Casino Complaint Aladdin's Gold Casino locked my account and is refusing to pay

[petr1]

I was requested to make a call for Aladdin's Glub Casino to verify my account so they could process my withdrawal. Customer servant asked me if I'm a full time student or not, to which I answered yes. Now my account is closed due to this.

I decided to re-check the Terms and there was this odd rule you don't often see on other casinos:

1. The Player is at least 18 years of age or has reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction, whichever is greater. Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in a College or University are not permitted to play in the Casino.

It simply says, players must be at least 18 years old (or has reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction) and full time college OR university students are not allowed to play in the Casino.


First of all, what is Aladdin's Gold Casino's definition of "full time student"?

Next year, I will be prepairing 3 months for my final exams, 2 months in school, 1 month at home, am I a full time student for them?

Second, the rule should only apply to college and university students because that what it says. Doesn't it?

According to them, no. It applies to all students.

Here's a small piece of the live chat conversation:

Me: But doesn't that rule only apply to College and University students?

Me: Because it clearly says so.

CS#1: yes, well college and university comes under education?

Me: In Finland, there's no such thing as "college". So how can I know if I'm in college by your definition?

CS#1: well you referred to them as college and university students so I'm sure you had some understanding to what they were

CS=customer servant

Oh really, so if College and University are both (different kind of) schools, I must interpret that in this case it means all kinds of schools?

After all, does it matter if you are full time student or not? Because for them, it seems full time student = all students, just like college and university = all schools.

Here are some quotes from the live chat conversations:

CS#2: Im sure we can yes if we needed to, at the end of the day, you did not read the terms of the casino, if you would have done then you would have known we did not accept students. it does not matter that is says college or university

CS#1: if you haven't graduated then your still undergoing education and will not be allowed to play

So now I have to be graduated to be allowed to play, even if I wasn't a full time student, what ever the definition for that is.


I told them (and even got a permission to release the conversations) that I might post this case on Casinomeister to get 'a second opinion' because for me, this thing seems just too ridiculous. (No, I was not threatening them!)

One of the customer servants thanked me for that, so it would make the rules more clearer for other players. I wonder why won't they do that themselves? I can think a thousand different ways to write the rule in a 'clearer way'.

CS#2: right, you can do that, it will help other players understand the rules of the casino, i will make it a little clearer for them, thanks but we do not except students, please read the terms and conditions and they won't make the same mistake as you, thanks very much

Me: Really?

Me: You keep twisting the rule, saying it includes all students.

Me: When it clearly doesn't say that.

Me: "a bit clearer"

Me: You could make it a lot clearer

Me: Just simply write no students allowed.

--
If you must know what kind of student I am, here's the answer:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I'm over 18 years old and I have almost graduated from my current school. I have 3 months left before the final exams, everything before that from now is really just preparation.

So, this is my sad story. I had a ~200 dollar withdrawal pending there and I guess it's now void. Do I have any chances here? What do you think?

 

[Redbush54]

You can contact the rep here. Look under i-Gaming Reps. There also is a thread here concerning this very thing.

 

[bb28]

I'm afraid you are sol because it is their terms and we all are responsible for reading and abiding by them.

On the other hand, I think they should abolish that particular term because it seems quite silly adding that in if you are of legal age.

I hope things work out for you.

 

[Markus]

Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in a College or University are not permitted to play in the Casino.

This rule makes no sense to me. From my perspective it has nothing to do with player protection. I do understand that it's necessary that a person must reach a certain age, before that person is allowed to gamble, to ensure that this person gambles responsible. But why are students not allowed to gamble within their means? Is this rule implying that students are more immature than non-students? A person who is unemployed, social benefit claimant and aged 18-25 may gamble but a student aged 18-25 may not? This makes no sense.

 

[Realitybitez]

I have to agree with you. It makes no sense. If they're old enough to gamble why the restrictions? They have every right to throw away their money the same as the rest of us

This rule makes no sense to me. From my perspective it has nothing to do with player protection. I do understand that it's necessary that a person must reach a certain age, before that person is allowed to gamble, to ensure that this person gambles responsible. But why are students not allowed to gamble within their means? Is this rule implying that students are more immature than non-students? A person who is unemployed, social benefit claimant and aged 18-25 may gamble but a student aged 18-25 may not? This makes no sense.

 

[chayton]

Redbush is right, this was gone over in depth in that other thread. The 'student' term may not make sense to the rest of us but that's the term at all the casinos in the CWC group.

So to the OP, sorry but it IS in the terms and you didn't read them. On the bright side, you're only out a couple hundred bucks in winnings and the casino will probably refund your deposits so at least you won't be out of pocket anything.

 

[Pinababy69]

I closed all my ClubWorld accounts due to this stupid rule. I knew that the problem would pop up again, and sure enough. Stupidest "rule" ever written into a casino's terms, and absolutely zero to do with player protection.

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/club-world-usa-proof-of-full-time-employment.40969/

44 page thread, when you have the time OP. Sorry you got caught out. If you like RTG software, play at Inetbet, where they have no such rule, and where you'll be paid in under 24 hours, 365 days a year.

 

[maxd]

Stupid rule or not CWC has legitimate legal reasons for having it, as mentioned in that other thread (as I recall).

 

[P.V.]

I closed all my ClubWorld accounts due to this stupid rule. I knew that the problem would pop up again, and sure enough. Stupidest "rule" ever written into a casino's terms, and absolutely zero to do with player protection.

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/club-world-usa-proof-of-full-time-employment.40969/

44 page thread, when you have the time OP. Sorry you got caught out. If you like RTG software, play at Inetbet, where they have no such rule, and where you'll be paid in under 24 hours, 365 days a year.

I agree that the OP is in fact a student in this case, it's clear. Not gonna get paid per the T & C at this site.

The problem is it's clearly discriminatory. You won't see this type regulation within the U.S., nothing in Nevada poker regulations recently approved has this type of legislation.

If you're of age, you've provided all doc's to prove your identity then you can play at the poker site etc..

Does a bar say, oh you're old enough to drink but you're a student so you can't drink? That would be discrimination.

Nevada Gaming Commission poker regulations says nothing about students as long as you're of age to play at a site.

The student rule is a joke, how about a rule for dead beat dads that don't pay child support!

Either you're of age to gamble online or you're not. Why would anyone support such a rule?

 

[Marie2473]

I do agree that it is a stupid rule HOWEVER it is in their T&C so they have their back covered.

 

[J.B.]

My guess as to why they have this rule is because some colleges use the same IP address for multiple computers within the same dorm hall and/or computer lab, making this rule a logical extension of the standard "one account per IP address" rule.

 

[Mousey]

My guess as to why they have this rule is because some colleges use the same IP address for multiple computers within the same dorm hall and/or computer lab, making this rule a logical extension of the standard "one account per IP address" rule.

That was my original thought on this idiotic rule, but that's not the reason (as 'clarified' by their rep in that other mile long thread).

 

[Nate]

Club World Group lost all credibility with me when this issue last popped up. I honestly can tell you that they ONLY have their own interests at heart. They use the term to enforce non-payment of winnings but have never proven that ALL Students who lost were reimbursed. I don't think they would even bother to audit their players for the purpose of refunding them.

I like to let dead dogs lie, but unfortunately this is a no win situation - they are one of the most stubborn groups and don't have any discretionary skills.

Nate

 

[petr1]

I do agree that it is a stupid rule HOWEVER it is in their T&C so they have their back covered.

If you take the rule word for word, it should only apply on full time college or university students aged 25 or under. So in fact this rule should not apply on me as I'm not studying a college or university.

 

[Jasminebed]

While many of us may agree with the OP (see the original thread in Redbush's link), we are not in control of his cashout. This term is not buried deep in their rules.

I think an additional checkbox for "I am not a student" when signing up might be in order though, since it is such an unusual term, unique to CW Group.

 

[vinylweatherman]

If you take the rule word for word, it should only apply on full time college or university students aged 25 or under. So in fact this rule should not apply on me as I'm not studying a college or university.

The problem is in the wording. Club World are UK based (except for their servers), so have worded this term to how things work in the UK. They have complicated matters by going into the additional detail of "who are enrolled in a college or university). THIS is what causes much of the confusion, as it suggests the rule only applies to SOME students under 25, when it is meant to apply to ALL students under 25 who study "full time", which means they don't have a paying occupation that beings in a "full time" wage. Part time work outside of study hours does NOT count as an occupation that would make the studies "part time".

The rule opens itself to all kinds of complications, and in one case a student got paid because he was able to show he was on a "gap year" at the time, yet another who played after graduating from college at the start of summer, but before taking up a post graduate course that autumn was NOT paid, even the only difference was that one was a "gap year", and the other a "gap 3 months". The argument presented in the second case was that because he started at a DIFFERENT college, he was NOT a student at the first college after graduating, nor was he a student at the second until he turned up for "fresher's week" to begin studies.

This is why it was suggested to get rid of the rule altogether, but protect students by limiting the amount they could deposit until they left their studies.

The fact that NO protection was put in place for what could arguably be MORE vulnerable groups did them no credit.

After great discussion, the clause " under 25 years of age" was added to clear confusion over whether "mature students" who returned to full time study after a first career could play.

This is the ONLY known group with such a rule. The rest simply have the "one account per email, computer, address, etc" rule, which effectively bans students from playing from their college/university address.

It is also 1) in the terms, and is hard to miss.

They can only determine whether someone is a student during verification, and had you answered "no", and presented a passport instead of a student ID card, they would never have known. It is likely they have plenty of students playing, but they have read the terms, and realise that the only way they can tell if a player is a student is by asking them, or getting a student ID card sent in for document verification.

In your case, you final exams are 3 months away, so you are STILL a full time student, even though your course is over and you are just preparing for exams.

As generally predicted, this DID happen again.

One compromise they could consider is to freeze an account until graduation, rather than confiscate winnings, but keep the deposits of losing students. Once having graduated, (and proving it), students could have their accounts unfrozen, and carry on from where they left off. This would also allow them to argue that LOSING students needn't be refunded their losses, as they too would have their accounts frozen, and released upon graduation.

Having winnings frozen in this way would REALLY protect these students because they would have the money to pay off debt, or set themselves up after graduation, rather than spending it on partying, or even at other casinos.

An alternative would be to require ALL players under 25 to be pre verified before depositing. This way they could find out who is a student before they have a dispute on their hands over winnings, and could say "not now, but come back after you have graduated".

 

[chayton]

It seems to me that the players who have an issue like this are the ones who didn't read the terms in the first place - as Vinyl said, no doubt those students who did read the terms and signed up anyhow could just lie if asked, it's only those who don't know it would be an issue to be a student (and who say they are) are the ones who end up in this predicament.

It would be easy to incorporate a student checkbox on signup like Jazzy suggested, and prescreening is another good idea - it would also be very easy to do. All the Club World Casino group phone you or pop up a window for you to phone them on your first deposit anyhow to verify your info and the amount you deposited etc. At that time the rep could check the player's age, if they're under 25 ask them if they're a student, if they are, boom - close the account and refund the deposit.

Personally I don't really 'get' this term, but there are other casinos that have rules like "if you're from a certain country then your WR on bonuses is 100x more." To be discriminated against because a bunch of fraudsters live in the same country as you isn't fair either.

 

[vinylweatherman]

It seems to me that the players who have an issue like this are the ones who didn't read the terms in the first place - as Vinyl said, no doubt those students who did read the terms and signed up anyhow could just lie if asked, it's only those who don't know it would be an issue to be a student (and who say they are) are the ones who end up in this predicament.

It would be easy to incorporate a student checkbox on signup like Jazzy suggested, and prescreening is another good idea - it would also be very easy to do. All the Club World Casino group phone you or pop up a window for you to phone them on your first deposit anyhow to verify your info and the amount you deposited etc. At that time the rep could check the player's age, if they're under 25 ask them if they're a student, if they are, boom - close the account and refund the deposit.

Personally I don't really 'get' this term, but there are other casinos that have rules like "if you're from a certain country then your WR on bonuses is 100x more." To be discriminated against because a bunch of fraudsters live in the same country as you isn't fair either.

It works the other way too, and when CASINOS face this problem they go to some lengths to argue that THEY shouldn't be judged by the actions of their peers. Recently, the Tropica rep came here to argue that the blanket roguing of ALL Rival white labels simply because SOME of them have been inept, rogue, sneaky, etc was unfair.

A similar situation exists with some software brands, with Playtech and RTG operators bearing the brunt of blanket discrimination simply because these two softwares have a habit of atttracting to rogue operators due to weak or non existent vetting on the part of the software supplier.

The same can be said of licensing jurisdiction, with the choice of jurisdiction alone sometimes being enough to assume the worst of a new start up casino.


If operators want players to leave this mindset behind, and judge individual operators on individual merit, they should treat players the same way, and presume innocence until checks on individual players show something suspicious. This is likely to involve more checking up front, rather than waiting for the first withdrawal.

Provided they are open and transparent, I don't think using an industry wide database should be too much of a problem provided individual players have the right to be sent a copy of all the data hald about them as they do under UK and EU law with respect to any other company keeping personal data. Such a database could allow a quick background check to take place as soon as an account is registered, and then select players with odd profiles for full pre verification, whilst leaving the majority to have their verification performed after the first deposits, or at first withdrawal. This would be a compromise solution to the argument that pre verification of EVERY player is unpopular with many, and leads them to drift to outfits that just let them play straight away.

 

[Nifty29]

Vinyl.....I think you're making this way too complicated than it actually is.

The student term, although IMO it is silly, is there in plain English for all to see. It's not hidden or disguised. Anyone reading the terms would see it right away. The OP said they weren't aware of the clause because "other casinos don't have it" which means they didn't read the terms, which in turn means the fault lies with them.

The issue of the validity of the term itself is irrelevant here and requires a seperate discussion. The only issue is whether or not they broke it, and it is clear that they did.

The part about "college or university" is, as others have said, a UK example. It is not reasonable to expect the casino to list every possible country-specific name for specific educational institution.....in fact it is ridiculous. A reasonable person would accept the phrase as encompassing all forms of education available to persons between 18-25 in the country in which they reside. The OP states there is no "college" in Finland, bit I'm sure that doesn't mean there isn't an equivalent....in fact, there must be or the OP wouldn't be studying...??. I've no doubt that Finland uses a different name for it, but it still boils down to post-secondary education and any reasonable person knows it.

I'm also sure that, if the casino was offering better bonuses or freebies for "college and university" students, the OP would have insisted he IS one. Like the player in the other thread who presented and described himself as a student, only to then insist he wasn't when the term (that he had neglected to read) was enforced.

The OP said they were a student, and they obviously are a student of a post-secondary institution. Stupid term. Correct application.

 

[The Dude]

If you take the rule word for word, it should only apply on full time college or university students aged 25 or under. So in fact this rule should not apply on me as I'm not studying a college or university.

Just to jump in real quick - and then I'm outta here

You're in "Gymnasium" - that's what it's called in Germany, not sure what it's called in Finland. In other words, you're in High School. Even though the casino assumes that most people have graduated from High School by the age of 18, you're still a student. There was another thread that dealt with this last year, not sure where it is, but it's about a guy who tried to convince everyone that being a High School/Gymnasium student didn't apply, but it did. Should have read the terms.

 

[petr1]

Just to jump in real quick - and then I'm outta here

You're in "Gymnasium" - that's what it's called in Germany, not sure what it's called in Finland. In other words, you're in High School. Even though the casino assumes that most people have graduated from High School by the age of 18, you're still a student. There was another thread that dealt with this last year, not sure where it is, but it's about a guy who tried to convince everyone that being a High School/Gymnasium student didn't apply, but it did. Should have read the terms.

Yes. It's called a gymnasium and most people graduate at the age of 18-19. Anyway, I can admit that I didn't read the Terms, at least not very carefully.

Still, I don't understand why should the casino have the right to interpret the rule in their favor? As I said, if we take the rule strictly, word for word, does it apply to me? No.

 

[Tengil]

Yes. It's called a gymnasium and most people graduate at the age of 18-19. Anyway, I can admit that I didn't read the Terms, at least not very carefully.

Still, I don't understand why should the casino have the right to interpret the rule in their favor? As I said, if we take the rule strictly, word for word, does it apply to me? No.

You are correct that the rule doesnt strictly apply to you but then again Club World Group isnt a good group, decent at best.

For the records the term in Swedish which is an official language in Finland:
1. Spelaren är minst 18 år, eller har uppnått myndighetsålder. Heltidsstuderande som är inskriven vid en högskola eller ett universitet, är ej tillåtna att spela i kasinot.

And in German if Bryan is interested:
1. Der Spieler ist mindestens 18 Jahre alt oder hat das in ihrem/seinem Gerichtsbereich geltende gesetzliche Mündigkeitsalter erreicht. Das höhere Alter ist gültig. Vollzeitstudenten, die an einer Hochschule oder Universität immatrikuliert sind, ist es nicht gestattet, im Kasino zu spielen.


There really isnt a single reason why anyone should "allow" them to steal your winnings. You (the casino) cant twist the rules so that they always suit you.
Or you can, in the wonderful world of online casinos.
They could easily make the rule read "any full-time student" or similar.

 

[anniemac]

Well, we could certainly beat this horse to death again and it wouldn't make much difference in the outcome.

If you are 18 and still in 'high school' then you shouldn't be gambling anyway. My opinion. Do you still live at home with parents? How did you fund your account? Lots of questions that can cause lots of problems. Again, my opinion.

I do have issue with the college/university rule that CW has but it is a rule and as such, must be adhered to. It's there and they can interpret and enforce it any way they want to.

 

[petr1]

You are correct that the rule doesnt strictly apply to you but then again Club World Group isnt a good group, decent at best.

For the records the term in Swedish which is an official language in Finland:
1. Spelaren är minst 18 år, eller har uppnått myndighetsålder. Heltidsstuderande som är inskriven vid en högskola eller ett universitet, är ej tillåtna att spela i kasinot.

And in German if Bryan is interested:
1. Der Spieler ist mindestens 18 Jahre alt oder hat das in ihrem/seinem Gerichtsbereich geltende gesetzliche Mündigkeitsalter erreicht. Das höhere Alter ist gültig. Vollzeitstudenten, die an einer Hochschule oder Universität immatrikuliert sind, ist es nicht gestattet, im Kasino zu spielen.


There really isnt a single reason why anyone should "allow" them to steal your winnings. You (the casino) cant twist the rules so that they always suit you.
Or you can, in the wonderful world of online casinos.
They could easily make the rule read "any full-time student" or similar.

Thanks, this just proves my point.

The word "högskola" (or "korkeakoulu" in Finnish) means higher education (University and Polytechnical). (

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

)
Gymnasium is an upper secondary school (

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

) which is before university and "polytechinal".

If you are 18 and still in 'high school' then you shouldn't be gambling anyway. My opinion. Do you still live at home with parents? How did you fund your account? Lots of questions that can cause lots of problems. Again, my opinion.

I think this is irrelevant. Even though I'm 18, I should get paid just like everyone else.

 

[petr1]

Still waiting for a reply from CW.

 

[chuchu59]

Just a quick one. Given that this issue caused a furore last year does the group require you to declare whether you are a full-time student when you register. If not, why not?

 

[Jasminebed]

You are required to check that you have read and agreed to the terms. The condition of not being a student under 25 years of age is item 1 under Player Responsibilities.

We have had the case argued before that high school students are not College or University students, but Club World has not agreed that they are exempt from the no student term.

I don't see the OP having a resolution in their favour unless they took legal action in the appropriate jurisdiction, and I can't see it being viable for such a small amount.

You are young, and it's a very valuable lesson to always read the terms and conditions of any contract you agree to. Many people have learnt this lesson at a much higher cost.

If you do want to play online, there are many other casinos that will accept you if 18 is legal age to gamble for your country. Please read all terms though, because many do not accept players under 21, students or not.

 

[catcat941]

200 withrawl loss ?

man you must be lucky , maby dozens in here are after 12 in a raw sessions of 200 eu losses , maby quit gambling now and rebudjeting when you are 30 . harsh rule and unbelievable , but your in the worst western country for onlinegambling . try viplounge group .slow pay but pay . to americans.

 

[chuchu59]

man you must be lucky , maby dozens in here are after 12 in a raw sessions of 200 eu losses , maby quit gambling now and rebudjeting when you are 30 . harsh rule and unbelievable , but your in the worst western country for onlinegambling . try viplounge group .slow pay but pay . to americans.

VIP lounge? Ya kidding. I faintly recall this one is associated with Virtual. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[greasemonkey]

Many of us here are quick to say "sorry, that is their rule and nonsensical or not it is our repsonibility to abide by it and know it."

but what about the times that these casinos go outside of their rules and implement an FU clause? Sorry, we feel that you were not gambling in the spirit of our bonus or sorry, we think you play like other players and are linked somehow..... there are too many ways for these casinos to get out of paying players. The rule should be that if you accept a bet then pay the winners. Period. These rules are absurd and it is in no way intended to protect any player it is simply a way to get out of paying winners... especially winners that the casino guesses will not be overall losers eventually. It is total BS.

 

[LaHutti]

Many of us here are quick to say "sorry, that is their rule and nonsensical or not it is our repsonibility to abide by it and know it."

but what about the times that these casinos go outside of their rules and implement an FU clause? Sorry, we feel that you were not gambling in the spirit of our bonus or sorry, we think you play like other players and are linked somehow..... there are too many ways for these casinos to get out of paying players. The rule should be that if you accept a bet then pay the winners. Period. These rules are absurd and it is in no way intended to protect any player it is simply a way to get out of paying winners... especially winners that the casino guesses will not be overall losers eventually. It is total BS.

I very much agree with "if you accept the bet, pay the winners".
It's NOT fair, that the casinos put the responsibillity on the players. It should be THEIR responsibillity, that everything is the way they want it, before they take a bet from any player, and once they say "good to go", then they need to pay up.
Makling stupid rules, that they can turn and twist as they please is not the way to do it, and we see more and more of that.

 

[Nifty29]

Many of us here are quick to say "sorry, that is their rule and nonsensical or not it is our repsonibility to abide by it and know it."

but what about the times that these casinos go outside of their rules and implement an FU clause? Sorry, we feel that you were not gambling in the spirit of our bonus or sorry, we think you play like other players and are linked somehow..... there are too many ways for these casinos to get out of paying players. The rule should be that if you accept a bet then pay the winners. Period. These rules are absurd and it is in no way intended to protect any player it is simply a way to get out of paying winners... especially winners that the casino guesses will not be overall losers eventually. It is total BS.

We aren't talking about spirit of the bonus or FU clauses or anything of the kind. The issue also has nothing to do with casinos going outside their own rules. It might be an idea to start a new thread if you want to go over that old chestnut again.

The term may or may not silly, but it is clearly stated right at the top of the page. The OP personally stated they were a student. The OP only decided that they weren't technically a student AFTER reading the terms AFTER their winnings were denied. If they had done so beforehand, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

It is the PLAYERS responsibility to read the terms BEFORE they play. Anything and everything that happens as a consequence of NOT doing so is totally the players fault.

You can say the term itself is stupid, but it has no bearing on this case.

"Accept a legitimate bet, pay the legitimate winnings". I agree.

Remember that the OP accepted the terms and conditions when they signed up and that included the student clause. The only thin that it BS is expecting exceptions to be made for people who don't bother to read the rules before they play. It's ok for 99.9% of others so why should software changes be made for people who couldn't be arsed in the first place?

 

[greasemonkey]

Nifty, you are likely correct if we are looking at just this one case on its own. But if you look at the totality of all the legitimate cases then you will see that casinos are adamant about you following their terms precisely and if they can use them to not pay you then they will..... HOWEVER, they also give themselves the right to not follow their terms exactly or precisely if it benefits them. What I am saying is that they cannot have it both ways.

I am also stating that the entire model is backwards. Approval should be done by the casino PRIOR to you playing. That way, rather than looking for reasons not to pay a player they would simply approve a player then pay him upon cashout requests and that would greatly reduce this ridiculous model that we now operate under in which even if you win you are still wondering if your cashout will arrive or if they will find some hidden clause and not pay you.

In other words, if the casino accepts your bet then they should surely pay you if you win and keep your money if you lose. Simple and clear. I don't need to be a lawyer to walk in and gamble at a brick and mortar casino and I should not have to be one on line either. If you accept my risk and bet then assume your risk should you lose and pay the player.

 

[Nifty29]

Nifty, you are likely correct if we are looking at just this one case on its own. But if you look at the totality of all the legitimate cases then you will see that casinos are adamant about you following their terms precisely and if they can use them to not pay you then they will..... HOWEVER, they also give themselves the right to not follow their terms exactly or precisely if it benefits them. What I am saying is that they cannot have it both ways.

I am also stating that the entire model is backwards. Approval should be done by the casino PRIOR to you playing. That way, rather than looking for reasons not to pay a player they would simply approve a player then pay him upon cashout requests and that would greatly reduce this ridiculous model that we now operate under in which even if you win you are still wondering if your cashout will arrive or if they will find some hidden clause and not pay you.

In other words, if the casino accepts your bet then they should surely pay you if you win and keep your money if you lose. Simple and clear. I don't need to be a lawyer to walk in and gamble at a brick and mortar casino and I should not have to be one on line either. If you accept my risk and bet then assume your risk should you lose and pay the player.

In a perfect world, everyone could be instantly verified upon signup via an online casino database or a fingerprint scanner etc. Unfortunately, it isn't a perfect world and it never will be.

Casinos don't implement pre-verification because it turns a lot of players off. We want to signup and play, not sign up and send our docs and wait for some drone to stamp it and have our account unlocked for play.....players will just go elsewhere that they can play instantly. The only way it might happen is if all operators implemented it together, and you can guess how likely that is to occur.

The fact is that things are as they are.....the player IS responsible for reading the terms before they agree to them.

On the other matter, when did CWG "not follow their own terms"? We are talking about a specific casino here so we shouldn't be generalizing.

 

[Tengil]

Everyone seems to have forgotten that he didnt brake any term. He was not in College or Uni nor was he in Högskola or Universitet. If they ment something else like all full-time students then write in the terms. Period. Take some responsibility for your own mistakes like players have to do.
If you are too lazy or mentally challenged to get it then close shop.

Its sickening how some try their utmost to defend Club Worlds roguish action.

 

[ksech]

CWC's student clause is ridiculous, but nothing any player or member here at CM says or does will make them change it. The general concensus agrees this is a stupid clause. They DON'T hide it, it's right there. To continually bicker about it doesn't accomplish anything except to refuel a debate that gets members temporary vacations or banned.

 

[The Dude]

Just to give further info: Gymnasium is the European equivalent of High School/prep school which normally goes from the fifth grade to 12th or 13th grade. Students of the Gymnasium are from the ages 10 - 18 or 19. My two youngest are both in the Gymnasium, so I'm pretty familiar with this.

Most of the CWC crew are gone for the holidays, so it may be a few days before any responses come in.

 

[Markus]

Casinos don't implement pre-verification because it turns a lot of players off. We want to signup and play, not sign up and send our docs and wait for some drone to stamp it and have our account unlocked for play.....players will just go elsewhere that they can play instantly.

Unfortunately in most cases this is true, but I do have one counterexample: Totesport Casino. After sign up they immediately lock the player account and request a proof of age before they allow the player to deposit and play (at least at the time I signed up they did it this way). You can see at this example that it does work, because despite this procedure there are players playing at Totesport Casino.

In my opinion Totesport behaves in an exemplary manner in regards to player protection and fairness. All casinos should do it this way, especially if they have a strange student clause like Club World.

 

[LaHutti]

WWhat I don't understand,is why they even have the rule in the first place. If anyone could tell me why, I would dearly appreciate it.
If people are of legal age, what's the big deal ?...and who don't they want playing there next ? Painters ?
It seems very odd to me, and on top of that, discriminating.

 

[anniemac]

The player has to send in ID verification, proof of address - utility bill in his/her name etc, copy of CC used plus a signed authorization. If CC not used, then they ask for account number of webwallet used. Sometimes they ask for a copy of your bank statement also. This process in itself will throw up the first red flag. Could be it did and this is what cause the phone call to become necessary.

Whether the player is a student or not is a moot point if he can't submit verification documents.

Do I think the T&C's need to be changed? Yes I do. There is a big difference in a college student that is 25 or under, living on his/her own and paying his/her own way and a college student 25 or under living in the dorm and gambling away happily on Daddy's money. I absolutely believe that anyone still in high school, gymnasium or whatever you call it should not be able to gambling online, period.

But it really doesn't make a rat's behind because the term is there and we can split hairs all day long.

 

[vinylweatherman]

WWhat I don't understand,is why they even have the rule in the first place. If anyone could tell me why, I would dearly appreciate it.
If people are of legal age, what's the big deal ?...and who don't they want playing there next ? Painters ?
It seems very odd to me, and on top of that, discriminating.

The argument is really about whether an adult is an adult PERIOD, or whether there are certain categories of legal adult that must be treated as legal minors for their own good. CWC consider that young adult students, although legally adult, MUST be protected from their own youthful urges and prevented from digging themselves into a hole by gambling when they have no means of independent support, such as a job. This is the argument presented previously to justify this term, and it's strict enforcement no matter how unpopular.

In law, there ARE categories of adults (over the age of majority) that are granted legal protection. These include those classed as having "learning difficulties", and thus unable to manage their own affairs without help. It also includes the elderly suffering from such degenerative diseases as dementia. Courts grant a power of attourney to someone to manage the affairs of these people, and this can be done against their will. The ONKY difference is that CWC are a private business, and have taken it upon themselves to enforce such protection against one class of adult it believes to be particularly vulnerable to the pitfalls of easy access to gambling products online, which could cause them to be forced out of their studies through losing more than they can afford when they are too young to realise the damage done to their life prospects. Governments also impose regulations designed to protect certain groups of adults, and again this is done against their will.

One argument is whether this right to "nanny" should extend to private business, or be the preserve of elected governments. The only real way to settle this is for a specimen case to go before a court, where the legal arguments can be examined.

There are many anti-discrimination laws that make it illegal to "protect" certain groups, such as women, minority races, religion, gender, and more recently age. I am not aware of any such laws prohibiting discrimination on other grounds, such as occupation, income, etc. In fact, if they had a rule prohibiting over 70's from playing, they WOULD be in a heap of trouble from the UK and EU. The ONLY permitted age discrimination allowed is when it is directed at excluding minors from accessing a product intended for adults.

In terms of intent, a "high school" student gambling is WORSE than a university student gambling, as "high school" is part of the routine education that ALL children are expected to pass through on the way to adulthood, whereas university or equivalent is a choice made by a student to study further, or enter the jobs market right away.

The change to 18 as the age of majority has lead to some of these problems. It used to be 21 in recognition of the feeling that 18 was too young to take on the full responsibilties of adulthood. Social progress lead to it being dropped to 18 in many countries, but there are states in the US where it is STILL set at 21.

Recently, the UK has started moving things the other way. The legal age for buying tobacco used to be 16, but was recently raised to 18. There are also moves to require full time study in "school" to be extended to the age of 18, rather than having the option to leave at 16 and try to get work.

There are those that want some things to go back to being restricted to age 21 or over, although the businesses that make money from such services are going to resist.

Had the minimum age for gambling remained at 21, the vast majority of university students would be under age anyway, as most courses are for 3 years, and cover the ages 18 to 21.

Specifically stating "university or college" rather than leaving it as "full time student" has only allowed these arguments over whether a particular establishment is covered by the term, rather than focussing on the "full time" aspect of the studies which leaves little time to earn a living wage to fully support oneself.

CWC ignored earlier advice to simplify the term by removing this extra information, making it a very simple "no full time students under 25 years of age", regardless of the name or structure of the institution in which the studies were undertaken. After all, the aim is to stop students from gambling away their study allowance, not have them argue over whether they can dodge the rule because of the way their studies are structured.

In many ways, this is a rule that can only be enforced by consent, as the only way they can prove someone is a student is to get them to admit it. As this player failed to read the terms, they walked right into this mess by answering "yes" when asked if they were a student. Had they said "no", there is no way CWC could have proven otherwise without access to enrollment records of all institutions in the country. A student would simply use standard documents such as a passport, rather than send in their student ID card.

The previous student was only caught because they volunteered their student ID card as their photo ID, which alerted the casino to the fact they were a student. Having sent this card in, it was too late to backtrack and claim not to be a student any longer, and it didn't work.

I bet there are many students playing at CWC, but they have not been caught because they have read the terms, and have made sure CWC don't get hold of the wrong documents such as a student ID card. It would take a great deal of costly investigation for CWC to check up on every player between the ages of 18 to 25 in order to catch out those who are students. If they put EVERY such player through such detailed investigation, it will drive them away student or not, as they will feel the "hoops" they are being asked to jump through are ridiculous.

 

[petr1]

We aren't talking about spirit of the bonus or FU clauses or anything of the kind. The issue also has nothing to do with casinos going outside their own rules. It might be an idea to start a new thread if you want to go over that old chestnut again.

The term may or may not silly, but it is clearly stated right at the top of the page. The OP personally stated they were a student. The OP only decided that they weren't technically a student AFTER reading the terms AFTER their winnings were denied. If they had done so beforehand, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

It is the PLAYERS responsibility to read the terms BEFORE they play. Anything and everything that happens as a consequence of NOT doing so is totally the players fault.

You can say the term itself is stupid, but it has no bearing on this case.

"Accept a legitimate bet, pay the legitimate winnings". I agree.

Remember that the OP accepted the terms and conditions when they signed up and that included the student clause. The only thin that it BS is expecting exceptions to be made for people who don't bother to read the rules before they play. It's ok for 99.9% of others so why should software changes be made for people who couldn't be arsed in the first place?

You keep forgetting that I didn't break the Terms, I have explained this many times. I didn't "decide" that I'm not a student after reading the Terms.

 

[Nifty29]

You keep forgetting that I didn't break the Terms, I have explained this many times. I didn't "decide" that I'm not a student after reading the Terms.

You told the rep you were a full time student.

You then "re-checked" the terms and "found a rule" about students I.e. you didn't see it the first time, because if you had then surely you would have clarified your status with the casino right?

It really comes down to common sense. Why would Uni and College students under 25 be banned, but an 18yo at high school be just fine? The terms "university or college" were used in the UK/American sense and obviously include other similar types of education. In Australia, high schools are called "colleges" so does that mean that Australian high school students are banned but Finnish ones aren't simply because they call it something different?

Come on.

 

[petr1]

You told the rep you were a full time student.

You then "re-checked" the terms and "found a rule" about students I.e. you didn't see it the first time, because if you had then surely you would have clarified your status with the casino right?

It really comes down to common sense. Why would Uni and College students under 25 be banned, but an 18yo at high school be just fine? The terms "university or college" were used in the UK/American sense and obviously include other similar types of education. In Australia, high schools are called "colleges" so does that mean that Australian high school students are banned but Finnish ones aren't simply because they call it something different?

Come on.

There no common sense in that rule. 18-year old unemployed non-student is allowed to play but 25-year old university student is not?

And by the way, when did casinos start to have common sense?

 

[Jasminebed]

I'm sorry petr, but you broke the terms in the eyes of Club World. I'm no fan of this term, and I tend to agree with you that the term is poorly worded, when it comes to high school students.

Did you read this thread? https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/high-noon-casino-account-closed-student-issue.42566/ This issue was pretty much the same as yours. You can see just how far this student got with his complaint.

There's also a discussion regarding clarifying the student term: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/suggestions-for-the-no-student-clause.41601/, and further discussion here: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/club-world-still-waiting-on-t-c-changes.42045/

A really really long thread regarding another member who was asked for proof of employment because his age caused the casino to suspect he was a student, and the issue is again discussed at length: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/club-world-usa-proof-of-full-time-employment.40969/

One more from quite a long time ago: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/club-world-no-students-under-21.16930/

If Aladdin's Gold has not returned any deposits you have made, you need to let us know that, and I'm sure you will receive assistance in that regard.

You can see that quite a number of the members here don't favour that term, how it's written and how it is implemented, but we are not the ones running the casino.

You are beating a dead horse. If you really think you have a case, it will have to be taken via legal action, you won't find a resolution here I'm sorry to say.

 

[chuchu59]

There no common sense in that rule. 18-year old unemployed non-student is allowed to play but 25-year old university student is not?

And by the way, when did casinos start to have common sense?

Petr, when did you register at the casino and was there something in the registration form asking whether you are a full-time student?

 

[petr1]

Petr, when did you register at the casino and was there something in the registration form asking whether you are a full-time student?

If I remember correctly, I registered there in the beginning of December and at the same day I made a deposit. If I had not won anything few days ago, I wouldn't even know that I have the right to demand a refund for my deposits.

There was absolutely nothing in the registration form asking if I'm a full-time student.

 

[anniemac]

Chu,

I don't remember if there is a full-time student box but you do have to check the box that asks if you have read the T&Cs and agree to them. Plus by his own admission, he told them he was a student.

Should CWG address this issue more in depth, I believe so. But I don't run the casino. As the saying goes, it is what it is. Leason learned. Read the T&C's in depth before playing. If you don't understand them, ask.

 

[petr1]

Chu,

I don't remember if there is a full-time student box but you do have to check the box that asks if you have read the T&Cs and agree to them. Plus by his own admission, he told them he was a student.

Should CWG address this issue more in depth, I believe so. But I don't run the casino. As the saying goes, it is what it is. Leason learned. Read the T&C's in depth before playing. If you don't understand them, ask.

They made a vague rule with a loophole and after several complaints they are still not fixing it. It's their mistake, not mine, and if we take the rule precisely, I should get paid.

 

[anniemac]

Yes, but had you read the rules before playing, then you would have known this rule was there, however ambiguous. You could have asked for clarification and wouldn't be in this predicament now.

Whether anyone agrees with the rule or its meaning is a moot point. Casinos, whether this particular one, or every other one on the internet, have the right to put in what ever rules they want and interpret them anyway they want to. When you check the T&C box you are agreeing to that.

Just a curiousity question, have you PM'd the Rep here?