Rushmore- sucky rule to confiscate funds

[silcnlayc]

The point I was trying to make is that I feel that it is unfair towards the OP to imply that there has to be something shady going on because he forgott a couple of thousand $.

Fair enough, I think I am understanding what you were saying. To me, red flags fly when one comes here and tries the innocence route, instead of all the other avenues such as the PAB etc...and not pursuing all the help one has here and goes straight for the kill. I think it is the way it was presented that I find fault with.
I also feel the casino could have done a better job in their position, and expanding on the reason they felt the need to invoke their rule. They too are not being open about this (not that they have too, just a courtesy to all players).

One thing I can say is, I am not for the casino or against the OP. Either way it plays out, In my gut , I still believe there are some things missing here to just give up ANY amount of money without a fight even if it WAS in the T&C's.

.

[Nifty29]

I've never heard of such a term before. I've seen a few dollars taken away, but never thousands.

Well Inetbet confirm they have a similar term, and the following is from Fortune Lounge:

The player acknowledges that casino management may close any casino account which is, in its sole opinion, undesirable or dormant for a period of 6 months. Any "real" funds i.e. not promotional or bonus funds (dealt with in terms of additional terms and conditions) in any such casino account at the time of closure will be claimable for 6 (six) months thereafter. Players who discover that their accounts have been closed in terms of this clause 17 shall be entitled to lay claim to such "real" funds upon application to the casino, whereafter such funds will be refunded to the player, provided that application has been made within the aforementioned time period.

** Under this term he would have been outside the 12 months period and would lose it all **

This is from Intercasino:

Your ECash Account will be deemed to be inactive if you do not process a Transfer Transaction from your account in any continuous period of ninety (90) days. Once your ECash Account is deemed to be inactive, you agree to pay ECash Direct a monthly service fee of the then applicable fee (or the current balance of your account, if less) so long as a balance remains after which the account will be closed. You authorize ECash Direct to debit this fee from your ECash Account on the first day of the month following the day on which your ECash Account is deemed inactive, and on the first day of every subsequent month that your ECash Account remains inactive, until your ECash Account becomes active again or the balance of your ECash Account is nil.

** Under this one he would have lost $720 which is still a fair chunk **

Anyway, the point is that most casinos have some kind of dormant account policy where they can confiscate some or all of the players funds.

The difference is, as in the InetBet case, whether the casino INVOKES the term or treats each case on its merits. Obviously Inetbet has occasions where they could have done so, but didnt in the interests of fairness and ethics.

As Bryan said, the casino should have contacted the player and given them 7 days or something to reply and/or login to his account. If they had done so, this thread wouldnt exist and it wouldnt be costing them far more than $2k in negative PR. It sucks that its in black and white in the terms, but as Pulver says its up to us as players to vote with our feet and stop these harsh terms being applied in the first place.

[Casinomeister]

The Rushmore Group has been removed from the Accredited Casino section. Here's why - even though this term is in their terms and conditions, I don't believe it was implemented fairly. The player should have been contacted - warned that his account was pending dormant status. And if the player fails to respond, then so be it. But if and when a player comes back - this player should have been allowed to pick up where he left off. What's the big deal?

The members are correct in stating that this behavior is not becoming of an "Accredited Casino". And if the casinos which are listed here value their listing on the site, then they need to treat their players fairly.

New term in our standards for the accredited casinos: "Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player." The term "fair" is not as subjective as it may seem. I think the membership - to include the i-Gaming reps - would agree with me on this issue.

[elscrabinda]

Good call imo, thanks for your behind the scenes work. For the record, on the topic of pitching a bitch, I think I gave the casino more than enough chance to behave more reasonably, but I appreciate that it helps Max/Bryan to get a heads up before a thread like this so will do so in future.

[chuchu59]

And that's where the accredited casinos remain the cream of the crop.

[zebedy]

Its a real shame that the management at the rushmore group didnt act and make things right when they had the chance, all the hard work louise has put in over the last 12 months has gone to waste by all the bad publicity over the last few months.
hopefully this will be a wakeup call for them,

[maxd]

... on the topic of pitching a bitch, I think I gave the casino more than enough chance to behave more reasonably....

FWIW, I don't recall anyone saying you didn't. I for one simply don't know either way. If you're still thinking of my post upthread then I remind you that it was a general point I was making for the benefit of others who might read this thread and get the mistaken "no point in PABing" thing stuck in their heads, thereby killing any chance they might have had at a favourable resolution.

Ok, just looked back and it had come up, so I can see the reason for your comment now. Either way, I was making a general point as explained.

[lauram]

Let us hope, Louise will read this thread and reconsider placing the money back into the players account. I can see maybe a small fee for holding the account open but taking all the funds is uncalled for. If you leave a 0 balance in the account, they never close you off for not using it. Yet all these casinos have a 24 hour waiting period in hopes of you reversing a withdrawal to get you to play on. Or with some casinos they limit the withdrawal process to a few times a week for players as of the costs of processing. So after reading this it seems most players should pull their funds out of the account rather then leaving it in there to play. And for what it is worth here is what has gone on with me and funds in casinos longer then 6 months and not logged in.
Inetbet won off a free chip, no matter what I did they could not read id from me. The withdrawal was put in aug, feb I bought a new computer, was able to download inet sent them docs. Next am funds had been put into my ewallet.
My account by no means had the kind of funds in there that this player had.
I also must say mainstreet group slotsplus. Made a deposit, had been playing and a power failure hit. Lost my full computer, and could never get their casino to download again. It was well over a year and sighs another computer purchased. I thought lets download and see if i can get in. And yes my funds had still been sitting in my account for me to play on with.

So yes there are rtg casinos and mg casinos that do not apply this rule.

[Mouche12]

If an account remains inactive for a period of 30 months or more, Buzzluck has the right to deactivate said account and seize funds. In the eventuality that a request has been made from the account holder to return the available funds, Buzzluck will reactivate the account and reload funds as they were originally, providing that no fraudulent activity has taken place.

Now this is a reasonable term!

I would like to repeat once more that if the OP seeks legal advice, I believe he will have a good chance before a court of law that his account will be reactivated and he can continue to play with or withdraw the winnings from his deposit(s). If something is written in the terms, it does not mean that it is written in stone...

[DaveG39]

That's rogue behavior. They can close accounts if they like as per their terms but the money must be returned either to your original depositing method and if it's not possible to a withdrawal method agreed by both parties minus processing fees.

Press on with it. Dont let them get away with your money. Send a mail to them asking for your money together with your faxback forms (dont be lazy this time). Remember, they dont have the right to confiscate your funds though they can stop you from playing.

I just read that Rushmore Group is no longer accredited because of this "rogue" practice. Granted, a warning email probably should've been sent but who the frig leaves up to 2 grand laying around for nearly a year?? C'mon now.