for send one family member in household gifts their other family member an item must use different devices and not the same ones. using multiple accounts means that he used the same device on different accounts. he did not give me his account so it would be included in the number of multiplayer accounts and he is not sign in sender account for it not would be included in the number of multiplayer accounts. if he did not like the accounts from which he received gifts, he could not add them as friends and not receive them, as well as cancel deal and i will immediately send refund, but he confirmed his readiness to receive gifts and take it. this event was intended for one player to give gifts to another player in form of items. from a technical point of view, this deal looked exactly as it was intended by the developers. recipient paid for these items or received them as a Christmas present from a friend they do not know this thing. among other things senders accounts is active and not banned and has never been banned this means that he did not break the rules and deal was clean and has nothing to do with his banned. there is no my involvement in his ban and how it cannot beAfter researching more, it appears a user wouldn't be banned for gifting items to themselves via multiple accounts, as long as they both were owned and accessed by that one user. It isn't against the rules to gift yourself an item. I.E one family member in the household gifts their other family member an item, there will be no ban.
The ban message states it was both involved in fraudulent activity & multiple account usage to benefit the users account. After looking on the forums it appears they were cracking down on unit/item sellers especially during this gifting event.
At this point, its bigamen's word against MrCrimson's. The best way to resolve this is 50%/50% split as there is no way to prove who got the account banned. Feedback can be changed afterwards.
by rules of the game it is forbidden to have multiplayer accounts, but this rule is not very strict if this is not used to obtain a gaming advantage, as was done in this case.

