[CLOSED] Misleading Bellerock terms, DO NOT play there.

[TDTAT]

Originally Posted by vinylweatherman

None of this gets over the fact that BelleRock snuck this rule in on an arbitrary mid-month date prior to Christmas, and did nothing to alert players to the change on their main pages that CONTINUE to advertise and cross market all four sign-up bonuses.


Even now, there is nothing on BelleRock's own sites about this, and only this thread provides a clear warning that this term is currently active, and being enforced.

It is slightly ridiculous for affiliates to have 2 or 3 of the
groups sign up bonuses advertised together. I have had
the warning up for MONTHS (maybe a year?) that only one FDB is allowed
for the group. Some affiliate friends of mine have advertised
these casinos together.. I know they meant no harm
and removed additional banners after they were enlightened.

My point is: The least bellerock could do is make sure affiliates
are aware of the rule. Players are rightly confused when
2 bellerock banners promoting 2 sign up bonuses are side by side.

A simple reminder affiliate email should do the trick and save
everyone a few future headaches.

I still think the terms and the list of casinos that
allow the one bonus should be placed in a more prominent place.
There is no good reason not to make this information CLEAR and easy to find.
If not, SIMPLY Block a player from downloading or claiming a bonus

[vinylweatherman]

Originally Posted by TDTAT

It is slightly ridiculous for affiliates to have 2 or 3 of the
groups sign up bonuses advertised together. I have had
the warning up for MONTHS (maybe a year?) that only one FDB is allowed
for the group. Some affiliate friends of mine have advertised
these casinos together.. I know they meant no harm
and removed additional banners after they were enlightened.

My point is: The least bellerock could do is make sure affiliates
are aware of the rule. Players are rightly confused when
2 bellerock banners promoting 2 sign up bonuses are side by side.

A simple reminder affiliate email should do the trick and save
everyone a few future headaches.

I still think the terms and the list of casinos that
allow the one bonus should be placed in a more prominent place.
There is no good reason not to make this information CLEAR and easy to find.
If not, SIMPLY Block a player from downloading or claiming a bonus

As well as players, this affects the affiliates, as players screwed by this term could blame the affiliate for misleading them by not warning of the term, and advertising more than one of the SUB offers. This would affect the quality affiliate sites more, as players would perceive these to be "advisory", rather than a banner farm site.

[scrabble73]

Originally Posted by maxd

I don't see that the sarcastic tone is going to help this, do you?

Which specific term(s) are your referring to? If there are dated copies of the terms in most or all the languages you registered in that indicate you could not have known about the clause(s) in question then I would think we'd re-open this case. Compile that information, with URLs to the relevant pre-clause archived pages, and you might be back in business here.

Unfortunately, most of these archived pages are not readily available which is why I had to involve both eCogra and Gibraltar to pressure them into telling me when the specific term was added, but I would be happy to forward you the email from jackpotcity.com's customer service that confirms that my account was created December 15th (I wasn't quite sure whether it was the 14th or 15th) and that the rule was put into place December 17th. I am confident I claimed the bonus prior to the 17th which was two days before the terms were added to their webpage (that is the date their email specifically references). I've asked their support team for a copy of their terms in their entirety prior to the 17th, but I get only periodic responses from them.

I feel that I've put together a sufficient enough case that they invented a term that did not exist at the time I signed up or claimed the bonus and are trying to retroactively apply it to me to steal my winnings and that I am owed my winnings.

[bellerock]

Hi All,

I am embarrassed to have to make this post, and I owe apologies to a number of people. This whole situation seems to be riddled with communication errors. In dealing with a number of issues with our lawyers who drafted and maintain our terms and conditions, I confused the dates given to me and in haste quoted that this term had been added in 2004. It turns out that it was actually added in December 2007, although not on the date quoted by Scrabble73. I am not sure why she was given that date because the term was actually published on the 5th of December and as such we were within our rights to take the action we had taken.

Because of the communication errors and the confusion caused we have decided to honor Scrabble73’s withdrawal as a gesture of goodwill, but confirm that she was still in violation of term 5.6.

Best regards,

Belle Rock

[BBKPoker]

Originally Posted by bellerock

Hi All,

I am embarrassed to have to make this post, and I owe apologies to a number of people. This whole situation seems to be riddled with communication errors. In dealing with a number of issues with our lawyers who drafted and maintain our terms and conditions, I confused the dates given to me and in haste quoted that this term had been added in 2004. It turns out that it was actually added in December 2007, although not on the date quoted by Scrabble73. I am not sure why she was given that date because the term was actually published on the 5th of December and as such we were within our rights to take the action we had taken.

Because of the communication errors and the confusion caused we have decided to honor Scrabble73’s withdrawal as a gesture of goodwill, but confirm that she was still in violation of term 5.6.

Best regards,

Belle Rock

I'm happy that you did the right thing, but you still haven't addressed the issue at large.

[vinylweatherman]

Originally Posted by bellerock

Hi All,

I am embarrassed to have to make this post, and I owe apologies to a number of people. This whole situation seems to be riddled with communication errors. In dealing with a number of issues with our lawyers who drafted and maintain our terms and conditions, I confused the dates given to me and in haste quoted that this term had been added in 2004. It turns out that it was actually added in December 2007, although not on the date quoted by Scrabble73. I am not sure why she was given that date because the term was actually published on the 5th of December and as such we were within our rights to take the action we had taken.

Because of the communication errors and the confusion caused we have decided to honor Scrabble73’s withdrawal as a gesture of goodwill, but confirm that she was still in violation of term 5.6.

Best regards,

Belle Rock

How many PLAYERS benefit from a team of corporate lawyers though when it comes to UNDERSTANDING all the legalese, marketing hype and misdirection, as well as the psychological "mind games" that are involved in making consumers believe one product is better than another that is, in fact, in all respects identical (e.g Microgaming casinos).

Would you like to hold a hot cup of coffee for 5 minutes, and THEN decide whether I deserve a £200 free chip in my account (BBC2 Horizon, two weeks ago 12th Feb )

[Roar]

Originally Posted by bellerock

Hi All,

I am embarrassed to have to make this post, and I owe apologies to a number of people. This whole situation seems to be riddled with communication errors. In dealing with a number of issues with our lawyers who drafted and maintain our terms and conditions, I confused the dates given to me and in haste quoted that this term had been added in 2004. It turns out that it was actually added in December 2007, although not on the date quoted by Scrabble73. I am not sure why she was given that date because the term was actually published on the 5th of December and as such we were within our rights to take the action we had taken.

Because of the communication errors and the confusion caused we have decided to honor Scrabble73’s withdrawal as a gesture of goodwill, but confirm that she was still in violation of term 5.6.

Best regards,

Belle Rock

Someone has previously mentioned that such copious and legalistic T+Cs are hardly meant for recreational players. Belle Rock ought not to complain too loudly when they get a touch up from such non-recreational players given their precious T+Cs have already scared the pants off ordinary ploppy joes.

Here's some brand new web site posted T+Cs from Belle Rock courtesy I suspect from the lawyers:

"1.1.8.You may not open and maintain more than one account at any point in time.
1.1.9.Funds and/or Casino credits may only be transferred between Casino accounts belonging to the same Player i.e. transfers to third parties are not permitted.

1.2.2.If you breach the warranty contained in clause 1.2.1.2 above, all transactions placed by you shall be null and void and you shall forfeit any winnings accrued to you as a result of such transactions and/or participation"

Bonus, or no bonus, 1.1.8. says you can not have, or maintain, two or more accounts. YOU MUST CLOSE ALL ACCOUNTS else any winnings are liable to forfeiture even if you have not played the other accounts for years. This will include Trident Lounge linked casinos without a doubt.

But at least this accredited casino group has cleared up any remaining confusion.

[BBKPoker]

Originally Posted by Roar

But at least this accredited casino group has cleared up any remaining confusion.

Aside from why they are even issuing bonuses in the first place and then confiscating funds rather than excluding players from the bonus like other Microgaming groups do with ease.

That, in my opinion, is obviously rogueish behavior.

[BBKPoker]

Originally Posted by BBKPoker

Aside from why they are even issuing bonuses in the first place and then confiscating funds rather than excluding players from the bonus like other Microgaming groups do with ease.

That, in my opinion, is obviously rogueish behavior.

Looks like they finally did the right thing, the Bellerock group clause is now on the promotions page. I'd still rather they exclude players from even claiming the bonus, but its a significant enough step in the right direction.

[maxd]

Originally Posted by vinylweatherman

Would you like to hold a hot cup of coffee for 5 minutes, and THEN decide whether I deserve a £200 free chip in my account (BBC2 Horizon, two weeks ago 12th Feb )

Ha! I finally get the reference: BBC - Horizon - How to make better decisions. Good episode!