Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Casinomeister
You wagered and won on games that were not to be played with the bonus. It may seem harsh, but that's the way it goes when you play bonus funds on non-playable games. There is no way in hell anyone should be dissing this casino just because they stick by the rules. If they were to say, "okay go ahead - we'll make an exception for you," then everyone and their brother would chime in and say "what about me? I played on the disallowed games as well!" Run a business like that, and you'll be run into the ground.
|
I think that's a bit of an overstatement. People are only suggesting good will could be shown here because the player's obviously going by the terms and conditions that were there a few hours before he started playing. He clearly had no intention of playing disallowed games but got caught out. £8000's a lot to pay for an honest mistake.
A second issue is whether it's reasonable to have an "any play whatsoever on disallowed games voids the bonus" clause. It's debatable, but until recently it's only been rogue or borderline casinos that have had such a term. Any clause that makes it possible to forfeit winnings for a mistake in meeting often complex wagering conditions is a bad thing (especially around the dates casinos change terms). It's sad for the industry to see otherwise reputable casino groups adopting such terms.
Mathematically it's not really justified, either. Any play on disallowed games will cost the player money while not helping to meet the
wr. The argument that you can use the funds to aggressively build up a big balance is negated by the fact you can do that pretty much as well by playing aggressively with the allowed games.
p.s. excuse the repetition as I wrote this before seeing thelawnet's post