Who inside the operator decides

A stop is a decision made by something - an automated rule, a payments analyst or a compliance review - and the clause it cites is chosen from a small set. This page shows the split and what it implies.

Desk spec

automated rule: 231
payments analyst: 96
compliance review: 53
verification clause: 244
payment-name clause: 61
bonus clause: 49

the stateWhat the request is doing. Of 1,800 sampled requests, 1,421 were paid without ever stopping, 380 were held at least once, 260 of those were released and 120 were closed without payment.

the groundThe recorded reason a payment stopped. Across the 380 stops: a document gap 148, a source-of-funds query 96, a rail or name mismatch 61, an alleged term breach 49 and a dependency not settled 26.

the retentionThe one outcome that costs money permanently. Of 742,500.00 requested, 693,412.50 was paid, 41,147.30 returned to balances and 7,940.20 retained, at a mean 214.60 per reclaimed request.

Direct answer

Of 380 sampled stops, an automated rule recorded 231, a payments analyst 96 and a compliance review 53. The clause cited was the verification clause 244 times, the payment-name clause 61, the bonus clause 49 and the settlement clause 26, so most stops are a rule citing a verification term.

The three routes

who recorded the 380 stops
route	stops	share	mean days	released
an automated rule	231	60.8%	5.4	188 (81.4%)
a payments analyst	96	25.3%	9.8	57 (59.4%)
a compliance review	53	13.9%	19.6	15 (28.3%)
all stops	380	100.0%	8.7	260

The direction is clear and worth stating plainly: the further a stop travels from an automated rule, the longer it lasts and the less often it ends in a payment. An automated rule released 81.4% of what it stopped in a mean 5.4 days; a compliance review released 28.3% in a mean 19.6 days.

The clause that is cited

clauses cited against 380 stops the verification clause 244 (the one that allows a check before payment) the payment-name clause 61 (money must go to a destination in the holder name) the bonus clause 49 (a granted credit and its conditions) the settlement clause 26 (a bet or deposit that has not settled) 244 + 61 + 49 + 26 = 380

The verification clause carries two thirds of all stops on its own, which is why a document gap and a source-of-funds query together account for 64.2% of the grounds. A reader who understands only that one clause can account for most of what a stopped payment will ask of them.

What a rule cannot see

An automated rule records what it can measure: whether a document is on file, whether a destination name matches, whether a wagering condition is met. It cannot see that a pay slip is a pay slip, or that a destination is a joint account, so a rule that stops on a mismatch will stop on the good case as often as the bad one. That is exactly why 81.4% of the automated stops released, and why the number is worth knowing when a stop looks arbitrary.

Working out which route stopped you

If the message names a document or a name mismatch with no human signature, it is an automated rule and will usually release.
If the message asks where money came from, it is likely an analyst route and the clock is longer.
If the message quotes a bonus or abuse clause, it is likely a compliance review and releases less often.
Note which clause is cited, because the clause decides which items close the stop.
Remember that a stop by rule is not a judgement about you, since more than four fifths of them release.

The groundsthe deciding reason each route records The appealthe second reviewer that reverses one appeal in three What is keptthe outcome a compliance review reaches most often Legal and risk warningthe limits of this desk