RESOLVED: PlayMaison & 888 Group LLC Dispute

[888GROUPLLC]

ALERT — PlayMaison / play maison | Unpaid CPA €3,230 | No Response 15 Days

Company: PlayMaison (partners.play.maison)
Brands: Spinaura, TikiTaka, Cazeus

---

We (888 GROUP LLC) are filing a formal dispute complaint against PlayMaison and play maison affiliate program. Reps are refusing to pay €3,230 in earned CPA commissions. Zero response for 15 days after a written promise to resolve by February 20, 2026.

---

THE FACTS:

Nov 26, 2025 — Deal agreed. "No KPI" written directly by PlayMaison's own affiliate manager in our shared Telegram group.
Dec 7 — Traffic launched (Facebook Ads → Telegram funnel). PlayMaison replied: "Perfect, thank you!"
Dec 26 — December payout requested. PlayMaison: "December will be paid in January."
Jan 5 — January traffic continuation notified to PlayMaison. Zero objection received.
Jan 22 — PlayMaison finance team confirmed: "Payment will proceed Monday."
Jan 26 — December PAID via TRON. Same traffic. Same source. No issues raised.
Feb 17 — January payment REFUSED. First-ever accusations appear: "fraud traffic", "no quality", "unauthorized launch."

Every accusation appeared for the first time AFTER payment was requested — after 2 months of silence.

---

PLAYMAISON'S OWN DASHBOARD STATS:

- 516 registrations
- 23 deposits
- €3,230+ owed

Same funnel with another program = 83% Deposit-OAS 30D. The traffic was real and quality.

---

LAST COMMUNICATIONS:

- Feb 18 — We demanded proof of fraud (player IDs, detection tool, specific behavior flagged). No answer.
- Feb 19 — Formal final warning issued. No answer.
- Feb 20 — PlayMaison stated: "Management will be back by Wednesday." Wednesday came. Nothing.
- Feb 25, 26, 27 — Multiple follow-ups. Complete silence.
- Mar 2, Mar 7 — Still nothing.

15 days. Zero response. Zero payment. Zero explanation.

---

WHAT WE ASKED — NEVER ANSWERED:

→ Which player IDs are flagged as fraudulent?
→ What fraud detection tool was used?
→ What specific behavior triggered the fraud flag?

PlayMaison / play maison never answered a single one of these questions.

---

CONCLUSION:

PlayMaison paid December with identical traffic, then refused January using retroactive accusations that appeared only after payment was requested.

We are publishing this on every affiliate forum, iGaming community, and Telegram group until PlayMaison pays what they owe.

PlayMaison owes 888 GROUP LLC €3,230. They know it.

For questions or if you have had a similar experience with PlayMaison or play maison:
Telegram: @aeth777

— 888 GROUP LLC

 

[eenzoo]

And you try to inpersonate as 888(.com) or EVOKE or you just try to get/steal some trust, profit or other benefits while incorporate as "888 GROUP LLC"?

 

[888GROUPLLC]

And you try to inpersonate as 888(.com) or EVOKE or you just try to get/steal some trust, profit or other benefits while incorporate as "888 GROUP LLC"?

Hi,

No impersonation whatsoever. 888 GROUP LLC is our legally registered company name — it has nothing to do with 888.com, Evoke, or any other entity.

The Telegram screenshot below shows exactly who we are: a affiliate operation that agreed a CPA deal directly with PlayMaison, delivered 516 registrations and 23 deposits, got paid for December, and was refused payment for January with zero documented justification.

Our company name is irrelevant to the facts of this case. What is relevant is that PlayMaison agreed "No KPI" in writing, paid December with the same traffic, then went completely silent for 15+ days after promising a resolution by February 20th.

Focus on the evidence, not the company name.

— 888 GROUP LLC | Telegram: @aeth777

 

[888GROUPLLC]

They were supposed to get back to us three days after February 20, as she mentioned. Since then, we have received absolutely no response from them — complete silence.


For transparency, we have also published a website containing all the evidence and information that you can review.
You simply need to remove the space after the “.com” to access it.

---->>. playmaison.pazza-idea .com

----

----

 

[eenzoo]

我非常討厭違反業界規則的人。

And you are not able to write in English? Use Deepl?!

 

[eenzoo]

And whats the point now? If you read the forum rules you will find out, AGD gives not longer gives support in case of problems with CPA-only deals. Funny guys you are ... 888 Group LLC

Whats the next business idea? Porsche Group LLC to sell cars?

 

[MissExposé]

Hello @888GROUPLLC, as mention above by @eenzoo, we do not mediate in CPA, Hybrid etc deals, but what we can and will do is to notify the representatives about your complaint.
Please check your PM.

 

[888GROUPLLC]

Hello @888GROUPLLC, as mention above by @eenzoo, we do not mediate in CPA, Hybrid etc deals, but what we can and will do is to notify the representatives about your complaint.
Please check your PM.

I answer you please check

 

[Play Maison]

Dear Affiliate Guard Dog users and team,

We would like to address the unfounded accusations published in this thread, as they are misleading, incomplete, and omit critical facts.

1. Terms were clear from the start — incentivized traffic is NOT paid​

From the very beginning of our cooperation, our affiliate manager explicitly stated that incentivized traffic is not eligible for payment. These terms were acknowledged and accepted by the counterparty’s team.

2. Traffic quality raised multiple red flags​

• ~20,000 clicks lead to only 30 deposits
• Counterparty could not explain the origin of ~20000 clicks; they changed their versions of events throughout our communication
• There was only 1 redeposit out of 30 FTDs
• No players logged into accounts after the first playing session

We pre-approved the following funnel for that traffic flow: Facebook —> Telegram —> Casino. At the same time, traffic acquisition statistics didn’t match actual economics. Facebook traffic in Tier-1 GEOs costs €2–€4 per click. With that volume of clicks, the claimed payout would have been 25 times lower than the cost of the clicks alone, which is economically irrational.

These inconsistencies justified a deeper verification.

3. Counterparty refused to provide ANY proof of their funnel​

We requested any verification materials, such as Facebook ad screenshots, used creatives, links to Telegram groups / channels, or / and funnel structure. At first, the team agreed to provide the data. Later, they categorically refused to show any proof.

4. Independent partner feedback confirmed our concerns​

The counterparty suggested that we check their reputation with “their top partners” (they mentioned a couple of casino names). Since those companies are our long-term partners, we contacted them for clarification. The head of affiliates of the first of them stated that he has no knowledge of 888 Group LLC at all, he only asked if they have any relation with 888 partners.

The second advertiser confirmed that there had been prior cooperation. After reviewing the funnel structure at the time, they classified the traffic as incentivized and therefore not eligible under their terms. Precise similarities in statistical patterns compared to the current case were observed. The adveritiser revealed the Telegram group shared by the counterparty during the dispute. The group predominantly contained heavily incentivized posts, promoting schemes such as depositing €40 to secure a guaranteed minimum payout of €500, along with similar misleading offers.

This directly aligns with what we observed on our side.

5. Reasons for payment​

The only point that the counterparty provided to us to justify their payment request was “You paid us for 2 FTDs last month, so you must pay now”. Since the counterparty seems to have low awareness of the standard traffic assessment procedures in the market, we had to emphasize the following:

-Initial small payouts do not validate future traffic quality;
-Each batch of traffic is subject to independent verification;
-Once fraud / incentivized patterns are detected, payments are rightfully withheld.

By categorical refusal to provide any details on the funnel, the counterparty prevented proper traffic verification, and blocked any possibility of resolving the situation constructively.

6. ESCALATION TO THREATS AND INTIMIDATION​

Instead of resolving the matter professionally, the counterparty’s team escalated to direct threats, references to personal data of our employees and their families, and statements implying danger to their health and life.

Examples include:

-“we have all the precise information about you and your relatives…”
-“you will never forget what will happen”, “be ready”
-sending screenshots of personal accounts with threatening captions like “I hope *names of relatives* are well"

Threatening communications were sent both via official work channels and through fake accounts. They contacted our employees not only in the work chat but also targeted their private accounts and personal profiles across multiple social platforms. The most severe threats were delivered directly to employees’ personal accounts, clearly intended to demonstrate their ability to obtain and leverage personal information for intimidation purposes.

By this, the counterparty shifted communication from an affiliate dispute to criminal intimidation.

Despite attempts to remain anonymous, the individuals involved have been identified. All criminal communications have been fully documented, preserved in accordance with legal standards, and prepared for submission to law enforcement in the UAE and France, where the counterparty’s team members reside.

7. Summary​

• Traffic was not compliant with the pre-agreed terms
• Multiple indicators red-flagged traffic as incentivized
• Counterparty didn’t manage to explain the origin of the anomalously high number of clicks, got tangled in their own argumentation, and in the end showed a radical refusal to provide any details about traffic
• Independent partner confirmed similar issues
• Counterparty started to send threats directed at of our employees and their families
  

We strongly advise market participants to exercise high caution when dealing with 888 Group LLC.

Play Maison remains open to working with transparent, professional partners and maintains a strong reputation earned over years of high-quality market presence and a rich, verifiable track record.

 

[Gatto]

Thank you for the detailed response and appreciate the manner it is publically addressed.

 

[TomRocks]

Hey colleagues.

I am joining this discussion as the Head of Affiliates at Rocks.Partners, as I am familiar with both sides and believe it is important to bring objectivity to the conversation.

From our side, I would like to confirm that PlayMaison has been our partner for over a year and a half and consistently ranks among the top 10 partners in our program. Throughout our cooperation, the team has proven to be a highly professional and reliable market player, with well-structured processes and a balanced approach to working with both operators and webmasters.

I would also like to highlight an important point: in cases where disputes arose regarding traffic quality (including potential fraud or incentivized traffic), PlayMaison consistently took a constructive stance and made decisions based on the provided evidence - including ruling in favor of operators when risks were confirmed.

Regarding our cooperation with 888GROUPLLC, unfortunately, we can provide a clear and unambiguous assessment.

From our side:
• In November, 1 out of 2 players was paid, while the second was rejected by the platform as fraud.
• In December, both referred players were not paid due to consistent red flags identified by anti-fraud systems.

This is not a subjective assessment, but rather a conclusion based on a combination of signals: behavioral patterns, anomalous deposit scenarios, and internal platform anti-fraud metrics.

We identified these risks in a timely manner and discontinued the cooperation. In this case, it is not about “low-quality traffic,” but rather clear indicators of a fraudulent model. Based on our experience, such cases typically follow a similar pattern: at the initial stage, traffic may appear as low-quality or underperforming, but as data accumulates, it systematically reveals itself as fraud or incentivized traffic.

Considering our experience working with both parties, we fully support PlayMaison position in this case.

We would recommend that 888GROUPLLC reassess their approach to traffic sourcing and transparency in partner relations. Pressure or threats in such situations are not a constructive communication model and only reinforce concerns regarding the legitimacy of the traffic.​

 

[eenzoo]

Some of the AM's reading this, should share this conversation in its TG groups.
Absolutely unexaptable.