6 figure sc winning denied kyc verified

In United States
Zuletzt aktualisiert: Jan 14, 2026
Accessed Platform: I accessed [contact info removed], a subdomain controlled by [company removed] displaying identical branding, functionality, and Sweeps Rules to their main site [contact info removed].

Platform Representations: The site displayed Sweeps Rules Section 3 stating: "these Sweeps Rules provide the terms pursuant to which you may obtain free Sweepstakes Coins (SC) to enter and play Sweepstake Games to win Prizes." No conspicuous "test environment" disclaimers appeared anywhere.

Compliance and Verification: I registered, completed their mandatory full KYC identity verification (successfully verified), and played sweepstakes games exactly per their published rules.

Documented Winnings:

Won 600,000 SC initially (transaction record screenshot)

Continued legitimate gameplay with real-time balance fluctuations (screen recording preserved)

Final entitled balance: 571,000 SC (multiple screenshots)

Submitted redemption request showing "pending" status on their interface

Company Misconduct: After winning substantial amount, [company removed]:

Claimed "testing environment - winnings voided" despite running consumer KYC

Promised 1-3 business day payouts but stalled 72+ hours with "review team" excuses
Post-dispute cover-up:

Blocked all Georgia IP access to sites

Blocked my verified account

Altered landing page language (before/after screenshots preserved)

My Response: Sent escalating demands citing:

Their Clause 19 Arbitration Agreement

Georgia Fair Business Practices Act violations

$250,000 settlement offer (expressly reserving full amount rights)

Demanded arbitration process details they refuse to provide

Their "Formal Response" (January 13, 2026): Claimed "no valid prizes earned" despite their own "win Prizes" rules, KYC processing, and redemption interface.

Result/Current Status:

Settlement offer expired - they chose stonewalling over $250k resolution

Full claim activated: Demanding complete 571,000 SC redemption value + interest + costs + fees

Multi-front escalation planned:

Arbitration filing per their Clause 19 (details demanded but refused)

Georgia Attorney General complaint filed (O.C.G.A. § 10-1-393)

FTC Section 5 complaint filed

Atlanta consumer media packet distributed

Seeking legal representation for full enforcement

Preserved Evidence (complete digital package):

[company removed] Sweeps Rules screenshot proving "win Prizes"

KYC verification success confirmation

600k SC win transaction record

Gameplay screen recording (600k→571k)

Redemption pending interface

Full email correspondence (their bad faith stalling)

Georgia IP blocking proof

Site language scrubbing documentation

Legal Position: Their own published rules created enforceable Prize rights. KYC collection + post-dispute blocking + refusal to provide arbitration process = clear liability under contract law, consumer protection statutes, and basic fairness principles.

Antworten von Anwälten

Ascendance International Consulting (A-I-C)

Ascendance International Consulting (A-I-C)

Jan 14, 2026




The user accessed a sub‑domain of a company that duplicated the main site’s branding, functionality, and “Sweeps Rules.” Those rules (Section 3) promised free Sweepstakes Coins (SC) that could be used to play sweep‑stake games and win prizes, with no indication that the site was merely a test environment. After completing full KYC verification, the user won 600,000 SC, continued legitimate gameplay, and ended with a balance of 571,000 SC, submitting a redemption request that showed a “pending” status. The company later claimed the activity occurred in a “testing environment,” voided the winnings, delayed the promised 1‑3‑day payout for over 72 hours, blocked the user’s Georgia IP, locked the verified account, and altered the landing‑page language—all while refusing to disclose the arbitration process required by its Clause 19.




The user has responded with a $250,000 settlement offer (preserving full rights), cited violations of Georgia’s Fair Business Practices Act, and demanded arbitration details, which the company denied. With the settlement offer now expired, the user seeks full enforcement of the 571,000 SC value plus interest, costs, and fees, planning multi‑front escalation: filing arbitration under Clause 19, filing a complaint with the Georgia Attorney General (O.C.G.A. § 10‑1‑393), a FTC Section 5 complaint, and distributing evidence to Atlanta consumer media. The preserved evidence includes screenshots of the Sweeps Rules, KYC confirmation, transaction records, gameplay recordings, redemption interface, email correspondence, IP‑blocked proof, and before/after landing‑page screenshots. Legally, the company’s published rules create enforceable prize rights; its KYC collection, post‑dispute blocking, and refusal to provide arbitration details constitute clear liability under contract law and consumer‑protection statutes.






 

 

Sincerely,

Ascendence International Consulting


KOSTENLOSE FRAGE STELLEN

Kostenlos • Anonym • Experten-Anwälte

Persönliche Rechtshilfe benötigt?

Verbinden Sie sich mit erfahrenen Anwälten in Ihrer Region für persönliche Beratung zu Ihrer spezifischen Situation.

Kostenlos und unverbindlich.