Why the hell have fortune lounge been allowed back??

[SuitedPower]

Hi Guys,

It saddens me that a bunch of theives like this lot have been allowed back into casinomeisters accredited list. There is a thread currently a few below this one discussing how some MG casinos are turning a bit "rogueish" ( http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...-becoming.html ). In that thread "aka23" makes a very good post which I will now quote from..

Fortune Lounge -- Locked thousands of accounts and confiscated winnings from many players. It was temporarily put on rogue list here. As of this week, a player reported that they are still up to their old tricks with confiscated winnings.

The thing is, ignoring what happened in the past, that I too have heard such reports this week from sources. The pattern of thefts they got rougued for is still continuing. These are NOT groups of fraudalent accounts or even players who are misreading the terms and conditions. These are legitimate players who have abided by fortune lounges own t&c. Their only crime? Being smart/lucky enough to win. In these cases the practices of a while ago are still commonplace with fortune lounge. Winnings confiscated. If a player has been allowed to sign up for an account and his bets accepted, with him or her abiding by all the t&c then they should be paid their winnings regardless. Of course the casino is free to ban anyone they want but if they have gone so far as allowing all of this then by confiscating the winnings of a legitimate, rule abiding player they are doing nothing but stealing. This practice is still commonplace at fortune lounge casinos.

When casinomeister originally rouged them a while back I was most impressed, they clearly deserved it but they had long been a fixture of his site, it took some balls to drop them like he did. However this about turn saddens me greatly. I have always followed the casinomeisters recommendations for casinos. Whenever I have fancied trying a new casino/software platform out my first port of call has always been his accredited list to choose one that takes my fancy. His judgement always appeared 100% sound to me, and with his contacts at each casino any minor complaint that would arise (I had a couple of these myself, nothing major tho and with this websites help they were sorted asap) from players he referred were always recitified openly and to the satisfaction of both parties. Because of this I always tried to use the affiliate links from casinomeister as a show of support for the site and also because I felt my money was going to a truly worthy affiliate. Unfortunately this state of place is now not so clear. With Fortune Lounge back on the list it is a nasty state of affairs as imo this is openly inviting players to play at a casino which has no qualms about trying to steal legitimate intelligent players money. A leopard does not change its spots in Fortune Lounges case as has been proven this week and being "accredited" is basically inviting players who are none the wiser to sign up to a bunch of crooks. It seems a sad lapse in judgement to me from an otherwise excellent site. I dont really automatically trust other "accredited" casinos so quickly now, it was a true seal of approval for me before. I can only guess that the reason for putting them back up was purely financial....

SP

P.S. This is not intended as a casinomeister bash guys, this site has helped me a lot in the past, its really a fortune lounge bash, but the accredited thing me just smacks me as plain wrong.

[Casinomeister]

...I can only guess that the reason for putting them back up was purely financial...

It has nothing to do with anything financial - those who know me, and I have a public track record going on ten years here, know that I am not motivated by money. I am motivated by being fair.

The unfortunate thing is that many people who frequent forums only see what other players post. You are not privy to their player accounts, or whether or not they are being 100% honest. I on-the-other-hand am. I can see clearly from both sides of the fence (in most cases).

When Fortune Lounge was removed from the site last Spring, it was for a number of things, mainly they didn't react appropriately to a botched promo. They were hit by massive fraud because of this and many of the complaints that were dealt with were from fraudsters. I nailed a few on my own. The other players, the advantage players who were locked out, were paid both their deposits and winnings.

The bottom line is that I am being fair to both the casino group and its players. The player base for Fortune Lounge is huge - and how many of these players have problems? The percentage is minuscule.

If casinos are not allowed room for improvement or to learn from their mistakes, what good is a rogue list? Why would a casino be motivated to do the right thing, treat their players fairly so that removal is possible?

Its funny how anytime I try to be fair towards a group of casinos, I get bashed with a "it's all about the money" thing. I'm disappointed in your short-sightedness.

[chuchu59]

Financial reasons? Bryan, you must be a multi-millionaire by now, if not a billionaire. Can I borrow some quid for a shot at the progressives?

[brianzz]

If you don't like FL casinos, don't play there. When I signed up here I didn't see anything that said I must play at all accreditted casinos.

[vinylweatherman]

"are reports of...." does not constitute proof of rogue behaviour. If there is enough of a problem, then this will surface here, and again through the PAB service it will be possible to identify whether this is "fraud", or a repeat of the problems from last time.
We need to have cases where play has been within the terms and conditions, yet winnings have been confiscated. After last time, additional terms WERE added that prohibited certain kinds of "advantage play" even though all games are allowed under the new EZbonus rules.
The problems last time were that Fortune Lounge went over to EZBonus, but were hit by players who had found the mathematical flaw in the system, and with 8 casinos to join, each with a bonus, these advantage players were on to a winner. The fraudsters were the greedy ones for whom it was not enough to hit 8 SUBs, but they went back for more under false details. The sheer weight of "new" signups triggered the initial overreaction, and the slowness in sorting out the innocents from the fraudsters is what earned them rogue status.
I expect they have now "served their time", and are being allowed a fresh start after a review of current practices.
There have been other casino groups that have moved between rogue and accredited status, and some that have not kept up with promises and found themselves back in the rogues gallery again. Sometimes this is driven by changes in management and ownership, and thus policy. I am not aware, though, of such changes with Fortune Lounge.

[KasinoKing]

We need to have cases where play has been within the terms and conditions, yet winnings have been confiscated. After last time, additional terms WERE added that prohibited certain kinds of "advantage play" even though all games are allowed under the new EZbonus rules.

This whole 'bonus abuse' thing is the main thing which P's me off with the vast majority of MG casinos - not just Fortune Lounge (who at least did make an attempt to clarify one type of 'abuse')
EZ-bonus or not, why is it so difficult for them to just add a term which says something like "While meeting wagering requirements for any bonus, players may not place single bets greater than 25% of the bonus in question. (e.g. If you have claimed a $100 bonus, the maximum single bet is $25)"
I mean, it's not rocket science and if the casinos were really serious about stopping so called 'abuse' they would surely do something like this.
All the time they carry the wishy-washy term "any play the management deems abusive" the complaints will just keep coming and coming...

[kingkong098]

Sign up to Royal Vegas, deposit $100 and get the the $100 SUB. Make $100 bets on bacarat/BJ until you are two bets or more ahead... Grind out the WR on $1 bets on French Roulette. I can pretty much guarantee your account will get locked and you will not get paid.

Same shenanigans that got them rogued, yet still completely within the rules. They got massacred by this method in the past, and yet they do nothing to fix it? Doesn't make sense, unless of course they engage the FU clause. Casinomeister once warned against signing up to any casino that used the following language "The Casino reserves the right to decide in its sole discretion which activities constitute “irregular play” for bonus play-through requirement purposes from time-to-time and to withhold any cash-ins where irregular play has occurred", but I see that has been removed from the recommendations list.

Mr. CM, can you confirm that if a player plays in the way described above, understanding obviously this is purely an advantage play but completely within the rules of the casino, that the player will get paid?

[vinylweatherman]

Sign up to Royal Vegas, deposit $100 and get the the $100 SUB. Make $100 bets on bacarat/BJ until you are two bets or more ahead... Grind out the WR on $1 bets on French Roulette. I can pretty much guarantee your account will get locked and you will not get paid.

Same shenanigans that got them rogued, yet still completely within the rules. They got massacred by this method in the past, and yet they do nothing to fix it? Doesn't make sense, unless of course they engage the FU clause. Casinomeister once warned against signing up to any casino that used the following language "The Casino reserves the right to decide in its sole discretion which activities constitute “irregular play” for bonus play-through requirement purposes from time-to-time and to withhold any cash-ins where irregular play has occurred", but I see that has been removed from the recommendations list.

Mr. CM, can you confirm that if a player plays in the way described above, understanding obviously this is purely an advantage play but completely within the rules of the casino, that the player will get paid?

I thought FL resolved the issue by explicitly disallowing this kind of advantage play tactic. If they did add such terms, and then removed them once the fuss died down, but still confiscate winnings, then this needs further investigation. They may have "done a BelleRock" and buried this term in the general terms of use, and not in the terms for each of the SUBs. It is also worth looking for a term limiting bonuses to a certain number of casinos within the group, as with 8 to choose from, FL can be hit 8x by a single player, and this kind of play becomes an almost certain winner, but not one that has the slightest chance of going unnoticed by "risk management"

[kingkong098]

They word the clause confusingly (surprise,surprise). My interpretation is no full balance bets and no bets where the majority of the bet is bonus funds. Since the players funds are used first, if I were to bet $100 and win 2 or 3 consecutive hands, I have never touched the bonus money....the other extreme is what happens once you've lost over half your balance, now all of a sudden all you have is bonus funds and you're not allowed to bet more than half your balance be it $100 or $1.

Here's the full clause on "irregular play"

Before any withdrawals are processed, your play will be reviewed for any irregular playing patterns e.g. playing of equal, zero margin bets or hedge betting, which all shall be considered irregular gaming for bonus play-through requirement purposes.
Other examples of irregular game play include but are not limited to, placing single bets using your entire or the majority of your account balance, where the majority of that balance is made up of bonus balance. The Casino reserves the right to decide in its sole discretion which activities constitute “irregular play” for bonus play-through requirement purposes from time-to-time and to withhold any cash-ins where irregular play has occurred to meet bonus play-through requirements.

The fact that the player never fully knows if their funds are safe and the continued arbitrary use of this clause to confiscate winnings keeps me from ever playing there. What's even crazier is 3 of my FL accounts got banned, 2 keep receiving "we want you back" bonuses.

[jetset]

This thread is beginning to sound like a convoluted debate between opposing Silks in the Supreme Court with all the T&C technicalities....that's an unfortunate consequence of the bonus system that has developed in the industry which now has the savvy players and the operators continually trying to outwit one another.

I don't see this struggle changing anytime soon.

FWIW, I think if the operator believes a player is an advantage player whose business he does not want or need, he should exercise the right of admission and bar the "offending" player or restrict his/her promo eligibility.

But first, he needs to honour the T&Cs if said advantage player has played by the rules on the transactions preceding the lock.