Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thelawnet
Yes it costs money for the casino not to enforce every clause and subclause to their letter, but through such decisions reputations are built.
|
I agree... Yes, it seems the player didn't adhere to the T&C's exactly, but it's exactly as has been mentioned before. Any casino that includes these clauses would be on my steer clear list. By all means ensure additional wagering requirements or whatever, but to confiscate all winnings is just - well - a bit rubbish and not what I'd want from a casino.
I never read T&C's nearly as thoroughly as I should, but then again I only play at outfits I know won't try and trip me up the minute I click on a game that, in their opinion, I shouldn't.
Just another example of why bonuses should be awarded to loyal, proven players - with no strings... This stupid scenario we have online is absurd, and serious ammunition for the H.R 4777 supporters. Let's face it, without the knowledge a lot of us have of this online business, on the surface this looks like yet another example of why it's all bad...
32RED plopped a bonus in my account recently to say 'congratulations' for something that happened in my life a few weeks ago. It said on the message, and I quote, "It's yours to cash out and buy something for the family, or spin and win - it's up to you!"... and people wonder why for a lot of online players - they're becoming almost exclusive.
In summary - the guy didn't follow the T&C's, and hence probably deserves what's happened. In reality, and looking at the bigger picture, this makes the casino look bad. End of story...
Be interested to see the casino's response/opinion on this one!