I thought there was no such thing as a central blacklist. Come on reps - is there or isn't there. Red Flush is independent, so they should NOT have access to data from other MG casinos on ANY of their players.
A breach of terms can cause a confiscation of winnings, but I have NEVER heard of a casinomeister accredited casino confiscating a deposit unless that deposit was made using a STOLEN deposit method, such as a stolen credit card, and this is then only to ensure the stolen funds are returned to their rightful owner.
PAB is the best course of action here, if true, Red Flush will have to prove the OP has committed a FRAUD, and a pretty BIG one to justify confiscation of a deposit. The only "banning" that generally occurs is of advantage players, who get removed from receiving bonuses. No "group" can do anything if they cannot receive bonuses, so this part is irrelevant.
The position here is that either the player breached the rules or they didn't, and if they didn't, but the casino wants rid of them, they have to be paid their winnings AND then banned.
If players are in a place, such as a hospice, it is possible that a large and changing number of players are appearing to come from the same "household", and this could get them mistaken for a "ring" of players out to scam casinos out of the bonuses. While this is catered for in the terms and conditions, it is a technical point that can be misunderstood by the ordinary player, who thinks they are OK if they themselves have only one account, and follow the rules. This is more often a problem on college (university) campuses, where many students will play, and the assumption is that if they are mostly winning with bonuses, they are acting as a group and sharing the risk. Pattern of play is a factor in determining whether a group strategy is being used. Depositing and NOT taking a bonus has no place in this kind of group advantage play strategy.
It would help if the software were able to register these duplicates from the IP address and MAC address at registration, locking the account BEFORE a player has deposited and played. It would then be down to the player to get clearance from the casino to continue to play after satisfying them they are not up to any tricks.
In the event that this turns out to be a fraudulent complaint, the OP will receive an invoice from Casinomeister, and will have this fact announced, and their forum account banned. This does happen, and when someone joins and immediately posts a complaint about what is considered a reputable casino, we have to consider the possibility that the complaint might not be all it seems.
If the OP has ever been told by an MG casino that they have been banned, whether justified or not, it would be wise to say so, and let this fact be considered alongside this complaint, and allow the debate to consider whether the other casinos acted properly in issuing a ban, and whether they have indeed passed this on to Red Flush in some way, which will again ignite the debate about there being a central blacklist for all MG casinos used against certain "advantage players". Rival admit they have such a list, and use it to bonus ban players, and Playtech SEEM to have some kind of list, but claim that they do not have one at the software provider level (nice choice of words, but still, we have cases where players get banned at one Playtech casino, and somehow a Playtech casino of a different group knows straight away that they are an "undesirable" before they have even played a single game - to me, that's a "central blacklist")
Empty Fruities Astern Capt'n
Back to port for unloading.
Full Sails - before we get raided ourselves.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Simmo!
)
Bookmarks