PKR revoking bonus for no reason.

[Snake Eyes]

The AGC still havent received the logs from PKR almost 3 weeks later. When asked why it was taking so long they informed that it wasnt a top priority for PKR.

Perhaps I am naive but if I received a request for logs from my regulatory body in connection with a player complaint I would think it important enough to respond in a timely manner.

It really is laughable. Regulators need to grow some teeth (and some balls, perhaps). This isn't the first time i've heard something like that when it comes to a regulatory investigation - and not simply the likes of Costa Rica etc. Its amazing what some operators think they can get away with - the sad thing is, it sometimes seems that they can

The AGC need to come down hard on this attitude, or it simply makes a mockery of regulation

[Rusty]

First of all let me say how sorry I am for you topoor being put through this nonsense and I hope it all gets sorted out in the end.
With the fantastic advice you have received from VWM and others there is still hope of a favorable outcome.

How I missed this thread I have no Idea so thanks to VWM and fleur de lise for pointing it out to me.
I posted about this company in the Poker section because I was very suspicious about them being licensed by the UK gambling commission.
There is no clickable link to the gambling commissions website which seemed strange and the fact they are also licensed by alderney seems odd.
I have written to the UK gambling commission and asked them to clarify if this company is indeed licensed by them.
Any response I receive I will post here.

I am shocked by Moneybookers role in all this and I really hope the reasons they closed Topoor's account come to light.
Even more shocking was the Ministering Angel revelation, are Moneybookers going to get away with advertising a rogue Casino run by crooks on their site?

How many of us are seriously considering closing our accounts with moneybookers?
I certainly am.

A Bank with moral standards?
That will be the day.

[topoor]

Alderney has sided with PKR. These are the reasons.

You made two large deposits, $200 and $500. The first depost of $200 is the maximum eligible amount for a first time deposit bonus. The second deposit is again the maximum eligible amount for reload bonus.

As soon as the bonuses were cleared you requested a withdrawal, each time within five minutes of clearing the specific bonus.

You did not engage in any play between the first withdrawal and the second deposit when the reload bonus became available.

The only game you played was casino hold em.

The vast majority of the bets you made were the minimum $1. This is quite a small bet amount when compared to the amounts that you deposited. Only the basic main bet was played, never the side bet (AA bet).

The total amount you bet on the account was $20,002.00, this reflects the $10,000 bet to claim the first deposit bonus and then a second $10,000 to claim the reload bonus. It is clear that as soon as the bonus was released no more games were played.

Play only occured while a bonus was pending.


So there you have it, if a casino invites you to an offer and you take them up on it, follow the terms to the letter and dont breach any rule or law the casino is allowed to deny you the bonus. This is the finding of the Alderney Gambling Commission.

I found this comment particularly laughable:

PKR are more than within their rights to close your account and seize all funds.

So according to Alderney if I break no rules or laws and deposit to a casino they have the right to steal my money should they wish.

Absolute joke. What on earth does this say about the gambling industry?

[maxd]

FWIW, I have received and read Alderney's decision on topoor's case and the bottom line is that Alderney backs PKR and clears them of having any connection to the Moneybooker actions.

In detail this is their decision re: the topoor case:

The Commission has thoroughly investigated your claims and are found to be in agreement with PKR Limited’s decision to exclude you from their site. On obtaining details of your game play it’s apparent that you have abused the bonus scheme that was offered to you. ...
In accordance with sections 9 and 10 of PKR Limited’s terms and conditions, of which you agreed to adhere to at all times, they are more than within their rights to close your account and seize all funds.

They go on to present the evidence for the "bonus abuse" claim.

Our position on this is our usual position on bonus abuse claims: there is, generally speaking, no such thing. Playing by the strict terms of the bonus in order to take advantage of it is properly called "advantage play." The term "bonus abuse" is often just a euphemism for "we don't like how you play": by calling it "abuse" the offended casino generally hopes to then use is as grounds for withholding monies, etc. Our position is that if the terms of the bonus have been met without fraud or cheating (ie. bots, etc) then the player is due their winnings.

What the casino choses to do after the winnings are paid is a different matter. If they don't like the player's action then we think they're justified in asking them to leave, but they are not justified in confiscating their winnings, at least not on those grounds.

So the bottom line is that we do not support Alderney's affirmation that the casino was justified in confiscating the player's winnings. By the strict reading of the T&Cs PKR can claim the right to do so: we would say those are unreasonable T&Cs and stand by our decision that the player should be payed.

Max Drayman
Casinomeister.com, Player Grievance Manager

LATER: I've been told by the PKR rep that topoor's winnings _were_ paid, it was only the bonus that was withheld. My mistake in saying it was otherwise.

[jetset]

Max, is it not worth communicating that imo correct view to Alderney with a request for a review?

Andre Wilsenach is a professional and reasonable director at Alderney, and he should be prepared (as is eCOGRA in their system) to go back and take a second look at any case where there is a doubt as to the fairness of the decision.

[maxd]

Max, is it not worth communicating that imo correct view to Alderney with a request for a review?

Good point, they even say as much in their ruling. Let's see what topoor has to say and we'll take it from there.

[topoor]

Well I am appalled. More so with the comment regarding PKR's right to seize deposits than the actual decision regarding the reversal of bonus itself.

How can any regulatory body feel that it is acceptable when no fraudulent or dishonest act has been committed for a casino to commit theft?

Personally I feel that this ruling should rogue the entire jurisdiction.

Alderney have confirmed that all I did was stick to the terms and conditions of the offer. No fraud, no bots, no nothing except what I was required to do to avail of thier offer. Something I had done only a few days earlier without issue.

[maxd]

Well I am appalled. ...

In which case an appeal would probably be in order. Alderney signs off by saying:

If you wish to pursue your complaint further, the matter would first be considered by the Chief Executive Officer of the Commission and, if you are still not satisfied with his preliminary determination of the matter, you may request referral of your complaint to the Commission for a hearing under its Regulation 342. When deciding whether to pursue the matter further please also consider Regulation 343(2), which advises you of the possibility of your being required to pay part or all of the costs incurred by the Commission and PKR Limited in this matter.

That pretty much spells it out: justice, or the possibility of it, costs money. It's your call.

[topoor]

Max, what is your view on the status of both PKR Casino and the AGCC?

[maxd]

Max, what is your view on the status of both PKR Casino and the AGCC?

I take my queue on AGCC from the Casinomeister himself (because he has more experience and has been dealing with folks like that for a long time): I believe he has faith in them and what they do.

As to PKR, we're learning as we go and so far I will say that they do care how this case goes and are concerned about the impact it will have on their operation. That may not seem like much but I take it as a very good sign: not all casinos give a damn and when they don't the water can get deep and hot real fast. So I'd say let's give them the benefit of the doubt.