kiwi casino - resolved

[KasinoKing]

I’ve only just spotted this thread and find this is one of the rare occasions that I disagree with the Meister.

I think ‘seymore’ was totally right to make his initial post here.
People should be warned of any casino that pulls the old ‘anything we deem to be bonus abuse will get your account locked even if you’ve not broken a specifically stated condition’ BS.

The good thing here is we don’t have to just take this new posters word for it, because Kiwi have admitted it themselves in the post above!

In my opinion this is totally unacceptable behaviour on the part of the casino. If they don’t want people to use this tactic they should say so in the T&C’s or simply put a maximum bet limit of say $25 on players who are completing a WR for a bonus. Not rocket science, but would have saved at least this bit of bad PR.

I have noticed that 4 or 5 of the top complaints at the moment are related to Playtech casinos – methinks they need to get their acts sorted out damn fast, or soon they will all be ‘tarred with the same brush’ as has happened with Rip-off The Gamblers.

[thelawnet]

Kiwi Casino has recently been the target of a significant level of player bonus abuse from the launch of its new UK (GBP) casino. In our view Seymor's play on Kiwi Casino UK is an example of this abuse. Betting an entire balance after depositing the exact level of the bonus match on Blackjack Switch is the classic beginning scenario of bonus abuse.

Various factors are considered when banning a player as a bonus seeker beyond their play alone. It is not something Kiwi Casino takes lightly, however in some cases it must be done to protect the casino from players with abusive playing habits who are there to take advantage of the bonus system in place. Bonus abuse is a difficult situation in the online casino industry and sometimes there are situations where we as the casino operator must make a decision, based on the best information available at the time, as to how to proceed.

UKDafoe has hit the nail on the head in his post regarding the play:

From the 1st of July, bonus system changes have taken place in Kiwi Casino to prevent further bonuses abuses of this nature from occurring.

Regards

Kiwi Casino Management

I just checked your website and it says 100% bonus, removed on withdrawal. It doesn't say you are not allowed to wager £200 on a hand of blackjack.

So what are these changes you have made, as I cannot see any.

Another thing, you say that trying to double up is abusive, and that various factors are considered when banning. Were there any other factors in this case? And banning is one thing, but the policy of 'if thet bet had lost, then the player loses', and in this case where they won they lose as well. That is different from a ban, it is a 'can't lose steal the player's money policy'

I can't quite see why these bonuses exist if you don't want people to have them. You need them to get people to sign up, and when they have the nerve to win you change your minds.

Frankly it's not going to encourage anyone to sign up at your casino when there are so many layers of crap behind the 'free £100' you promise.

As a personal story, the very first casino I signed up to was Casino Tropez, which was spammed to me via email. They also have this free money policy which evaporates on cashout, a major trap of the unwary new player.

I read the terms and conditions, saw that I could get a 100% bonus. I also read that it would be removed on cashout. So as a new player to casinos I wagered the whole lot on a hand of blackjack.

In the event I lost, but imagine if I had won and they had pulled a stunt like this.

The terms there and here say clearly 'bonus is removed on cashout', so it is so blindingly obvious that wagering everything on one hand could let you win. If you don't like people doing this then say so.

If you don't want people winning, then stop advertising '£100 free'. If the bonus attracts customers and makes you money, then offer it. If it costs money then change it so it doesn't. But don't try to screw people that follow your rules.

[seymour]

In our view Seymor's play on Kiwi Casino UK is an example of this abuse. Betting an entire balance after depositing the exact level of the bonus match on Blackjack Switch is the classic beginning scenario of bonus abuse.

This is a classic. A casino offers you a 100% match up to £100. But they take the bonus back at the end. so.....

The only real choices I can see of actually withdrawing money at the end. (Yes Kiwi withdrawing money at the end, shocking thing to want to do for a gambler I know) are playing alot of videopoker/slots and hopeing to hit something big or playing blackjack. Now I don't like to play slots and I'm not good at videopoker so I decided on blackjack.

But if the casino takes back the bonus at the end I figured I'd have more of a chance doubling my money and then playing my usual way. Now I had roughly a 50% chance of losing it all. Would you have returned my money if I'd lost, no you wouldn't.

The way kiwi operates regarding bonuses is disgusting. It seems wanting to withdraw money from a signup offer is now classed as bonus abuse.

BUYER BEWARE: Playing ONE hand of blackjack makes me a bonus abuser

[caruso]

This in itself is absurd:

"I was on £400 and decided to come back another day to wager some more, when I did I found my account locked. I received an email the other day saying I'm getting my £100 back but due to a pattern of bonus abuse in the casino."

He made one full-balance bet, and was an "abuser"? That bearing in mind that there was no split / double option, and as such the bet was ill-advised anyway.

Where do the Kiwi T & C state that you cannot bet your full balance? Where do they specify wagering patterns they consider non-abusive?

Not that I'm remotely surprised, but Playtech is currently coming apart at the seams.

Oh, and Seymour: you WILL get paid - I'm confident of that. You are one of the lucky 10% who found the forums.

[caruso]

On the question of complaint procedure:

I agree that hasty postings don't help because the casino doesn't like bad press, but there are issues beyond facilitating the mediation process. The poster will maybe save another member of the "lucky 10%" from depositing at Kiwi, making a full-balance bet and getting robbed. That's a good thing.

People need to be warned what's going on out there. Maybe the poster didn't follow the letter of the law. Maybe that will invalidate his complaint. BUT, he's already assisted others in so doing, because we know now that Kiwi will rob you based on undisclosed terms. This is tremendously valuable information.

It's a double-edged sword, both posting and non-posting.

[pstnpstn]

I think this is classic example of casino scamming.

check this post

http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...ght=ambercoast

the casino finally paid to player.
hope you be paid too.

[thelawnet]

On the question of complaint procedure:

I agree that hasty postings don't help because the casino doesn't like bad press, but there are issues beyond facilitating the mediation process. The poster will maybe save another member of the "lucky 10%" from depositing at Kiwi, making a full-balance bet and getting robbed. That's a good thing.

People need to be warned what's going on out there. Maybe the poster didn't follow the letter of the law. Maybe that will invalidate his complaint. BUT, he's already assisted others in so doing, because we know now that Kiwi will rob you based on undisclosed terms. This is tremendously valuable information.

It's a double-edged sword, both posting and non-posting.

it beggars belief. Kiwi Casino have spent huge amounts of money building up a reputation, Casinomeister Casino of the Year, etc., and they are prepared to toss it away for the sake of some players £100 bonus.

They could have just come out and used the usual casino excuse about a fraud ring or investigation and said that they have paidd the player.

But no, they dig themselves into a deeper hole and risk being labelled on multiple sites as 'to be avoided', just for the sake of a measly £100 bonus.

It just can't be worth the damage to their reputation for the sake of £100.

[seymour]

Well they actually owe me £200 lets not forget.

But that aside yes I thought posting might help out other people not waste their time and money with KIWI casino.

Also I sent numerous emails to kiwi casino without even receiving a reason for why they did it.

[clawback]

Eeeeeeeeek

So the only players welcome here are losers eh.

A player lumping his full balance on 1 hand is a high roller, kiwi see`s this as nothing but abuse purely based on the fact he won that hand

Are kiwi now willing to refund all those players who lost doing this kind of bet....I think not.

Avoid.

[Aindreas_Daoc]

Online casinos are a funny bunch. Bet too small, you're an abuser because "you never risk your own money". Bet too big, you're an abuser because "only bonus abusers play that way".

If he lost that bet, he wouldn't be a bonus abuser, now would he?

I think deciding whether someone is a bonus abuser based on 1 hand of play is absurd.