Roguish PKR revoking bonus for no reason.

[kernow]

Originally Posted by Rhyzz

Someone who plays Slots or Casino Hold'em is not a bonus abuser.

They are if they use a bot to play for them.

[topoor]

Not that it applies in my case but on the advice of a friend who has advised me that PKR probably thought I was using a bot I have checked the terms and conditions of the offer and Bot play is not specifically excluded.

So technically they wouldnt be bonus abusers. Even if PKR did believe that, it doesnt explain moneybookers or PKR's refusal to explain their decsion.

I suppose if any casino suspected bot play they could invoke the "FU" clause but they would surely need proof such as a 12 hour straight minimum coins session without beaks?

[Fleur-De-Lis]

Originally Posted by topoor

I live in England and have never accessed the internet from any other country.

I see, glad I was wrong. Did you try to call Moneybookers? I found out you can get more info over the telephone with them, if you clench your teeth and try to be friendly

Customer Call Centre:
Monday - Friday 9:00 - 18:00 GMT International: +44 870 383 0232
UK: 0905 848 0011 (calls cost 25p / minute)

[topoor]

Yes I rang them. The people on the phone are friendly enough but they wont let you speak to Security or Management so you can get nowhere. I followed their advice and sent in details of my case and its subsequent complaint but to no avail.

[vinylweatherman]

Originally Posted by topoor

Yes I rang them. The people on the phone are friendly enough but they wont let you speak to Security or Management so you can get nowhere. I followed their advice and sent in details of my case and its subsequent complaint but to no avail.

Since you have received a "deadlock letter" (Email in your case), you should now complain to the relevant authorities. This may well be the Financial Ombudsman here in the UK, since Moneybookers have suspended an important service for an internet gambler (legal here in UK), and there has been no evidence that you have broken T & C, and you suspect a "spiteful" complaint from a merchant (PKR) simply because you lodged a complaint with the Alderney licencing authorities about their arbitrary reneging on a bet without explanation to you.

It is great that Alderney are looking at playlogs, they will be able to gain their own impression as to whether you broke the terms and conditions of the offers.

Now it is time to pursue Moneybookers through the Financial Ombudsman while you wait on Alderney.

Neteller would be a good alternative for online gambling. The fees are higher, but phone support is FREE. Currently, Barclaycard is good for internet gambling if you play in UK Pounds, no fees - treated as ordinary purchases. Withdrawals will come back to the Barclaycard as they are in the "OCT Scheme". Other withdrawals though, would have to be by cheque, which might be a nuisance.

[c_note]

Vinyl was right. MB T&C's state :

http://www.moneybookers.com/app/help.pl?s=terms

3.6. Company will ensure that all personal details of the Customer are held in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Company's published privacy statement.

13.2. The Financial Ombudsman Service applies to Moneybookers' e-money scheme. Customer may refer complaints that are eligible to be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service to the Financial Ombudsman if a matter cannot be resolved in accordance with Moneybookers' standard complaint handling procedures. Information regarding our internal complaint handling procedures and the Financial Ombudsman Service can be requested by contacting Moneybookers’ customer service department.

The Financial Ombudsman Service is available from
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/

The relevant Data Protection act section is :
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998..._en_3#pt2-l1g7


I was going to check the pkr site to see if they are provided to operate under the data protection act, but their site is down for maintenance. It should be in their Privacy Policy or Terms & Conditions.


Good luck..

[Roar]

Originally Posted by topoor

I have received a reply from Alderney stating that they are waiting for my game history from PKR and that they will be able to make a decision following its receipt.

Hopefully this wont take to much longer.

Very strange chronology of events.

Did Alderney not mention the basis on which PKR are justifying their confiscation of funds ("bonus abuse" requires definition if it indeed does exist)?

Looking at game history might be akin to looking at Tea Leaves. What on earth are they expecting to see in the Tea Leaves?

If per chance a "bot" is seen in the Tea Leaves should Alderney not then seek your further representations before arriving at a decision? (Wow! You can just imagine the ramifications of an adverse player ruling.)

Having said that it does seem Alderney are moving with some haste toward a thankfully timely resolution which puts the likes of Malta LGA to an absolute shame.

Keep us updated topoor - it's better than watching TV.

>

[Rodmania]

Hi,

good news

for 20 minutes i get 250 $ from PKr after my first cash back from 420 $
so in total they must me get "only" 250 $ for my 920 $ total.

I hope they will credited in the next days, i email them the situation, but this is the right step

I will inform you

[spearmaster]

Originally Posted by kernow

They are if they use a bot to play for them.

Seeing as that Playtech slots have autoplay built in, and autoplay is essentially a bot, I think we can safely say that this statement is incorrect.

[topoor]

Originally Posted by Roar

Did Alderney not mention the basis on which PKR are justifying their confiscation of funds ("bonus abuse" requires definition if it indeed does exist)?

>

No, the statement simply read:

"At present the AGCC are in the progress of retrieving your gaming history so that we can assess it. Once we have done this we should be able to make an informed decision regarding your complaint."