Vegas 7 problem

[Macgyver]

Suppose we agree that a casino can confiscate winnings and return the original deposit because a player tried to withdraw before meeting the WR. What about players who don't meet the WR but try to cash out when their remaining balance is less than they originally deposited? Would they get their original deposit back in full? I think not. I doubt any casino would be willing to do this, nor do I think any player would expect them to. I wouldn't even expect them to honour a cashout of less than the deposit if the WR hadn't been met.

There are two problems with this:

1. A common (all too common, it seems, and very frustrating to me) misconception is that when accepting a bonus, the player plays with the bonus money FIRST. In fact, with the exception of very few casinos like Intercasino, the player plays with his or her DEPOSIT first. Therefore, the player has lost their deposit and is actually trying to withdraw the bonus money (their "remaining balance", as it was put).

2. What's to stop a player from constantly withdrawing (and wasting the casino's time) if all the casino does is simply return the amount back to the player? Not to mention the wasted resources of having to discover once again that the WR aren't met and manually put the money back into the player's account, but maybe one time the withdrawal slips through the cracks, goes through, and the player has pulled one over on the casino.

Just as we hold the casinos to, we have to hold the players to the T&C they signed under when they took the bonus. It's a "contract", folks, and both sides have to hold up their ends of it.

[rreevy]

In fact, with the exception of very few casinos like Intercasino, the player plays with his or her DEPOSIT first. Therefore, the player has lost their deposit and is actually trying to withdraw the bonus money (their "remaining balance", as it was put).

That's true. What I was arguing is that no withdrawals AT ALL should be processed until the WR is met, regardless of whether the player has a balance less than they originally deposited, a huge win on top of the deposit and bonus, or anything in between.

What's to stop a player from constantly withdrawing (and wasting the casino's time) if all the casino does is simply return the amount back to the player? Not to mention the wasted resources of having to discover once again that the WR aren't met and manually put the money back into the player's account, but maybe one time the withdrawal slips through the cracks, goes through, and the player has pulled one over on the casino.

That's a good point. I somehow imagined that the returning of funds to a player's account when they haven't met the WR was automatic - it would be easy to automate after all. This would mean no manual administration for the process, and also prevent any withdrawals 'slipping through the cracks'. Of course if the player repeatedly tries to withdraw (is this likely, if the know they'll never see their money this way?) then the casino would have justification for returning the deposit and voiding play.

But I think, where a player makes the mistake just once of trying to withdraw without having quite met the WR, the casino ought to give them at least one more chance. It's not an unforeseeable error and I think a first mistake with this should be forgiven.

[silcnlayc]

I somehow imagined that the returning of funds to a player's account when they haven't met the WR was automatic - it would be easy to automate after all

So what is the point of having T&C's and wagering requirements if you expect your money back after a nite of fun and frolic but don't want to follow thier rules? If you haven't met the requirements, you DON"T GET PAID or a REFUND!

don't need to confiscate winnings if players try to withdraw before meeting the WR.

There are NO WINNINGS if they haven't met the requirements so what is it they are trying to withdraw????

In fact, with the exception of very few casinos like Intercasino, the player plays with his or her DEPOSIT first. Therefore, the player has lost their deposit and is actually trying to withdraw the bonus money (their "remaining balance", as it was put).

Very well put!

[Vesuvio]

So what is the point of having T&C's and wagering requirements if you expect your money back after a nite of fun and frolic but don't want to follow thier rules? If you haven't met the requirements, you DON"T GET PAID or a REFUND!

Silcnlayc, you're taken this thread off on a bit of a wild tangent. The one certainty here is that when they talk about a "flagrant breach" of their terms and conditions the casino haven't got withdrawing before meeting the wr in mind! That's a minor issue that happens all the time (inevitably, given the uselessness of Playcheck & the lack of any wagering indication on the MGs not using the new bonus system).

What they do have in mind is anyone's guess, for now.

[murdock]

Silcnlayc, you're taken this thread off on a bit of a wild tangent. The one certainty here is that when they talk about a "flagrant breach" of their terms and conditions the casino haven't got withdrawing before meeting the wr in mind! That's a minor issue that happens all the time (inevitably, given the uselessness of Playcheck & the lack of any wagering indication on the MGs not using the new bonus system).

What they do have in mind is anyone's guess, for now.

I don't know if my post was skimmed past, but I definately (100% sure) met the wagering associated with the signup bonus, playing slots only and have been subject to £2500 being confiscated for a supposed flagrant breach.

[rreevy]

So what is the point of having T&C's and wagering requirements if you expect your money back after a nite of fun and frolic but don't want to follow thier rules? If you haven't met the requirements, you DON"T GET PAID or a REFUND!

I am not disputing this. I'm saying players shouldn't expect their money back, nor should they expect to be able to cash out before meeting the WR. But I don't see why funds should be confiscated if someone tries to withdraw before meeting the WR. Just cancel the withdrawal and say 'no, you haven't met the WR, you can't withdraw yet'. Confiscating funds for this is unfair, at least on the first occasion. I don't think it's a question of players not wanting to follow the rules: I'm talking about when, as in this case, the player simply makes a mistake about how much they have wagered.

There are NO WINNINGS if they haven't met the requirements so what is it they are trying to withdraw????

Not winnings that they are yet entitled to. They can keep them if they still have them left when they finally DO meet the WR.

But I don't see the logic of saying that there are no winnings. Let's say a player deposits $100, gets $100 free and has nearly met the WR. Which would you rather, having $500 in your account at this stage or $50? Just because you're not entitled to cash out your winnings at this stage doesn't mean there are no winnings.

That said, the casino should behave the same either way. Cancel the withdrawal, return the funds to the player's account and tell them to finish the WR. If they persist in trying to cash out, then confiscation of funds would be understandable.

[silcnlayc]

Rusty states: Of course I am going to take a first deposit bonus if it is offered and I always try to make a small cashout with a new casino

From his own lips. A bonus hunter that got caught is all it is IMO and thats why the rules (T&C"s) keep getting more ridiculous.

Silcnlayc, you're taken this thread off on a bit of a wild tangent

Sorry you feel this way , but I get so tired of hearing players cry wolf when they admit in writing that they hit and run and then expect a free ride when they get caught such as Rusty states above.

That's a minor issue that happens all the time (inevitably, given the uselessness of Playcheck & the lack of any wagering indication on the MGs not using the new bonus system).

Thats why they have phone numbers and e-mails...in case they do have lousy systems of tracking play for you to call and ask and keep a log of thier responses.

Of course, it was his first try at this casino (for he admits he looks for signup bonuses) in trying to avoid meeting the T&C's because it was his first deposit and thinking if he hollers loud enough, he will be forgiven his minor indescretion and be paid in full, but he failed to realize that some of the players that have been paid off in minor incidents such as this were mostly long time loyal players.

[Rusty]

Rusty states: Of course I am going to take a first deposit bonus if it is offered and I always try to make a small cashout with a new casino

From his own lips. A bonus hunter that got caught is all it is IMO and thats why the rules (T&C"s) keep getting more ridiculous.


I am amazed that you think that the above statement is an admition that I am a bonus hunter.
Before playing at Vegas 7 I have played at several casinos and poker rooms over the Years and made many deposits without receiving any bonus at them even though I have always been aware of bonus offers elsewhere.Even after this event I have been offered a bonus at a casino I play regularly but I did not take it as it limited me to playing certain slots that I am not over keen on.I gamble for entertainment and any wins are an unexpected BONUS.
Every now and again I will try a few new Casinos and if there is a first deposit bonus on offer then yes I take it.When I say I make a small cashout at a new casino it is to find out if they pay in a timely manner.This is true whether or not I have taken a bonus.
This seems like a sensible approach to take.
The very fact that you have decided this makes me a bonus abuser certainly makes it clear where your loyalties lie in these matters.
Also as I have previously stated why not make it impossible to cashout before the wagering requirements have been met it would save a lot of hassle.
As I have already mentioned a better bonus system would be a % of your first deposit back should you lose it all. But maybe just maybe this doesnt have the same wow factor as "Free $750 here!" (and other BS promos)
All in all I have spent tens of thousands of pounds on gambling and lining the pockets of those who provide the entertainment but as soon as I make one small mistake and try to withdraw $50 before unknowingly not meeting the T&Cs I am treated like a villain.Pathetic!

Each day I am enlightened, probably because I never get any wiser

[rreevy]

thinking if he hollers loud enough, he will be forgiven his minor indescretion and be paid in full

I don't think anyone is asking that he be paid in full until he meets the WR. Just that his balance be returned to his account so that he can meet the outstanding WR.

[silcnlayc]

Before playing at Vegas 7 I have played at several casinos and poker rooms over the Years and made many deposits without receiving any bonus at them even though I have always been aware of bonus offers elsewhere.Even after this event I have been offered a bonus at a casino I play regularly but I did not take it as it limited me to playing certain slots

as does all bonuses taken.

I make one small mistake and try to withdraw $50 before unknowingly not meeting the T&Cs

Reason for the T&C's. Odd that you wouldn't take a bonus at your usual stomping grounds and opt to take one at new ones...

Enough said by me...Wish you luck in all your travels through the world of online gambling and the ever changing T&C's.