|
|||
|
|||||||
| Register | All Albums | Member Blogs | FAQ | Members List | Social Groups | Event Calendar | Mark Forums Read | |
| Main Site | CM Casinos | CM Poker | I-Gaming Forum Reps | Rogue Pit | Webcast | Bitchin' Newsletter | News |
| Casino Complaints - Bonus Issues Complaints concerning bonuses are to be posted here |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| The Following User Says Thank You to Pinababy69 For This Useful Post: | ||
Da_Gambla (27th May 2007) | ||
|
||||
|
Quote:
So what is "Fraud"? As you've stated, who knows, and that's the problem. Oh wait! Josh knows! Quote:
According to his own definition, he cites 2 explicit reasons and leaves the door open for any interpretaion he deems to fall under etc. You're also right that most reasonable people's definition of "fraud" would be caught long before the cashout, so why does Josh holdout for the right to raid a Neteller account after the cashout has been paid? Interesting things he refuses to address. Maybe it's for security reasons? I don't know when other casinos (besides XXLClub) will address this issue in their T&C's. I do know one thing, however... Almost every single type of complaint, whether by player or casino, hits these Forums sooner than later. If Josh's contentions that all vendors can do this chargeback with NT is true, then he is the first one to have abused it. So, this is a new issue and will have to trickle down over the weeks, but in the meantime, Josh pulled the trigger, it's been posted here what he is capable and willing to do, and so the burden is on him to step up and put in writing that it will not occur within his business structure again. We will have to deal with the other casinos as they come up. Hopefully this hole will be plugged by Neteller and this whole discussion will be moot. After it is no longer an issue, Josh's obstinance on this topic will still stand, however. That's the unfortunate part for him. - Keith
__________________
Just for fun, I'm trying out this new sig. Let me know what you think. |
|
|||||
|
RTG saves Neteller security code
When I play at RTG's, my neteller security code is stored. I entered it when I signed up at the casinos, but never since. This, I would imagine, opens the door for rogue operators to remove money from neteller, without having to make a "chargeback". Just do the transaction, pretending to be the customer. I'm sure this wasnt how neteller intended it. I've never heard of this happening though.
__________________
Life's a binge and then you diet |
|
||||
|
Even though i am in US and cant play anymore, I would really love it if somebody with clout like CM or Jetset would present these cases to Neteller and get their official explanation of why they allowed the casino to take back these funds.
I can see casinos trying to do this (i can see it VERY easily,lol), so to me it is way more a Neteller problem.
__________________
paul02085 |
|
||||
|
Quote:
So josh has closed this discussion. Not going to happen josh, the issue is still here. As dg pointed out, etc. can be twisted into anything you like, and as some casinos now get mixed up between advantage play and fraud, then who's to say you won't either? Until you fully accept it was a completed unjust thing to do, and show that by putting it in writing that you shall not ever commit such a crime again, then the issue remains open (The issue will remain open until theres a response from neteller, but the issue involving your casino will diminish). Lets not forget, we (I?) are eagerly awaiting the outcome of the investigation - what was actually said between Prime and neteller to instigate this charegback in the first place. I can't believe that a claim of 'mistaken payment' would be accepted by neteller as a valid reason. |
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Yes, this play is what casinos consider "bonus abuse", however, Bryan has clear rules as to what is expected of an eccredited casino. Unless the single bet play was specifically against the T & C, this alone cannot be used as a reason for non-payment, This leaves the issue of withdrawing early. Jens says she didn't understand that particular term, which she clearly read BEFORE depositing, so there is a clear case of player ineptitude in not getting CS to explain to her what this meant BEFORE withdrawing. Jens is guilty of playing to win with the SUB, rather than lose it playing the games. This is EXACTLY what happened with Fortune Lounge, they confiscated winnings from a number of players that employed this aggressive betting strategy on the SUB, however, Fortune Lounge lost their case for doing this, and were pretty much told to pay players who had not committed actual fraud (multiple accounts, false details etc), so why should Prime be any different? No exception was made for Fortune Lounge, so I don't see why one should be made for Prime. Confiscating winnings is an EXTREME sanction that has become all too common nowdays. Yesterday, I played Blackjack at another MG casino, howeve the dealer hardly ever busted out on 15 or 16, but time and time again got 20 or 21, and I lost hand after hand that I should have won. The deck behaved as though it was a "10 poor" shoe, which is against the "shuffle every hand" rules. Now, this looked to me like "deposit abuse" by the virtual dealer, and normally is treated like "bad luck", with the dealer allowed to keep the winnings. Now, if players started acting more like casinos do when they don't like OUR style of play, we would be making chargebacks (our equivalent of confiscating winnings after the bet was made and accepted) whenever we had a truly unbelievable session, and naturally WE would get to be the judge, jury, and executioner as to what constituted "rigged" as opposed to "unlucky". 5. To say that registering a few days after registration is "ridiculous" is itself ridiculous. Granted, the casinos would rather we deposited immediately, and preferrably lost, but in the real world there ARE many players who register days later. Naturally, given what a "ball-ache" downloading an MG casino is, theyb will read and digest the T & C BEFORE deciding whether they want to play, and this is why it is important for casinos to place expiry dates on terms, such that players can immediately tell how long what they have read is GUARANTEED to be valid for. Promotion Abuse. Here is a case with Fortune Lounge that closely resembles the case of Jens:- I have queried your account and I can confirm the following. The withdrawal that you requested has been cancelled as your casino account has been locked due to promotional abuse. They have advised us that due to suspicious wagering by you on 100 Play Power Poker-Aces and Faces game in particular, the account was closed and will remain closed. Your game play was highly unnatural and improbable for any bona fide player with intent to play with us in future. Similarly, placing all your money on one single bet is also highly unlikely for any serious gambler. For this reason the account has been locked and will remain locked. Highlighted is the exact strategy Jens used on Roulette. The later cashout was a mistake, and against the terms and conditions, however a good casino should give the player the chance to fulfill WR by returning the funds to the account, not use a player oversight as an excuse to void winnings. The advantage play itself is NO EXCUSE for voiding winnings, so in effect, the casino are still of the opinion that should any player make the mistake of withdrawing before WR, despite the problems with the cashier page suggesting this is OK, should be given NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER, but suffer an instant confiscation. Bryan's explanation as to WHY this practice earned a spell in the rogue pit was this:- The problem with the term "promotional abuse" is that it's too subjective. The casino looks at this sort of behavior as abuse - the player looks at this as "beating the house". Don't get me wrong, the casino has every right in the world to pick and chose who their customers are. But once the casino makes the offer, accepts the bet, and the player plays according to the terms and conditions meeting the wagering requirements, then the casino ought to honor the winnings. It's the casino that is responsible for making the rules. If they make mistakes by forgetting to say that making a single bet on Blackjack is not allowed, then it should be allowed. It is not the responsibility of the player to try and guess what the casino considers "abuse". Subjective language has no place in enforcing rules. Casinos can enforce policies by disallowing these players access to the casino, or deny bonuses in the future, but it is unacceptable to garnish winnings after the player has met the wagering requirements of the bonus. We understand that the casino wishes to bring in new players who will remain loyal by them offering bonuses. But the bottom line is that the casino writes the terms for these bonuses, the casino should be expected to write terms that protect it from players they don't want. I understand that during this period, they was a high level of player fraud. But advantage players are not fraudsters - if you are tuna fishing, you don't kill the dolphines in the tuna net. Advantage players, avoid these casinos at all costs. This leaves as the ONLY justification for voiding Jens' winnings the fact that she withdrew before completing the full WR in the mistaken belief that EZBonus works the same in every casino, allowing this to blind her to the possibility that some casinos may intend otherwise. Bryan goes on to say how casinos should be reacting to "abusive" play:- Quote:
If Prime wish to continue to confiscate winnings when players slip up, they should not feel hurt when their own slipups are met with such "draconian" action by forum members - it works both ways.
__________________
Full Fruity ahoy capt'n ![]() Boarding party at the ready. ATTACK!!!!!! |
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to vinylweatherman For This Useful Post: | ||
|
||||
|
VWM!
![]() Really valid argument. I'm afraid that since this issue was interjected into a very crowded thread, I did not, and still don't know exactly what specific T&C TravelMaxx violated to the degree of being stripped of the winnings. Was the only wrong move the cashout attempt? So if TM had moved on to another game that counted towards WR, completed the WR and then cashed out, would they have been stripped of the winnings? I'd like to know the specific T&C, because I've gone back and skimmed over the relevant threads and cannot see it anywhere. I might suggest that TravelMaxx file an official PAB with Bryan at this point, as instead of being denied the winnings, maybe all they deserved was being banned from the casino as an "undesireable" player. From what VWM has quoted from Bryan in the past, there is argument here that Jens was simply an advantage player with no fraud involved. - Keith Quote:
__________________
Just for fun, I'm trying out this new sig. Let me know what you think. |
| The Following User Says Thank You to Da_Gambla For This Useful Post: | ||
PrimeCasino (29th May 2007) | ||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Attn: New Members! Make sure to check out the "Casinomeister Accredited Casinos" and the "Spot The Rogue" section of the main site here before jumping into "Online Casinos" with no information or knowledge behind you! |
| The Following User Says Thank You to Pinababy69 For This Useful Post: | ||
PrimeCasino (29th May 2007) | ||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Or does someone see a benefit in this new possibility? I think this is also the reason why we (I) never heard about this before. |
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| The War Against Online Gambling | Rollo | Casino Industry Discussion | 29 | 25th October 2008 04:26 AM |
| Londons Casino did not pay for over 90 days ($5,500) because they trying to for Sale | kumlim911 | Casino Complaints - Non-Bonus Issues | 13 | 4th October 2007 05:11 AM |
| Londons Casino did not pay for over 90 days ($5,500). They are trying for Sale | kumlim911 | Casino Complaints - Non-Bonus Issues | 2 | 3rd March 2007 03:39 PM |
| Anyone here run their own online casino? | mbcobretti | Online Casinos | 16 | 10th January 2007 05:57 PM |
Casinomeister is proud to present the following quality portals
Online Slots Guide |
Online Casinos | GoneGambling | Online Casino Reviews
| Wizard of Odds | Games and Casino | Online Poker Rooms | BetOnCharity | Online Slots |
Online Casino Reviews
Legal Statements and Privacy Policy
Casinomeister.com does not intend for any of the information contained on this website to be used for illegal purposes. You must ensure you meet all age and other regulatory requirements before entering a casino or placing a wager. Online gambling is illegal in many jurisdictions and users should consult legal counsel regarding the legal status of online gambling and gaming in their jurisdictions. The information in this site is for news and entertainment purposes only. Casinomeister.com is an independent directory and information service not affiliated with any casino. Links to third party websites on Casinomeister.com are provided solely for informative/educational purposes. If you use these links, you leave this Website.