Bonus Abuser Blacklist (Microgaming)

[Mousey]

For those who may have missed it, this is from Max's warning post HERE

Unfortunately I've recently been alerted to more of the same:


Quote:

We contribute to and make use of a shared industry database of promotion abusers and fraudsters. Individuals known from this database will not be eligible for any promotional offers and the casino reserves the right to lock their account and refuse access to the casino.

Again, this appears to be a standard term among Microgaming casinos and they are in fact using this to deny players their winnings.

In a recent case a player had received two bonuses, had played fairly, met all the terms and requested a withdrawal. As a "standard procedure" the casino finance people ran the player's name through their "bonus abuse" blacklist. Turns out the player was listed and the casino then used this as their only reason for denying the player's winnings, all in accordance with their Terms & Conditions.

If this "bonus abuser" blacklist was being used to decline deposits that would be a lot more understandable. After all, they'd be filtering players based on their past bonus usage and that, of course, would be their full right. One might not like it but if they did it up front and universally then at least it would be fair.

As it is, using the blacklist solely to weed out prospective withdrawals, means the player is at full risk and the casino is simply using the system to pad the bottom line with monies from players who might be on the blacklist but lost their money instead of winning. I am yet to hear of a case where a player lost, the casino discovered they were on the blacklist and then refunded the player's deposits.

It's how they are using this blacklist that is the problem here. Either apply it to everyone at the time of deposit or get rid of it. Applying it only to winners is highly suspect.

OK... I'm pissed off now. I've had it!

Bonus 'abusers' equated with fraudsters is a crock of bull. The casinos know it, we know it, Casinomeister knows it -- especially when the player abides by the casinos WR and T&C. Pay the player, then casinos can cut them off from bonuses or lock them out. This after the fact crap is just that -- crap!

I'm still not happy with this 'blacklist' idea. Fraudsters, yes. Bonus 'abusers'? No! A player who plays by the casinos rules is not an abuser. And if a player is on that list... why do casinos give them bonuses??

Sorry for the outburst... I'm so mad I'm sputtering ....

[maxd]

Don't be sorry, this is serious stuff! And good on you for bringing it up!

I hope you don't mind that I've tweaked your original thread title a bit. I thought it important that people read this in context -- that is, knowing it's MGS casinos -- as opposed to a general "o-ooo-o! there's a blacklist out there somewhere!" kind of thing.

[pinsnpies]

Really feel as if all this bonus abuse accusations is getting out of hand. Think i'll just stick to sportsbook betting.

[Simmo!]

Are Microgaming themselves aware that this goes on? If not, they should be. As Max says, use it to prevent a bonus being awarded, but if it has been and the play is fair then tough. The player should be paid. If a casino chooses to entice with a bonus, they should be prepared for the problems this causes. It's not like it's an unknown quantity - everyone knows that bonuses are asking for trouble unless properly managed. You can't have your cake and eat it.

[Casinomeister]

Are Microgaming themselves aware that this goes on? If not, they should be. As Max says, use it to prevent a bonus being awarded, but if it has been and the play is fair then tough. The player should be paid. If a casino chooses to entice with a bonus, they should be prepared for the problems this causes. It's not like it's an unknown quantity - everyone knows that bonuses are asking for trouble unless properly managed. You can't have your cake and eat it.

I haven't given them a heads up on it...yet.

Here is the link to the actual page. I've never seen this before in an MGS powered casino. I'm a little surprised:

#18 http://goldenlounge.com/terms.asp
We contribute to and make use of a shared industry database of promotion abusers and fraudsters. Individuals known from this database will not be eligible for any promotional offers and the casino reserves the right to lock their account and refuse access to the casino.

They lump fraudster and promotion "abuser" together in the same sentence. Looks like they slept through Online Casino Management 101. One excerpt here:
http://www.casinomeister.com/newslet...ruary2006.html

Simply put, if the casino makes the offer - they need to be prepared to follow through with it. Advantage players are not fraudsters. And if the casino allows them to play, they are obligated to pay the player their winnings. Casino operators who have claimed that land based casinos in Vegas kick card counters to the curb (winnings confiscated) are in error. A couple of years ago the Nevada State court ruled that advantage players do not constitute fraud.

Database or not, if the player met the terms and conditions of the promotion, then they need to be paid. This is not rocket science. If a casino is allowed to use subjective and vague terms such as "abuse" then anarchy will ensue.

[Casinomeister]

Oops! Did I just identify the casino? Sorry

[maxd]

FWIW I've updated the Warning as follows:

I should mention that Golden Lounge Casino (MGS, Kahnawake) is the site that precipitated this additional Warning and the only confirmed occurrence of the Terms in question ... but they wouldn't have a networked blacklist database if other MGS casinos weren't involved.

[vinylweatherman]

I found this out some time ago. The term has been around, but it is WELL hidden.

The Microgaming database is run by the big processor Proc-Cyber, and is one of their products "Risk Sentinel" offered to their clients. It tracks a single players entire behaviour across ALL merchants who channel their processing through Proc Cyber, which is pretty much every MG casino (for non US players). It appears to run like Experian, and players have a "credit file" kind of thing, but for their playing habilts. UNLIKE Experian though, Proc Cyber say that players have NO RIGHT to see the data held about them NOR the right to have it checked for accuracy if they believe their has been a mistake.

Proc Cyber, however, are based in the UK, which means that UK players at least CAN get hold of this "secret" data by serving notice to Proc Cyber under the Data Protection Act, which specifies a fee of no more than £10, and specifies a time limit for compliance.

Given that MG casinos have been caught RED HANDED by Max DELIBERATELY misusing this service to "pad the bottom line", rather than for refusing promotions in the first place - this must put MG well into the inshore waters of Rogue Island.

This makes it VERY LIKELY that the PLAYTECH variant does indeed exist, and that PLaytech (the company) has been LYING about it being a myth for the past couple of years.

IF these casinos were PROPERLY regulated in a PROPER country, this kind of thing would land them in court.

eCogra seems happy with this state of affairs, they have presided over this for quite a while, THEY ARE IMPLICATED - they must have known (it is, after all, their JOB to know), but decided this was quite OK.

The current situation allows less reputable casinos to set traps for players by pulling them in with big bonuses, and then pulling this central database stunt if the win, and as Max says, take the money when they lose, and maybe offer another bonus on top.

The first clause highlighted by Max is rather vague, it can be used to cover pretty much ANY style of play, and from some of the odd claims of "bonus abuse" that have cropped up recently, it seems there is something pretty murky going on even in the top end of the industry (Microgaming).

Maybe, CM accredited casinos should be BANNED from using the "bonus abuse database" at the time of withdrawal, and if they use it, the filter MUST be applied BEFORE a promotion is offered to a player.

A BIG part of the problem is caused by the SPAMMERS, often operating with the full knowledge of the casinos, who will allow it to go ahead because it is just so damn effective - however, it caused players to fall into traps, because the spammers deliberately set out to conceal things like terms and conditions through the use of fake casino landing pages that ONLY allow download & registration, where an incomplete set of rules is presented to the player.

If these revelations, and the discussions about them, drive some casinos to the wall TOUGH LUCK - you deserved it

[Casinomeister]

...If these revelations, and the discussions about them, drive some casinos to the wall TOUGH LUCK - you deserved it

But I wouldn't jump to conclusions quite yet.

I know that Proc Cyber runs players through a fraudster database. The database is not shared with the casino - only if a player pops up in the fraudster database will he be outed by Pro Cyber which notifies the casino. I remember a couple of incidents where fraudsters had been cleared by the casino for payouts, but got nailed by the cash processors - one was a Bellerock issue a couple of years ago that played out in the complaints section.

I seriously doubt that the casinos share a database of "bonus abusers". I have a feeling it's smoke being blown up the "abusers" butt in order to scare him off - or to confiscate winnings.

I'm guessing this will play out here as well.

Bear in mind, I don't believe this casino is an eCOGRA certified casino. So they aren't part of this equation.

[vinylweatherman]

But I wouldn't jump to conclusions quite yet.

I know that Proc Cyber runs players through a fraudster database. The database is not shared with the casino - only if a player pops up in the fraudster database will he be outed by Pro Cyber which notifies the casino. I remember a couple of incidents where fraudsters had been cleared by the casino for payouts, but got nailed by the cash processors - one was a Bellerock issue a couple of years ago that played out in the complaints section.

I seriously doubt that the casinos share a database of "bonus abusers". I have a feeling it's smoke being blown up the "abusers" butt in order to scare him off - or to confiscate winnings.

I'm guessing this will play out here as well.

Bear in mind, I don't believe this casino is an eCOGRA certified casino. So they aren't part of this equation.

Seems to me the same smoke is being blown up MAX's butt, which triggered his initial general warning.

This "makes use of a central database" term has been around for a while, and if this is simply smoke to be administered to someone's butt, perhaps the casino was unwise in administering it to Max's butt, as this has brought this issue up in the form of a general warning about Microgaming casinos.
Microgaming now have another PR problem on their hands, adding to the current ones. MG so far seem to think hiding under the duvet till it all blows over is the best policy.

The alternative to "tough luck" however, is there, simply be open, honest, and fair with dealings with ALL players, and salvage the broken bond of trust before it is too late.

Max, seems to have based the warning on a specific case, where definitive evidence of the central database being used to identify mere "bonus abusers" was found, the casino admitted it directly to Max it seems.

The description of "Risk Sentinel" I found showed it to be a product that went well beyond fraud detection, it was indeed able to track playing habits through patterns of deposits and withdrawals, and put together a web of associated assumptions based on these transactions. It could identify players who made only a single deposit at many new casinos, with little sign of repeat play. This could certainly be a flag for "potential bonus abuse", and could lead to a casino voiding winnings from a player's first deposit based on the past history of him hardly ever returning to play again at the same casino.

Incidentally, you can log on to Proccyber yourself and gather your OWN transaction history, and get a taste of the data they have available.