karamba.com

**rafi567** · 25th January 2011, 11:17 AM

Please help on the non-payment of winnings by www.karamba.com.
Despite the withdrawal request on Dec. 7, 2010, the payment status is
still pending. Despite numerous contacts with the operator I was not
given a concrete answer to why this happens. I am still disposed of that
I have to wait. I do not think, however, that something had changed.
What can I do to somehow explain this matter? Who to talk to. Contacts with their support is a complete waste of time.
This screen confirms that the seven weeks there with my Cashout not happening.
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/4720/karamba2.jpg

**BingoT** · 25th January 2011, 01:27 PM

Hey Rafi567 I gave Mickey heads up on this thread.
Thanks Mickey for the fast reply.
~T~

Thanks Tom, im looking into this.

Mickey Winitsky
Affiliate Director

**Karamba** · 12th February 2011, 10:50 AM

We acknowledge the time it has taken to resolve the case, has been lengthened however this is due to the complications that have occurred with the account and the process to issue the cashout.

And we would like to explain to our client/s that we have their best interests at heart, when special cases arise like this one, our compliance department have to initiate queries with relevant departments of our company to ensure the funds are being awarded correctly. This makes the process extensive however we make sure to that all the information is accurate to the 100th percent, so as to ensure no further confusions or issues at a later date may arise from the same instance.

The resolution has been found, upon approval from our compliance department, the funds have been sent to our Client also with communication to ensure that they are aware of the result.

Karamba.com

**maxd** · 22nd February 2011, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by Karamba

The resolution has been found, upon approval from our compliance department, the funds have been sent to our Client also with communication to ensure that they are aware of the result.

Thank you for your post. I will verify this with the player and post back here accordingly.

**maxd** · 24th February 2011, 07:53 AM

FWIW, no response from the player yet. Also, received this from the casino peeps:

We are writing to you with reference to your last email to us, please note to confirm, we will need a legal notice from the clients stating that you are representing them on their behalf. And the client will need to send this to us after which further communication will not be an issue ....

Since few players are willing or able to engage the services of a lawyer to write letters for them this effectively means Karamba won't talk to us about player issues: with any luck the next stop for Karamba will be the "No Can Do" List.

**Casinomeister** · 24th February 2011, 08:26 AM

We are writing to you with reference to your last email to us, please note to confirm, we will need a legal notice from the clients stating that you are representing them on their behalf. And the client will need to send this to us after which further communication will not be an issue ....

Just to make things perfectly clear, we're not representing anyone - nor have we ever pretended to do so. The PAB service is there merely to facilitate communications between players and casinos. We don't ask casinos to share any information or to submit any reports, all we ask from you is to look into an issue and get back to us on its status. A simple "we're looking into this - thanks for the heads up" would have sufficed.

The "need a legal notice" is a bit ostentatious in my opinion. If you want to give us a "speak to the hand" kind of response (after three attempts to contact you), I have no problem adding you to the No-can-do list. It saves us work.

Added: No Can Do list updated here: http://www.casinomeister.com/no-can-do-list.php

**vinylweatherman** · 24th February 2011, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by maxd

FWIW, no response from the player yet. Also, received this from the casino peeps:

Since few players are willing or able to engage the services of a lawyer to write letters for them this effectively means Karamba won't talk to us about player issues: with any luck the next stop for Karamba will be the "No Can Do" List.

Originally Posted by Casinomeister

Just to make things perfectly clear, we're not representing anyone - nor have we ever pretended to do so. The PAB service is there merely to facilitate communications between players and casinos. We don't ask casinos to share any information or to submit any reports, all we ask from you is to look into an issue and get back to us on its status. A simple "we're looking into this - thanks for the heads up" would have sufficed.

The "need a legal notice" is a bit ostentatious in my opinion. If you want to give us a "speak to the hand" kind of response (after three attempts to contact you), I have no problem adding you to the No-can-do list. It saves us work.

Added: No Can Do list updated here: http://www.casinomeister.com/no-can-do-list.php

Maybe they have worded this badly, and all they are asking is for the player to give a written permission under Data protection laws, and send both yourselves and them a copy.

A "legal notice" does not necessarily have to be done by a lawyer. ANYONE can write and send a formal "legal notice" to a company. It means that the notice can be taken as having a standing in law, and can be presented later as proof that the player consented to information being shared.

I always thought the PAB process relied on the willingness of casinos to share information, but arguments in the Ladbrokes thread suggest that a PAB can be processed WITHOUT any actual sharing of information, but as a means to have the "right person" take a second look at the complaint.

Perhaps Karamba should be given one last opportunity to clarify what they mean by this request before they are placed in "no-can-do".

"making unnecessary work for Max" is a different matter, and would qualify for "not recommended" even if they WILL cooperate, but in a way that makes the process overly burdensome.

**maxd** · 24th February 2011, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by vinylweatherman

Perhaps Karamba should be given one last opportunity to clarify what they mean by this request before they are placed in "no-can-do".

I believe I've already done this. After their initial response, saying:

Please be advised we do not discuss our customers case with anyone apart from the customer themselves, unless we receive legal notice from the player of represantation.

I asked for clarification: did they mean they wanted the player to send them authorisation for us to discuss their complaint or did they mean they required something from the player's lawyer. They replied:

... we will need a legal notice from the clients stating that you are representing them on their behalf.

I assumed this meant that they wanted lawyers involved. I believe Bryan had the same interpretation. However, based on what you've said I suppose there's a slight possibility that may not be the case.

**vinylweatherman** · 24th February 2011, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by maxd

I believe I've already done this. After their initial response, saying:

I asked for clarification: did they mean they wanted the player to send them authorisation for us to discuss their complaint or did they mean they required something from the player's lawyer. They replied:

I assumed this meant that they wanted lawyers involved. I believe Bryan had the same interpretation. However, based on what you've said I suppose there's a slight possibility that may not be the case.

I hope so, because there is NOTHING in data protection law that REQUIRES a client to have their own lawyer before they can take charge of their own information. It is the SAME argument that makes Ladbrokes' position on mediators have NOTHING to do with any legal requirement, but something THEY have imposed on themselves to make life easier.

They may say it has to be in writing, rather than an email. Pedantic, but technically true by the LETTER of the requirements of a "legal notice" that can be proven to be authentic if a later dispute arises. This is mainly down to having the hand written signature, rather than the content of any notice.

**maxd** · 24th February 2011, 10:22 PM

Originally Posted by vinylweatherman

I hope so, because there is NOTHING in data protection law that REQUIRES a client to have their own lawyer before they can take charge of their own information. It is the SAME argument that makes Ladbrokes' position on mediators have NOTHING to do with any legal requirement, but something THEY have imposed on themselves to make life easier.

In my experience casino management tends to interpret the Data Protection Act however it best suits them. In most cases they are fairly liberal minded about it and business proceeds without serious problems. On the other hand one of my least favourite interpretations is the "we can't say anything to anybody" position because it has nothing to do with reality and everything to do with "this is a useful way for us to read this so that's what we're going with".

This "say nothing" reading of the DPA is almost always bull crap and I'm happy, thanks to Zultha in the Ladbrokes "Spirit of the Promotion" thread, to have documentation of pretty much exactly that. What difference that'll actually make remains to be seen.