
Originally Posted by
vinylweatherman
These rules were designed to prevent what casinos call "bonus abuse". Casinos are quick to tell us it is all about the SPIRIT of play, rather than cold hard terms and conditions, but it seems casinos are using "spirit" when it suits them (player adhered to the LETTER, but was deemed nevertheless "too clever" in the way they won), and also the LETTER of the rules where it is clear that the player was a genuine recreational player, but nevertheless fell foul of some minor nuance of the terms at some point in play.
THis certainly seems the case here, because the first $50 was paid without fuss, indicating that at this point onward, PROMOTIONAL terms had been met, and that the player was acting far more like a recreational player than many of us by leaving most of their funds in play, rather than withdrawing the lot and depositing again WITH ANOTHER BONUS.
Casino Rewards are known for "using a sledgehammer to crack a nut" when it comes to the subject of "bonus abuse". It may save them making a few payouts, but it costs them an unknown amount of "action" when they pi$$ off a new player, driving them to try another group.
If you are a VIP, they are generally OK, but they have an unusually hostile approach to new players, and it seems the only way to pass the test is to LOSE with your first few bonuses, rather than winning from your first bonus.
There is also another term that is a bit "sneaky". Whilst they will bombard you with "personal invites" to take the welcome bonus at each of their other casinos, this may, at the time of the invite, be in breach of a sneaky "group clause" that states that a certain minimum deposit must be made at the already registered account before one of these "personal invitations" may be taken up (or they will confiscate any winnings, or lock the reward points account - or even both nowdays).
True "bonus abusers" rarely get caught out by these terms, since they will read every single one BEFORE playing, and will NOT give the casino the slightest opportunity to catch them with a definite breach. Experienced "bonus abusers" tend to get screwed by the "we can choose not to pay, even if no terms were breached" rule, otherwise known as the "F U Clause".
It is FRAUD that now seems to be getting caught by these terms, as sadly, many cases where winnings have been withheld due to specific breaches that at first sight seem to be minor "nit picking" issues turn out to be the tip of a fraud iceberg.
Fraudulent players often open multiple accounts to get a go at what should be "once only" special offers. It may be the case that after getting away with it a few times, they get cocky, and somewhat careless, which ends up with them being caught because of a more in depth audit.
Bookmarks