases they are no longer accepting... Someone should just simply ask their CS if it's just bases because it could be..

My b*tching is not all books are treated the same here and other books have graded winners as no action and losers as losers before in a dispute.. Look through 5Dimes threads... I am not saying your points are not valid I am just saying it doesn't justinfy the double standard treatment they seem to get... Why did your friend even place that parlay without checking with CS first..?

Do you guys remember a couple months back when I think it was Greek or 5Dimes that cancelled a baseball bet because they felt it was a "bad line" when we spent days figuring out if it was or not because it was PENNIES OFF.... This was more bullsh*t then the correlated parlays but no b*tching because they pay up I guess...

Rumor has it SBR_Carney might be traded to TheRx for a mod to be named later...

[DrunkenLullaby]

Originally Posted by ShamsWoof10

Why did your friend even place that parlay without checking with CS first..?

Just to test the software 'cuz I asked him to. It's 10 bucks, I don't think he's gonna sweat the payout on that too much.

Also, after all we all went through with CS during the withdrawal delays, are you really gonna rely on anything one of their reps tells ya?

[ShamsWoof10]

Originally Posted by DrunkenLullaby

Also, after all we all went through with CS during the withdrawal delays, are you really gonna rely on anything one of their reps tells ya?

That may be true but that is not a good enough reason to blindly place one without checking first.. At least you can say you checked and show proof... Come on' man you're scrappin' here... He does not have to go through the whole process ..if he even tried a bases one the software wouldn't allow it so if he wanted to test it he should have just gone through the initial step... Maybe he wants to test if they pay it.. will he b*tch if he wins and they don't..? I say since it's foots they will pay it if he wins...

[HedgeHog]

Originally Posted by ShamsWoof10

WELL AIN'T THAT A B*TCH!!! Just yesterday I am going back and fourth with some people on this forum about Sportsbook.com not taking correlated parlays which almost no books take for good reason... They took them though but SIA took there wagers too then didn't give them their winnings... Sportsbook.com had one isolated incident of this and then fixed their software but SIA has this happen more then once ....more then twice... more then three times and they string the person(s) along for months before they f*ck them...

For one situation "THEY ARE CROOCKS" but here "GOOD I AM GLAD THEY CAUGHT YOU"... WTF is that.? I am starting to think some of you need to google the word "FAIR"...

You wouldn't have to try this at Sportsbook.com because their limits are more then 5 cents...

Like I said you people.. JJ.. are as consistant as SW10 from 51 yards out..

Comparing this SIA fraud to SB.com is like comparing apples and oranges--doesn't make any sense. Do you work for SB.com?

Shams tries another chippy....blocked again.

[DrunkenLullaby]

Originally Posted by ShamsWoof10

I say since it's foots they will pay it if he wins...

...and I say that the people who got screwed out of all their winnings were betting football pars.

[ShamsWoof10]

Originally Posted by HedgeHog

Comparing this SIA fraud to SB.com is like comparing apples and oranges--doesn't make any sense. Do you work for SB.com?

Work for them..? Ummmmm you must have missed my post where I am waiting on $800 but they want me to fax in some ID and other sh*t... I call them and told them I am to damn lazy to do it right now and I'll get to it in a few weeks.. They said ok... You would think if I worked for them I wouldn't have to do that... SIA has had a lot of f*ckin' oranges ..you should say it's like comparing an apple to an orange TREE!!!

Originally Posted by HedgeHog

Shams tries another chippy....blocked again.

Coach called time out before the snap!

[ShamsWoof10]

Originally Posted by DrunkenLullaby

...and I say that the people who got screwed out of all their winnings were betting football pars.

Well now this is a good question...

SBR MODS CAN YOU CONFIRM THIS!!!

[mockingboy]

Can someone explain to me why correlated parlays aren't kosher?

[DrunkenLullaby]

Originally Posted by mockingboy

Can someone explain to me why correlated parlays aren't kosher?

In a very condensed nutshell, anything that leads you to hit a standard 2 team parlay (both involving sides that are -110 juice, i.e. no baseball) paying 2.6-1 more than 28% of the time will cause the book to be at a disadvantage. The correlation can lead to you hitting more than 28% of the time.

[ShamsWoof10]

Drunkin' this isn't SBR Harvard...

It's like this... A perfect correlation which of course they do not allow is taking a parlay with the ML and spread so if the ML hits (assuming it's a dog) then it's definate the spread hits... That is a perfect correlation with a 100% chance but let's say bases.. you take UNDER 7 and +1.5 on the RLine... Well it's not an extreme correlation but still correlates because if it does go under 7 the odds the +1.5 coming in are high...not a 100% but still much hgher then almost all books would like...

How was that??? Should I smoke another???

[vanman]

I can`t believe people can be so stupid.Do they not read rules.

[DrunkenLullaby]

By the way, I apologize for being involved in the hijacking of this thread. Shams & I have turned it into another Sportsbook.com thread instead of staying on SIA topic.

[ShamsWoof10]

True Drunkin' ... We'll stay on topic.. SIA SUCKS!!!

By the way I have had multiple accounts with SIA, SBoo, Wagerstreet, Bodog, Greek, Royal, 5Dimes and others... 5Dimes is the only one that said anything about it... All of my friends are legit and even now I log into my and my buddy WStreet account and they know us both and don't give a sh*t... He calls his in sometimes I just log in to be nosey... He's hit one round robin parlay after another this past weekend... crist!

[HedgeHog]

Originally Posted by ShamsWoof10

Well now this is a good question...

SBR MODS CAN YOU CONFIRM THIS!!!

Apparently, you missed the post that states SB confirms 31 players had their winnings confiscated for playing correlated parlays. Hardly an isolated case as you state. You were also wrong about SB fixing their software. And worst of all , you are wrong to bring the SB B.S. here for an obvious fraud case by a player against SIA. Are you starting to see a theme here?

PS Bringing up JJ's name every other post doesn't make you right. And how does he get your lipstick off his ass? (apologies in advance to JJ's ass).

[ShamsWoof10]

Originally Posted by HedgeHog

Apparently, you missed the post that states SB confirms 31 players had their winnings confiscated for playing correlated parlays. Hardly an isolated case as you state. You were also wrong about SB fixing their software. And worst of all , you are wrong to bring the SB B.S. here for an obvious fraud case by a player against SIA. Are you starting to see a theme here?

PS Bringing up JJ's name every other post doesn't make you right. And how does he get your lipstick off his ass? (apologies in advance to JJ's ass).

LOOK DUDE we already stated we got off topic and are trying to stay on topic but since you asked...

A.. I did not say this was isolated based on the number of people involved here I (and I am sure you know this) am saying it's isolated as this is the only time I know of that it's happened...
B.. Since you are one of the unfortunate people that happen to be involved would you mind showing your parlay ticket..?
C.. As far as I know the software does not allow bases and I have tried today and yesterday... Did they fix it..? Well if they accept foots then YES THEY DID if they do not then they didn't completely no...
D.. Everyone seems to agree this SIA is an open and shut case unless you think otherwise...
E.. Every other post..? You must have just saw the name JJ and didn't read the post because if that is what you call kissing as* then your judgement should be suspect!

[HedgeHog]

On topic: To open 6 accounts at SIA, or any other place, is wrong. He did this to by-pass the betting limits and perhaps took advantage of multiple bonuses. At best, he should only get his deposit (s) back.

[Mason]

6 accounts, all the same IP, overiding wager limits, syndicate, etc. This is a prime example of the types who try to use the forums as extortion.

You'd be amazed how many players call and say "If you don't pay me I'm going to the forums" or "I'm going to call Bill Dozer" when they are DEAD WRONG! It's usually a petty attempt at extortion to back-up their original scam/fraud.

The scammers seem to think Bill Dozer & SBR are their partners much of the time and it's just a formality realy that they'll side with them. In reality Bill is VERY IMPARTIAL. He will tell the book they're plain wrong and pressure them to pay up when they are. That's well documented. He'll also tell a scammer to go fly a kite just as quickly though.

Kudos to the SBR posters who saw right through this guy's BS!

[sia30k]

I wish to address just one thing, all accounts were created by different people (from different ip and household addresses, different neteller accounts etc), and we did not intend to break any rules, or use an internet forum to solve the dispute.

sia requested identification from each of us, we gave them what we have and they told us accounts info are okay, they just decided that we violated the t & c and voided all winnings at once. This is where we got an objection.

It just happened that we decided to get together and placed bets with the same computer, it's not in the same line with "one person with multiple accounts" kind of stuff. We are indeed 6 different persons.

Just thought if we should be punished because we logged in with the same computer and placed similar bets because we are friends. We do not think this violates their T & C.

1. Each member is permitted to open or operate one account only. In the event that any customer opens an additional account in his/her own name or under the name of an alias or through the co-operation of one or more persons, Sports Interaction reserves the right to close all related accounts and retain any account balances without notice.

2. “Any bets placed in an attempt in any way to defraud Sports Interaction or to violate Sports Interaction's betting rules or limits shall be voided and the balances in such accounts held by Sports Interaction. Any bets made by or contracted by any bookmaker(s), gambling syndicates, and/or any person, persons, parties, organization(s), friends or relatives acting on behalf of any bookmaker(s) or gambling syndicates shall be voided and the balances in such accounts held by Sports Interaction.

3. "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".

Guess it's time for us to get some legal advice. Hope that doesn't cost us more than 30k.

[jjgold]

SIA is a great book if you play by the rules

[vanman]

Originally Posted by sia30k

Guess it's time for us to get some legal advice. Hope that doesn't cost us more than 30k.

More money than brains then.

[RickySteve]

SIA should audit accounts at sign-up, not after they win. The book is equally at fault.

[operaman]

Some of you need a little help with your logic. Lets put it in a simple multiple choice question.


A. The guy is 100% in the wrong
B. All of the above
C. Both A and B are True


The signal to noise ratio on this forum is poor.