Royal Plaza - Beware

[thelawnet]

OMG, these people are Accredited ?

That is pretty shady if you ask me...

right:

Casinomeister Accredited Casinos

They must have a clean history of fairness towards their customers.

I would expect this to mean - if you try to cheat or defraud the casino, then you don't get paid, and if you behave honestly you won't have thousands stolen for making a tiny mistake and not reading the small print.

It just seems like natural justice to me.

Having to check the small print for terms that you couldn't reasonably anticipate is something that you expect of Betroyal or Virtual Casino, not a casino endorsed here.

[bpb]

Everyone who sided with the casino in this thread should obviously side with Royal Plaza here. So everyone start piling on and tell the OP how stupid he was to break the obvious T&C, and how he deserves to lose over 5,000 euros for his blatant transgression of the rules.

[VegasVIP Lounge]

Dear All,

I am writing to inform all persons that have contributed to this thread, that Ketzz was given a full refund of his original deposits which were processed to his neteller account on wednesday evening (UK Time).

Ketzz has been notified by the Casino and by me via private message.

[siorton]

Dear All,

I am writing to inform all persons that have contributed to this thread, that Ketzz was given a full refund of his original deposits which were processed to his neteller account on wednesday evening (UK Time).

Ketzz has been notified by the Casino and by me via private message.

well solved bar the €3800 you stole off him for the minor transgression. If he didn't claim a bonus they you're shafting him well and truely. You've basically call a bonus abuse t&c on a non bonus taker, then when given the choice of whether to use common sense and reverse the decision, or to act like reprehensible scum you've taken the latter option.

Shame on you VEGAS VIP.

[Casinomeister]

...or to act like reprehensible scum you've taken the latter option.

http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/forum_rules.php

1. General Posting Rules:

1.1 - No "Flaming": Please do not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. Abusive behavior will not be tolerated and your account may be suspended...

One week suspension for the scum comment. For a two time poster, that's a bit too much cockiness.

[henryVIII]

I love the line "the casino cannot be held responsible for any action taken".

Erm ... so they are saying they cannot be held responsible for any action they take.

It would be funny if it wasnt like watching someone being mugged in the street.

Are they seriously an accredited casino?

I think we have all learnt something here then.

[thelawnet]

Dear All,

I am writing to inform all persons that have contributed to this thread, that Ketzz was given a full refund of his original deposits which were processed to his neteller account on wednesday evening (UK Time).

Ketzz has been notified by the Casino and by me via private message.

resolved????

he won and you decided not to pay him.

funny definition of resolved.

If there's more to this than meets the eye (player lives in australia, you don't offer au$, so he quite reasonably assumed it was ok to use euros, he won, you invoke the 'sorry sucker, read the small print' clause, not because he'd set out to be dishonest, but as an excuse to avoid paying someone who won fair and square), do explain, because this is making your casino look pretty sleazy - there might be a reasonable explanation, but you hvent given one.

[vinylweatherman]

resolved????

he won and you decided not to pay him.

funny definition of resolved.

If there's more to this than meets the eye (player lives in australia, you don't offer au$, so he quite reasonably assumed it was ok to use euros, he won, you invoke the 'sorry sucker, read the small print' clause, not because he'd set out to be dishonest, but as an excuse to avoid paying someone who won fair and square), do explain, because this is making your casino look pretty sleazy - there might be a reasonable explanation, but you hvent given one.

It seems the explanation is "Rules are Rules" regardless of circumstances.
I will expect this same attitude to be evident when a player takes a bonus, follows the rules to the letter, and withdraws with winnings.

I don't find it unreasonable to play in the same currency as your funding source, it is common sense as considerable losses are incurred just for using currency exhange. Neteller would not have allowed the player to have another account in the correct currency for the casino.

Yet another example of a casino making the most of it's rules to make the best profits, rather than treating each player as an individual.
Behave like a faceless, uncaring, big corporation and expect to be treated as such by the criminally minded community, who will consider you "fair game" for pulling a fast one back.

It would be interesting to have some research done as to which casinos fall victim to fraud the most, and whether there is any correlation between rates of fraud and their percieved image in the larger player & fraudster community.

For example, does 32Red fall victim to more/less fraud per head than the likes of Grand Prive?

Shafting players prepared to risk 5000 Euro and not be interested in bonuses does not seem to be a good business decision as the casino can not lose as they can with bonus players. If treated well, the player may have come back with another 5000 Euro the next month.
Now, many players will be afraid to deposit in case they make some tiny mistake, and intending high rollers will be discouraged the most as they have more to lose.
This group already seem to be in trouble over non-payment issues with players who accepted a bonus and DID follow the rules. Clearly the casino wants it both ways!

[bpb]

Bleh, the player was playing without a bonus, so the casino was going to win all his money in the long run anyway. So they actually did him a favor by cancelling his winnings, since he would have lost them all in addition to his deposit. This way, he at least gets his deposit back.

I don't see the issue here. If the casino had a term that people named Fred can't play, and Fred Dunkelweissen was allowed to signup and win a few thousand before having his winnings voided, it's pretty clear that it's Fred's fault. He didn't read the terms and conditions, so he deserves what he gets.

You people seem to automatically always side with the player. You just don't understand the casino business. It's very clear that the casino shouldn't pay this player, and if you don't understand that, well, then it really can't be explained to you.

Nothing to see here, move along.

[vinylweatherman]

The original issue was more that the casino would keep the deposit, not just void winnings.
The terms IS now present at the head of the T & C page, however it does NOT state that the deposit is voided, just that the account will be locked.

Worse still, not only would Neteller charge conversion fees, but the casino seems to want to as well as it is "changing it's processor".

On the other hand, it is happy to take a deposit in the "Instacash" form and pay the 8.9% itself!

Clearly, they only want players in the US Dollar generally, but have an exception for the UK and Europe who can play in their own currency.

Theoretically, UK players can use the Euro by the letter of their terms, as we are in the EU, even though we do not use the Euro.

Players who are believed to be committing fraud, it seems, WILL have their deposits returned, but all winnings voided and accounts locked.

This player should have had the deposit returned straight away, this should have never reached the state where a complaint was needed.

Any player who is not from the EU or UK, and does not have a dollar denominated deposit source, should avoid this lot simply because they will not get value for money due to losses of several percent before they even place a single wager!

This player has their deposit back, but the terms need to make it clear that the deposit is likely to be lost, not just some woolly turn of phrase about the casino not being responsible for what may happen.