[IN PROGRESS] Luckyacecasino - bonus "abuse" problem

[RobWin]

I have to disagree with this statement, and as a consequence I have checked out the position with Tex Rees, the Fair Gaming Advocate at eCOGRA.

Luckyace is NOT entitled in any way shape or form to display the eCOGRA seal, and it is deceptive of it to do so, regardless of its white label association with 888.com.

Any online casino or poker room that displays the eCOGRA seal must have been individually inspected, assessed and monitored by the compliance teams at eCOGRA - a process that goes deeper than software verification and back end staffing.

Luckyace has not been through this process, I am told.

Thanks for confirming that for me Jet, as I had said in an earlier post here I thought that was the way that the certification process worked...

Even if Lucky Ace is a part of the 888 Group the way I understand eCOGRA's process of certifying casinos is to treat each one as a separate entity thus certifying each one seperately...

[jetset]

[QUOTE=vinylweatherman;216699]Perhaps if all the affected players were to deluge Gibraltar with their complaints, there would be far more chance of something being done about it. A large volume of complaints will make the Gibraltean authorities think there is something worth investigating about 888.com and Lucky Ace, as it will start to look like ALL winners are not being paid. Lucky Ace will then have to prove to Gibraltar that these players really did break T and C, and are not just being shafted because they won.
QUOTE]

I think this is a good additional step to follow for aggrieved players - the Gibraltar authorities will not be comfortable with a significant number of complaints about one of their licensees in the sensitive European market.

Edited to add a useful link in this regard: www.gra.gi

[jetset]

Good to see we're all on the same page regarding the unacceptability of this situation.

IMO it's a helluva lot better to act against the perpetrators of this mess than insult those trying to assist and this site, which has a long and successful record of standing up for what is right, regardless of cost to itself.

[aka23]

I have to disagree with this statement, and as a consequence I have checked out the position with Tex Rees, the Fair Gaming Advocate at eCOGRA.

Luckyace is NOT entitled in any way shape or form to display the eCOGRA seal, and it is deceptive of it to do so, regardless of its white label association with 888.com.

Any online casino or poker room that displays the eCOGRA seal must have been individually inspected, assessed and monitored by the compliance teams at eCOGRA - a process that goes deeper than software verification and back end staffing.

Luckyace has not been through this process, I am told.

I didn't say Lucky Ace was entitled to display the eCOGRA seal. I wrote,

"If Lucky Ace is the same thing as 888.com, then there wouldn't be an issue with Lucky Ace using the eCOGRA seal since 888.com is an eCOGRA approved casino."

In the post you quoted, I was saying that I disagreed with RobWin's statement that 888.com should be added to the rogue pit. My point was... Given that eCOGRA has a problem with Lucky Ace displaying the seal, then it is safe to assume Lucky Ace and 888.com are not the same thing. And if Lucky Ace and 888.com are not the same thing, then there is not yet enough information to add 888.com to the rogue list. As I stated in the post you quoted, first the degree of the relationship between 888.com and Lucky Ace needs to be confirmed.

[maxd]

It would still be very interesting to know if 'abusive' players who lost are also getting their deposits returned and accounts locked.

I realize you've asked that question a couple times and it gotten lost in the shuffle. Unfortunately I don't know the answer, but I think we all suspect what the answer is especially since fair play doesn't seem particularly high on the Lucky Ace agenda recently.

[jetset]

I didn't say Lucky Ace was entitled to display the eCOGRA seal. I wrote,

"If Lucky Ace is the same thing as 888.com, then there wouldn't be an issue with Lucky Ace using the eCOGRA seal since 888.com is an eCOGRA approved casino."

In the post you quoted, I was saying that I disagreed with RobWin's statement that 888.com should be added to the rogue pit. My point was... Given that eCOGRA has a problem with Lucky Ace displaying the seal, then it is safe to assume Lucky Ace and 888.com are not the same thing. And if Lucky Ace and 888.com are not the same thing, then there is not yet enough information to add 888.com to the rogue list. As I stated in the post you quoted, first the degree of the relationship between 888.com and Lucky Ace needs to be confirmed.

Splitting hairs aside for a moment - we know what the relationship is between Luckyace - Kamay Holdings and 888.com - the latter has previously issued a press release confirming a white label deal.

That still does not entitle Luckyace, having not undergone the requisite inspections and monitoring - to pirate a seal for which it has not qualified. That constitutes deceptive conduct imo, and if 888.com is a party to it they are also deserving of criticism in my book.

[aka23]

Splitting hairs aside for a moment - we know what the relationship is between Luckyace - Kamay Holdings and 888.com - the latter has previously issued a press release confirming a white label deal.

That still does not entitle Luckyace, having not undergone the requisite inspections and monitoring - to pirate a seal for which it has not qualified. That constitutes deceptive conduct imo, and if 888.com is a party to it they are also deserving of criticism in my book.

I don't consider a white label to be "the same thing" as the primary casino. And I don't think Lucky Ace is entitled to use the eCOGRA seal. Nobody in this thread has said they are entitled to use the seal, so there is no need to have a long discussion about points everyone agrees on that are tangent from the main thread. I also agree that 888.com is deserving of criticism, but I don't think it's done enough to go in the rogue pit (as was suggested in post #140 and discussed in my earlier reply).

[happygooner]

I realize you've asked that question a couple times and it gotten lost in the shuffle. Unfortunately I don't know the answer, but I think we all suspect what the answer is especially since fair play doesn't seem particularly high on the Lucky Ace agenda recently.

Hi max, it's great to see that interpretation has been revised since my last visit here as still no contact from luckyace but looked at bank statement today and deposit has been returned.

As of yesterday this would have rendered case closed from what I understand but today a different story. I know you suggested I wait until Wednesday but as they have simply sent me packing with my stake back and no response to my email would it not constitute reopening my pab now?

Also, would it be wise to take this up with gibraltar regulators now as others have suggested, or should I still sit tight for time being?

Cheers again and look forward to hearing from you

[loganberry]

Maxd, thank you very much. It takes a very big man to publicly apologise for his mistake and then take the necessary actions to rectify the problems that mistake inadvertently caused.

However there were some extremely vitriolic posts from established members of this forum against the newbies who came here for help, based very much on Maxd's initial stance.

Are those members also going to prove big enough and offer an apology to those who must surely have been devastated by that vitriol?

I'm not going to post any examples, but you know who you are.

[tsj]

Ok, you know what, it looks like I've had my head in ... an uncomfortable place today. My interpretation of the T&C issue has been a bit screwed up. Bryan's expertise in this lead him to a different conclusion, namely that if the players meet the wagering requirements, they ought to be paid THEN blocked if the casino insists on doing so. My primary mistake was in failing to recognize and follow that advice sooner.

I will now go through the process of re-opening all those PABs that I mistaken closed because of my erroneous T&C interpretation. Just so folks know where they're at I'll be sending out PMs with their current PAB status. This could take a day or two.

I will also go back through this thread and leave markers in my previous posts indicating that things have changed and that this post is now the starting point for a new approach to this.

Needless to say I offer my apologies to those that have been inconvenienced or distressed by my error here. What can I say, live and learn.

Ok mate.... sounds good