PLAYTECH: the nightmare list

**caruso** · 30th January 2006, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by SK2005

Please, advise me if i have any chances to get paid and what should i do. Thank you

You can file a complaint with Bryan for one thing:-

http://www.casinomeister.com/problems.html

I think Bryan is pretty snowed under at the moment; as I posted, I met up with our "disputes" lady last week and assured her I'd be staying in touch. If you want, you're more than welcome to PM / email me details and I'll contact her on your behalf. If it's bog-standard bonus abuse casino-speak, they don't have a leg to stand on technically. That isn't any guarantee of payment of course, but being catagorically in the right doesn't half make things easier.

Originally Posted by Slotmachine

bump

Cheers,
SM

Malicious little devil...

EDIT: Good heavens, that was quick rethink, SK2005.

**uungy** · 2nd February 2006, 01:44 AM

I may just be lucky, but I have never (yet) been refused a payout by any of these casino's (even for a withdrawal of a sign up bonus which ended up over $3000, and i wagered a very little over the requirements).

**caruso** · 5th February 2006, 12:16 AM

No apologies for shamelessly bumping my own thread.

Play at any of the sixteen casinos listed and you need your head examining - preferably with a hammer and chisel.

Is there ANY progress with ANY Playtech dispute?

**scrollock** · 7th February 2006, 02:04 PM

any chance of adding the golden palace lot to your list ?

**caruso** · 7th February 2006, 08:15 PM

As you'll see from the other thread you posted, the Golden Palace issue is in a class apart from these current ones.

There are unresolved, bogus winnings confiscations from that issue. Unfortunately, all players affected have either lost interest, lost all records or vanished from the scene, as a result of the sheer time involved.

These days, Golden Palace are are worst guilty of acts of idiocy ranging from buying baby names to sabotaging the olympic games. What they are NOT doing these days is stealing legitimate cashins. Then, yes. Now, no. These days, Golden Palace pays first and bars second - the correct way around.

The 15 casinos listed above are those which steal players' money. This is not to say that Golden Palace didn't. However, the sheer timescale involved makes this a horse of a different colour, because while the old GP issue is now completely unresolvable, these issues are NOT. These issues are current, all the players are active, all the records are up to date and all information is available. These issue can be resolved at the drop of a hat.

As such, I would tend to put Golden Palace into another category. If you don't mind patronising a group that stole about $300,000 six years ago and has no problem in committing such acts as olympic sabotage and baby-abuse, then you can do so and they will pay you. To include them in THIS category would devalue it slightly in my opinion, because these 15 casinos are flat out, committed thieves. They WILL steal your money if you patronise them.

**two_card** · 7th February 2006, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by Westland Bowl

I've heard that the exceptions to the general "avoid Playtech" rule are Bet Fred and Bet365 casinos. Supposedly they were determined to be fair and fast payers.

BET365 withheld a lot of January bonus in the Poker Room.
Basically players did not play every hand.

Full story at BonusWhores.

**Casinomeister** · 8th February 2006, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by caruso

As you'll see from the other thread you posted, the Golden Palace issue is in a class apart from these current ones.

There are unresolved, bogus winnings confiscations from that issue. Unfortunately, all players affected have either lost interest, lost all records or vanished from the scene, as a result of the sheer time involved.

These days, Golden Palace are are worst guilty of acts of idiocy ranging from buying baby names to sabotaging the olympic games. What they are NOT doing these days is stealing legitimate cashins. Then, yes. Now, no. These days, Golden Palace pays first and bars second - the correct way around.

The 15 casinos listed above are those which steal players' money. This is not to say that Golden Palace didn't. However, the sheer timescale involved makes this a horse of a different colour, because while the old GP issue is now completely unresolvable, these issues are NOT. These issues are current, all the players are active, all the records are up to date and all information is available. These issue can be resolved at the drop of a hat.

As such, I would tend to put Golden Palace into another category. If you don't mind patronising a group that stole about $300,000 six years ago and has no problem in committing such acts as olympic sabotage and baby-abuse, then you can do so and they will pay you. To include them in THIS category would devalue it slightly in my opinion, because these 15 casinos are flat out, committed thieves. They WILL steal your money if you patronise them.

Okay, I need to interject here because we seem to be spiraling back down to where we were when Caruso's account was suspended for 30 days last fall. Postings need to be free of emotional subjectivity that can jeopodize the integrity of this site.

http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/forum_rules.php
1.6 - No "Libelous" Posts. Do not make posts that could be considered libelous, defamatory, or posting merely to cause harm to another's business. Opinions are expected, but do not attack others with accusations of criminal activity unless this has been proven in a court of law.

Let's mellow out a bit, okay?

**caruso** · 8th February 2006, 01:39 PM

Fair enough, Bryan.

Feel free to put a full stop after "opinion" - penultimate line - and cut out the rest. Wouldn't affect anything.

**Slotmachine** · 8th February 2006, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by caruso

These days, Golden Palace are are worst guilty of acts of idiocy ranging from buying baby names to sabotaging the olympic games. What they are NOT doing these days is stealing legitimate cashins. Then, yes. Now, no. These days, Golden Palace pays first and bars second - the correct way around.

How is this T&C interpreted (From golden palace signup bonus T&C's)?

If the casino deems that you have wagered and risked only the BONUS in order to pass the audit, the casino reserves the right to void any winnings resulting from these wagers as well as the bonus itself, and will refund your purchases.

What constitutes "risking only the bonus"?

What about this:

Upon your FIRST withdrawal (regardless of the number of deposits), any amount up to the equivalent value of the PLAY BONUS will be deducted from your play balance or winnings prior to settlement.

So if I deposit 100 today, get 300 bonus, lose all 400, then deposit say 300, tomorrow, wager up and down breaking even in the end, with a balance of 300 again, try to withdraw it, according to the T&C's the 300 will be deducted...and I end up with zero.

OK, the latter is not thievery as it's clearly stated, but it's a rotten deal.

Cheers,
SM

**caruso** · 8th February 2006, 02:00 PM

On the former: if Golden Palace ever actually INVOKE this clause, then they will belong in with all the rest. I've not heard of them ever doing this, however.

On the latter: never even saw that before. That gets worse the more you bust out. Take $200 bonuses ten times, deposit $200, get all the way up to $2200, cash out...and get your deposit back.

Pretty stiff.