Carnival Casino. (Am i really in the wrong?)

[bianca110]

Hello to you all.

I wonder if anyone can see what i have done wrong here?

I signed up to Carnival casino a while ago and since then they have told me I would not be getting paid and now I really don't known what to do...

I started by placing 100 pound hands on blackjack. Their bet max. I managed to win quite big and decided not to play as risky. So remembering i had to wager a certain amount i reduced my bet size.

They come back to me with the below. (I cant see how what i did was wrong although they have come back with these accusations)

Dear Bianca,



After a thorough investigation, your account ............... has been found in contravention of our Promotional Terms and Conditions. We must draw your attention to the particular condition:
"11.6 Your use of any Bonuses is subject to our review for irregular playing patterns. To ensure fair gaming, we consider low margin, equal, zero bets or hedge betting to be irregular gaming for the use of Bonuses. Further examples of irregular playing patterns also include, but are not limited to: (i) placing single or multiple bets on any single game that sums over the value of seventy percent or more of the bonus credited with the intention of clearing the Bonus until the release requirements have been met; (ii) if we suspect you have attempted to use a Bonus contrary to the spirit of the promotional offering; (iii) if we suspect that you have sought to deviously profit from a Bonus offered by us in good faith (for example, the acceptance of a Bonus, wagering the minimum amount and immediately withdrawing the funds). In the event that we deem that an irregular playing pattern has taken place, we reserve the right to prevent you from cashing out Player Account funds and/or withhold any of your winnings derived from your use of the Bonus."







The above chart shows your first and second (last) game session in the casino followed by screenshots of your game sessions for showing your betting patterns. As you can see you hade an average bet of £110 when you started playing. After you doubled up you started playing the same game with an average bet of £11 to safely complete the wagering requirements of the bonus you received.

In light of the exploitative nature of these actions, which directly contravene the standard terms and conditions, we will be annulling the wagers that were placed by you, your original deposit amount of £200 in reference to the your account will be returned to you and your account will subsequently be closed. Please do not attempt to open further accounts across our platforms as the accounts will subsequently closed.
------------------------------

Thanks Everyone
Bianca

[Repro]

Again a casino that uses the "spirit of the bonus" argument.

I can't find them in the accredited list or which group they belong to. Only thing i could find it's a playtech.

You can consider a PAB.

IMO any casino who uses this argument should be rogued right away.

[Seventh777]

(iii) if we suspect that you have sought to deviously profit from a Bonus offered by us in good faith (for example, the acceptance of a Bonus, wagering the minimum amount and immediately withdrawing the funds).

Wtf?, so in the same context - if you claim a bonus but burn out before you have made the w/r they should give you the bonus again, as surely *the spirit of the bonus* protocols have not been met by the casino, for bonuses are not intended for players to actually win with, but are purely for fun!!!!!! .

If your initial bonus was 100% of 200 then your bet size would have to be 140+ to break their bonus betting amounts, and you started placing 110 bets on BJ which is hardly hedge betting, I don`t think there is a gambler on this planet that would attempt to hedge bet playing BJ lol.

In all honesty I really cannot see how you have abused this bonus.

GL with getting your money .

[KasinoKing]

I wonder if anyone can see what i have done wrong here?
...

How much was the bonus?

I can't find them in the accredited list or which group they belong to. Only thing i could find it's a playtech.
You can consider a PAB.

They are part of the AffClub stable, including Nobel, Club Dice, Entercasino(!), Casino King(!) and a few others.
Not accredited and not rogue - somewhere in that grey area between.

This means the OP can Pitch-A-Bitch if they are unable to resolve this themselves.
Bianca: First please send the casino representative a Private Message about your problem by following this link: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...=newpm&u=16459

After giving them a reasonable amount of time, if they do not put things right to your satisfaction, you can Pitch-A-Bitch.
This is CasinoMeister's FREE service to help players with problems at non-rogue casinos.
To submit your PAB, click here: http://www.casinomeister.com/problems.php
Be sure to read ALL the terms for submitting a PAB, including the PAB FAQs here: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...?faq=cmfaq_pab

KK

[greasemonkey]

There was a really long thread about this same group enforcing ticky-tack terms that are really gray in order to get out of payments. I would say they are quite disgusting in their behavior.

[vinylweatherman]

Worse still, this is happening with the blessing of the GRA, and it seems that even though this play is fully within the specific rules for the bonus, operators are allowed to "deem that in oour opinion the play was an attempt to profit from the bonus", rather than to use it "in the spirit in which it was offered".

In order to save Max time with this bullshit, the whole lot should be placed under "not recommended - licensing jurisdiction supports "spirit of the bonus" rulings by operators"

Those that actually USE this loophole should end up in the pit.

They should redesign the rules so that players are left in no doubt as to what is allowed. In most cases, rather than seeming to allow, even encourage, table game play as a means to gather data about "intent" during the play on the welcome bonus, they should restrict it to slots and similar games that have no real "strategy" to them, and only offer bonuses for games like blackjack to their regular players after they have demonstrated an intent to play for risk and entertainment, rather than best strategy to make a profit.

From my perspective, designing a bonus as an entrapment to weed out "bonus hunters" from the rest is "not in the spirit" of how a reputable business should conduct itself just in order to guarantee profitabilty.

They deserve what's coming to them, and that goes for the licensing jurisdictions, as well as the operators.

Looks like the LGA (Malta) has competition this year for a certain award

[Nifty29]

Wtf?, so in the same context - if you claim a bonus but burn out before you have made the w/r they should give you the bonus again, as surely *the spirit of the bonus* protocols have not been met by the casino, for bonuses are not intended for players to actually win with, but are purely for fun!!!!!! .

If your initial bonus was 100% of 200 then your bet size would have to be 140+ to break their bonus betting amounts, and you started placing 110 bets on BJ which is hardly hedge betting, I don`t think there is a gambler on this planet that would attempt to hedge bet playing BJ lol.

In all honesty I really cannot see how you have abused this bonus.

GL with getting your money .

I would say it was a 50% bonus.

If the player made bets of more than seventy percent of the bonus then they broke an explicit term. It would not be a spirit of the bonus issue. If one is going to use advantage play like this they need to be more attentive. I'm sure they'll get plenty of sympathy over at bonerbeaters.com

Even if it was a 100% bonus, the average bet was $110 which means they could well have bet more than $140 on a few hands. In fact, if they were playing max bet of $100 its almost certain due to double downs or splits etc.

[vinylweatherman]

The OP was supplied with a copy of their play, so it should be easy to settle this argument about explicit breaches of the rules vs "spirit of play".

[Nifty29]

There was a really long thread about this same group enforcing ticky-tack terms that are really gray in order to get out of payments. I would say they are quite disgusting in their behavior.

Where's the "ticky-tacky" part?

It expressly states what is against the rules. It gives an explicit instruction about bets over seventy percent which the player violated.

I'm sure the crew at bonusbleaters.com and their ilk are up in arms, but the simple fact is that the player in both cases didn't READ the terms properly prior to playing, so it's tough cookies to them.

Players who engage in this kind of play KNOW that it is frowned upon at just about every online casino, so if any of them had an ounce of common sense they would go through terms with a fine-toothed comb every single time.....but from what is said at bogusbeaters.com confiscations are seen as a cost of doing business, which just proves my point that these players know exactly what they're doing. If they get cashouts denied, they go around the forums whipping up support from those other "poor players" who have been so badly ripped off for breaking rules that everyone else is happy to follow. Not only that, they get to take up Max's time with PABs when they know they're in the wrong. Quite pathetic really.

[Glunn11]

I would say it was a 50% bonus.

If the player made bets of more than seventy percent of the bonus then they broke an explicit term...

I have to agree with Nifty, but everyone else's concerns about the casino are certainly valid. The only concrete term in that entire spiel is the number 70%. Terms (ii) and (iii) are quite rogue because they allow the casino to judge, in its sole discretion, whether or not you were following the "spirit" without offering any guidelines whatsoever to constitute what that spirit is. I wouldn't play at a place that goes to such lengths to say, "Large bonus winnings are attached with a 100% commission".

The fact that they go out of their way to rephrase the "spirit of the bonus" crap with two separate terms is troubling.

Regardless, I have no qualms about the 70% rule, and it is certainly up to the player to look at this before taking a bonus. If the 70% rule was being employed without a bonus, then I would have a problem, but as it stands, it is a fair promotional rule to curb advantage players.