Some of this is down to the software provider. The rogues only get away with it because the provider allows it to happen.
Playtech got a great deal of criticism for allowing a rogue casino to pocket half a CAD$4Million progressive won by a player by imposing their weekly payout cap that would have meant it took 30 YEARS to pay the win in full, and then blackmailing the player into accepting half in one lump sum provided she agreed to forefeit the rest to the casino.
RTG have random jackpots, and this came up with iNetBet, and the rep said that any winnings from the RJ that exceeded the max cashout were put back into the RJ pool.
Top Game withdrew a faulty game, and it's accumulated progressive, and it was never reinstated. After much argument, a vague assurance was made by Top Game that the pool had somehow been shared out among players in other ways, rather than being pocketed by Top Game - I don't think too many CM members believed it
I think CS underestimate the importance of this question, and may be tempted to bluff it with what they think happens, rather than find out. The above looks like a CS agent tried to get away with a "brush off" answer, and then realised they were up against a player who actually CARED about the fairness of what happened, so decided they were out of their depth, and thus quickly wanted an exit strategy from that chat session.
CS giving the wrong information can get casinos into a great deal of trouble where that wrong information is given to the wrong player
Empty Fruities Astern Capt'n
Back to port for unloading.
Full Sails - before we get raided ourselves.
Bookmarks