Casino On Net will steal your deposit and winnings

[fortuneriver]

I think that you would find that if you had restricted yourself to just playing at 888, you would not find yourself in the position you are in now. The fact that you played tactically the same at both properties owned and operated by 888, flagged you as a result as a bonus hunter, rightly or wrongly. As such the casino has implemented that clause.

Like I say, not what you want to hear, but this is how I am interpreting it.

First of all, why should i restrict myself from playing at both of their casinos? Where it says in their terms and coditions that i SHOULD play only at one of two? Now, where it says also that i SHOULD play different ways at both of those casinos so they don't consider me bonus hunter? Also, why should i know that these casinos belong to the same group and why should it bother me as a player?
So, about what implementation of clause are you talking? According to this clause thay can make whatever they want to whoever they want.

[Webzcas]

FRiver. I am just saying how I am reading all of this. You don't have to agree with me. FWIW good luck in seeing if they will change their mind.

[fortuneriver]

FRiver. I am just saying how I am reading all of this. You don't have to agree with me. FWIW good luck in seeing if they will change their mind.

thank you for your opinion. And i just tried to explain you my view: the Casino on Net just steal my winnings using absolutely absurd idea of bonus abuse. The actual meaning of the words "bonus abuse" is " winning with the bonus". Abusing the bonus = making profit of bonus. I dont see any other rational explanation.

[fortuneriver]

Section 9(ii):

"In the event that the Company believes a user is abusing or attempting to abuse a bonus or other promotion, or is likely to benefit through abuse or lack of good faith from a gaming policy adopted by the Company, then the Company may, at its sole discretion, deny, withhold or withdraw from any user any bonus or promotion, or rescind any policy with respect to that user, either temporarily or permanently, or terminate that user's access to the Service and/or block that user's account

and here is my interpretaion. I only change the term bonus abuse with the term winning with the bonus. Look how well it fits.

In the event that the Company believes a user is winning with the bonus or attempting to win with a bonus or other promotion, or is likely to benefit through bonus or lack of good faith from a gaming policy adopted by the Company, then the Company may, at its sole discretion, deny, withhold or withdraw from any user any bonus or promotion, or rescind any policy with respect to that user, either temporarily or permanently, or terminate that user's access to the Service and/or block that user's account."

[mucullus]

I think it is crystal clear that fortuneriver is a hardcore bonus hunter and a real nightmare for most online casinos. I have to admit that I don't feel much sympathy for his situation, BUT IMO 888 and eCOGRA made a poor decision. As always in such situations casinos should honor their own terms, pay the player (after playthrough) and then ban him.
If they don't like players taking advantage of their promos in a risk-free way they should tell the players and update their t&c's. It's so easy!

[nafanny29]

It would help 888's case if when you leave their website or casino they didnt have a pop-up window saying "take me to reef club for a $200 bonus"

Kind of dilutes 888's "multiple bonus abuse" excuse a bit really.

As I see it I think that 888 are in the wrong. If they dont want this sort of play then they should have a bonus where no withdrawals are permitted until the wagering requirement is met or the players account hits zero. Simple really.

[chuchu59]

Clear bonus abuse but nobody said this was disallowed. Imagine the player had won the $710 at CON first and lost the $200 at Reef later. Will he be able to cash out the $710? Definitely. The sequence of events should not be a deterrent in cashing out winnings. I would suggest that the player be paid the $710 minus the $200 at Reef because he was should not cash out and thus render it a no-risk bonus at a second casino.

[paul02085]

Grief Club is already infamous for pulling these stunts and they are part of CasinoOnNet i dont care what they say so this not really surprising.

I remember when Grief Club was robbing players we hoped CasinoOnNet would make them change. I guess it happened the other way around.

[fortuneriver]

Clear bonus abuse but nobody said this was disallowed. Imagine the player had won the $710 at CON first and lost the $200 at Reef later. Will he be able to cash out the $710? Definitely. The sequence of events should not be a deterrent in cashing out winnings. I would suggest that the player be paid the $710 minus the $200 at Reef because he was should not cash out and thus render it a no-risk bonus at a second casino.

My friend, what is a bonus abuse? I played by the RULES. Tell me where and when I violated the rules of the Casino On Net.

[fortuneriver]

I think it is crystal clear that fortuneriver is a hardcore bonus hunter and a real nightmare for most online casinos. I have to admit that I don't feel much sympathy for his situation, BUT IMO 888 and eCOGRA made a poor decision. As always in such situations casinos should honor their own terms, pay the player (after playthrough) and then ban him.
If they don't like players taking advantage of their promos in a risk-free way they should tell the players and update their t&c's. It's so easy!

I suppose the only way to get your sympathy is to come to the casino and to play slots 3 times the necessary wagering requirements? How can somebody accuse me in the fact that i tried to win and not to lose? Is there any normal person in the universe who plays at the casino with the purpose to lose ? But overall, you are right- the casino must honor its own terms. That is what it all about.