resolved

[supergod]

Scammer's profile link: RuneHall CheapGP
Amount scammed: 22690m
Discord ID + Unique Discord ID: runehall 1060031568695021578 _cheapgp_ 1075129188220162050
Proof that it's their Discord: Screen capture - 55aa33667baf48ecabf8240e60c194af - Gyazo Screen capture - 1381fb77e3973a537571813375dd7d22 - Gyazo
Explanation of the trade: I bought 17724m from CheapGP on runehall and have won alot that i cannot withdraw now
How they scammed: The withdrawal option has been disabled on my account and now i have nothing
Other relevant trade screenshots: Screenshot - 0db6ed16a4e6a24609498ba72a39d27f - Gyazo Watch 2025-05-11 23-28-59 | Streamable

 

[RuneHall]

Dear Sythe Staff

The user’s account is currently limited due to serious concerns around multi-accounting, which constitutes a direct violation of RuneHall’s Terms and Conditions. These limitations were placed after internal checks and external flags by our sports provider’s compliance and fraud team.


Relevant clause from our Terms & Conditions:

“PERSONAL USE. The Service is intended solely for the User’s personal use. The User is only allowed to wager for his/her personal entertainment. Users may not create multiple accounts for the purpose of collusion, sports betting and/or abuse of service. The attempt to manipulate your IP address through the use of VPN, proxy, or similar services is prohibited. Without prejudice to any other rights, if a User breaches in whole or in part any provision contained herein, RuneHall reserves the right to take such action as it sees fit.”


Timeline of Events:

• Internal systems flagged multiple accounts being accessed from the same IP address — a violation of our Terms.

• Simultaneously, our external sports provider’s fraud and compliance team flagged the same account due to suspicious behavior and limited it on their end.

• Based on these triggers, we applied temporary restrictions on the user’s account and funds while a full investigation is carried out.

• The user was asked to provide verification and basic information to assist the investigation, but has so far declined to cooperate. c91726041c753d4555c9fb0dd0c34cab — Postimages

As a result, the account remains under review, and withdrawals have been disabled pending the outcome. Cooperation from him is required to proceed. This is standard procedure for fraud-related investigations and fully aligned with our Terms and Conditions.

If Sythe staff would like any evidence or further details, we will gladly provide everything we have.


Kind regards, RH
(RuneHall)

 

Dear Sythe Staff

The user’s account is currently limited due to serious concerns around multi-accounting, which constitutes a direct violation of RuneHall’s Terms and Conditions. These limitations were placed after internal checks and external flags by our sports provider’s compliance and fraud team.


Relevant clause from our Terms & Conditions:

“PERSONAL USE. The Service is intended solely for the User’s personal use. The User is only allowed to wager for his/her personal entertainment. Users may not create multiple accounts for the purpose of collusion, sports betting and/or abuse of service. The attempt to manipulate your IP address through the use of VPN, proxy, or similar services is prohibited. Without prejudice to any other rights, if a User breaches in whole or in part any provision contained herein, RuneHall reserves the right to take such action as it sees fit.”


Timeline of Events:

• Internal systems flagged multiple accounts being accessed from the same IP address — a violation of our Terms.

• Simultaneously, our external sports provider’s fraud and compliance team flagged the same account due to suspicious behavior and limited it on their end.

• Based on these triggers, we applied temporary restrictions on the user’s account and funds while a full investigation is carried out.

• The user was asked to provide verification and basic information to assist the investigation, but has so far declined to cooperate. c91726041c753d4555c9fb0dd0c34cab — Postimages

As a result, the account remains under review, and withdrawals have been disabled pending the outcome. Cooperation from him is required to proceed. This is standard procedure for fraud-related investigations and fully aligned with our Terms and Conditions.

If Sythe staff would like any evidence or further details, we will gladly provide everything we have.


Kind regards, RH
(RuneHall)

What did they do that was suspicious? How did they collude or abuse the service?

 

[RuneHall]

Hello,

the suspicious activity is described in my original post: several accounts accessed from the same residential IP and placing identical bets, which triggered both our internal system and our sportsbook’s fraud team.

Are you looking for specific evidence? If so, could you let me know exactly what you need? I’m happy to provide any logs or screenshots.


Thanks, RH

 

Hello,

the suspicious activity is described in my original post: several accounts accessed from the same residential IP and placing identical bets, which triggered both our internal system and our sportsbook’s fraud team.

Are you looking for specific evidence? If so, could you let me know exactly what you need? I’m happy to provide any logs or screenshots.


Thanks, RH

Hello, that isn't sufficient to prolong withholding the account. I'm only looking for evidence that would suggest there was malicious activity/unfair gaming.

 

[RuneHall]

Hello Techie,


Just to clarify, the user’s balance is only on hold pending completion of an active investigation. It’s not confiscated. The user has been asked to provide basic verification and account disclosures, which they’ve declined so far.

This isn’t based on a hunch, the account was flagged by both our internal systems and our sports provider’s compliance team. Until both sides are satisfied, restrictions remain in place.

To be clear, the amount involved here is not significant to RuneHall. We regularly pay out thousands every day, as our users can confirm. It’s definitely not about the money; we’re happy to payout once compliance is met.

Fairness matters greatly to us, but it has to apply equally to all players and the platform itself. It means protecting our platform and players from abuse. What’s at stake here is more than one user’s withdrawal it’s the integrity of the entire system and whether the rules are applied fairly to all.

If the user has nothing to hide, following the rules they agreed to on signup shouldn’t be an issue. Once everything checks out, the balance will be released.


Thanks,
RH

 

Hello Techie,


Just to clarify, the user’s balance is only on hold pending completion of an active investigation. It’s not confiscated. The user has been asked to provide basic verification and account disclosures, which they’ve declined so far.

This isn’t based on a hunch, the account was flagged by both our internal systems and our sports provider’s compliance team. Until both sides are satisfied, restrictions remain in place.

To be clear, the amount involved here is not significant to RuneHall. We regularly pay out thousands every day, as our users can confirm. It’s definitely not about the money; we’re happy to payout once compliance is met.

Fairness matters greatly to us, but it has to apply equally to all players and the platform itself. It means protecting our platform and players from abuse. What’s at stake here is more than one user’s withdrawal it’s the integrity of the entire system and whether the rules are applied fairly to all.

If the user has nothing to hide, following the rules they agreed to on signup shouldn’t be an issue. Once everything checks out, the balance will be released.


Thanks,
RH

From what's been presented, I don't see any violation of the agreement thus their compliance isn't required. Please release the funds to the user unless there is sufficient evidence suggesting otherwise.

 

[RuneHall]

Investigation Update

As we mentioned earlier, there has been an ongoing investigation into this matter. Based on what we’ve found so far, the user’s account is directly linked to a broader fraud case involving multiple users engaged in collusion, tip funneling, abuse of sports betting, and attempts to hide the movement of funds through staged duels with linked accounts. This is documented in an internal report, and we’re happy to share relevant portions of it if needed.

So far, the following red flags and violations have been identified:

● Account was less than 24 hours old at time of betting

● Bets placed through proxy IPs and known datacenter/server IP ranges, masking true location and identity

● Multi-accounting behavior matching others in the active case

● Immediate access to sports betting with no prior gameplay

● Pattern suspected to be consistent with exploitation of mispriced odds — a known abuse vector, often accompanied by playing random games to generate misleading activity logs and conceal the true source of profits

● Flagged independently by our sports provider’s compliance team, who monitor this behavior across many platforms

There seems to be some confusion around why multi-accounting is such a big issue, so here’s a quick clarification. Multi-accounting makes it much harder to detect fraud, helps users get around limits, and gives an unfair edge—especially in sports betting, where your identity, betting history, and patterns matter a lot. When you mix that with proxies and fast, high-risk activity, it becomes a serious concern not just for us, but for the provider and every other platform they support.

Multi-accounting in online casinos can also facilitate money laundering and other illicit schemes—via purchased or hacked accounts—and thus represents a red flag not just under our policy, but under federal law. This is especially true when coupled with attempted high cash-outs and strange or erratic play patterns.

According to our provider, the estimated fraud rate this month alone is 5.68%, with a rolling 12-month average of 7.16%. This highlights just how widespread and serious these issues have become across the network. Please also review the attached screenshots which support this data. We’re also happy to share them privately if needed, as they are pulled from a sensitive internal dashboard.

The current restrictions will remain in place. We are open to releasing the balance once the user fully complies with verification. However, the connections to the ongoing case and confirmed violations justify our current actions entirely.

We’d also like to point out that in a previous case, Techie, the very same Sythe moderator currently reviewing this matter, stated the following regarding Binance freezing funds:

"Considering the logs provided and previous report regarding this situation, this was up to the Binance platform which believes that the funds were not lawfully possessed. @GamzrRokov If you'd like to seek resolution, I'd recommend taking it up with Binance themselves as we do not have jurisdiction over them. As @Zora stated previously." (Chicks/Binance dispute)

We respectfully ask that the same logic be applied here. Just as Sythe cannot force Binance to unfreeze funds during an AML review, we believe the same respect should be extended to us. We are simply following the same principles of fraud prevention and compliance. We should not be treated differently for enforcing policies that align with what Sythe has previously recognized as valid.



RuneHall

 

Investigation Update

As we mentioned earlier, there has been an ongoing investigation into this matter. Based on what we’ve found so far, the user’s account is directly linked to a broader fraud case involving multiple users engaged in collusion, tip funneling, abuse of sports betting, and attempts to hide the movement of funds through staged duels with linked accounts. This is documented in an internal report, and we’re happy to share relevant portions of it if needed.

So far, the following red flags and violations have been identified:

● Account was less than 24 hours old at time of betting

● Bets placed through proxy IPs and known datacenter/server IP ranges, masking true location and identity

● Multi-accounting behavior matching others in the active case

● Immediate access to sports betting with no prior gameplay

● Pattern suspected to be consistent with exploitation of mispriced odds — a known abuse vector, often accompanied by playing random games to generate misleading activity logs and conceal the true source of profits

● Flagged independently by our sports provider’s compliance team, who monitor this behavior across many platforms

There seems to be some confusion around why multi-accounting is such a big issue, so here’s a quick clarification. Multi-accounting makes it much harder to detect fraud, helps users get around limits, and gives an unfair edge—especially in sports betting, where your identity, betting history, and patterns matter a lot. When you mix that with proxies and fast, high-risk activity, it becomes a serious concern not just for us, but for the provider and every other platform they support.

Multi-accounting in online casinos can also facilitate money laundering and other illicit schemes—via purchased or hacked accounts—and thus represents a red flag not just under our policy, but under federal law. This is especially true when coupled with attempted high cash-outs and strange or erratic play patterns.

According to our provider, the estimated fraud rate this month alone is 5.68%, with a rolling 12-month average of 7.16%. This highlights just how widespread and serious these issues have become across the network. Please also review the attached screenshots which support this data. We’re also happy to share them privately if needed, as they are pulled from a sensitive internal dashboard.

The current restrictions will remain in place. We are open to releasing the balance once the user fully complies with verification. However, the connections to the ongoing case and confirmed violations justify our current actions entirely.

We’d also like to point out that in a previous case, Techie, the very same Sythe moderator currently reviewing this matter, stated the following regarding Binance freezing funds:

"Considering the logs provided and previous report regarding this situation, this was up to the Binance platform which believes that the funds were not lawfully possessed. @GamzrRokov If you'd like to seek resolution, I'd recommend taking it up with Binance themselves as we do not have jurisdiction over them. As @Zora stated previously." (Chicks/Binance dispute)

We respectfully ask that the same logic be applied here. Just as Sythe cannot force Binance to unfreeze funds during an AML review, we believe the same respect should be extended to us. We are simply following the same principles of fraud prevention and compliance. We should not be treated differently for enforcing policies that align with what Sythe has previously recognized as valid.



RuneHall

Please provide evidence of claims and Binance/Chick's case is a very different case than this one. If you want to go that route, feel free to present evidence why that should be considered here.

 

@RuneHall, please post publicly, you can redact sensitive info and report a post on this thread with the uncensored version. Also, ideally upload them as images/videos on imgur.com, gyazo.com, imgbb.com, streamable.com, youtube.com, or postimages.org.

 

[RuneHall]

Sythe Case Evidence


We are providing this evidence as part of our response to the ongoing
Sythe dispute. Our intention is to clearly demonstrate the basis for our
actions, supported by provider-level data, internal investigations, and
verifiable activity patterns. The materials included here aim to show that the
restrictions placed on the account in question are neither arbitrary nor
baseless, but rather part of a broader, well-documented fraud review.


1. Initial Report Findings


The initial report was received directly from our sports betting provider, who
flagged suspicious activity tied to the account in question. These concerns
triggered an internal review.

An alt check conducted through our internal tools confirmed overlapping
user behavior and matching IP addresses. These were consistent with the
data provided by the provider.

1.1 IP Lookup

An IP lookup on the user 'Dzemalas' revealed the same IP address
previously flagged. Notably, one of the IPs was identified as belonging to a
data center, commonly associated with proxy usage or VPN masking.

2. Danius


Danius is directly connected to the ongoing investigation. Evidence shows
that Danius tipped a user named Kikis. The account belonging to Danius
was created on 07/04/2025.

3. Kikis


Kikis is also implicated. The account was created on 07/04/2025, and
analysis of tipping behavior shows that Kikis only sent tips to a single user:
Moxys.

4. Connection to the Ongoing Fraud Case

Attached is a snapshot from the internal fraud report filed in April. Within it,
Moxys is identified alongside other users involved in suspicious activity.
It also shows the internal staff correspondence confirming the timeline.
Notably, there are 25 days between the original report naming Moxys and
the opening of the current Sythe dispute, demonstrating a strong timeline
correlation.

4.1 Additional Report Excerpts

There is more to this report, but we have attached the relevant sections
that pertain to the current case.

5. Provider Fraud Statistics

These figures underscore the scale of fraud activity being monitored across
the network.

May 2025 fraud rate: 5.68%

Rolling 12-month fraud rate: 7.16%

6. Cases of Mispriced Odds

We would also like to highlight a known case where incorrect odds were
reported for a major sporting event. During the Timberwolves vs. Golden
State Warriors game on 11/05/2025, users began flagging an issue where
odds appeared to be swapped or severely distorted. Below is a portion of
the conversation that followed.
During this incident we had to disable sports on the platform

This case stood out due to the popularity of the match, but it reflects a
wider issue seen in the industry where occasional odds discrepancies,
especially in lesser-known leagues, can be exploited if not addressed
quickly. It’s exactly why related betting behavior must be evaluated
cautiously within a broader compliance context.



Best regards,
RuneHall

 

@RuneHall thank you, if there's anything sensitive you'd like to add you may report one of the posts on this thread as well. @supergod do you have anything to say regarding this?

 

Closing this as @RuneHall has provided sufficient evidence of being within reason and @supergod seems to be inactive so we will not move forward with this report.