Contact info for PokerHuis?

[Casinomeister]

The main reason why Pokerhuis was tossed into the rogue pit was their inability to communicate. It wasn't until they were placed in the Warning section and "rogued" that they took notice and came 'round.

Nevertheless, I find it highly unprofessional to post personal information of a player in a publicly accessed forum. A mere "we got your message, this is why we didn't respond - we believe the player is a fraudster" via email or PM would have sufficed. To carelessly post this privileged and confidential information here in the forum for everyone to see smacks of amateurism.

I hope that in the future, the managers of this casino are more responsive to people trying to communicate with them. It shouldn't take a "roguing" to wake people up.

[pokerhuis]

Hereby our Reply...

It seems to me that we are now having a discussion about the communication between Pokerhuis.com / Casinomeister.com / And the involved Player.

I will first explain how the communication works. We have a support department which we hire external (our software supplier) to do our first line support for Pokerhuis.com. This company is the first party to talk with the players. They work following the guidelines we gave them and they have access to all resources to help a player with a problem. For the most common questions they have standard procedures to help players out.

They also do our risk and fraud management and payments services. For this we also have standard procedures for them. As long as there are no special cases they work independent and we have periodical evaluation meetings. This works fine for us for already 3 years.

If there are special cases we have our own inhouse support team who handle situations that our partner can't solve by their own. Just because of the fact, the 1st line of support are not allowed to make specific decissions on special cases. This is the moment that our partners passes a ticket / support issue to our inhouse team. They also have their guidelines for how to handle support issues and are limited in their possibilities to maken decissions in special cases.

If we have a special case like with "The involved player" eventually, it will be escalated to the management. I am part of the management and am allowed to take any decission possible.

In every company the management is always protected from being spammed with questions that can be solved by the first line (the management in our case is the 3rd line). This is how we work also. This is why we never communicate our management emailadresses or phonenumbers to the World.

In the communications between "The involved player", the communications were escalated to the 2nd line and the management did all the neccessary research to conclude that there was enough evidence to proof that the player account was fraudulent. Due to multiple accounts and having multiple welcome bonusses. This has been communicated to the "Involved player" with the message that he would be blocked and he would receive his initial deposit back. Which was a very gentle solution from our side. But this is our opinion. We never had the intention to steal his money.

So for us the case was closed and solved. We followed our own rules that we communicate at the promotions page at our casino department of Pokerhuis.

After closing the case, the involved player decided to give it another try to have the money paid out by contacting Casinomeister.com. From that moment Max started to contact Pokerhuis.com at the first line support and support@pokerhuis.com.

The problem that occured from that moment, is that the first line support was functioning as a messenger to the second line support by copy/paste the message from Max in an email. Without the emailadres, but with the signature. Max @ Casinomeister.com

Usually the support is giving us the username of a player from which the case is escalated, so that we can take the contact details from our database. But in the case of Max there was no username of course. When the 2nd line support escalated the case again to the management, I made the mistake to consider the signature also to be the emailadress of Max.

And then the communication problem started. I didn't send 20 emails to Max but I have sent 2 emails to max@casinomeister.com with the question to send me his phonenumber or skype to discuss the issue. (I guess due to a catchall the email was not marked as unknown) My last email was at the 26th of April 2011. After this email I didn't hear anything of course, so I assumed that Max didn't need to talk anymore because it was solved by the 1st or 2nd line of support.

Of course I have also been reading this topic where Max is trying to find our contact details, probably from the management. I read that there was one member of Casinomeister.com so kind to give him 2 emailadresses at the 21st of April and Max thanked him for this at the 22nd of April. Of course I didn't know this, but Max had these 2 emailadresses from this moment.

I don't know why, but the first personal email that I have reveived from Max was at wednesday the 4th of May 2011. So from this moment I had his real emailadress for the first time and I would be able to have a communication with him directly. Unfortunately I was not at the office at that moment, and the day after, when I was at the office he already posted the Pokerhuis Warning. If he would have given me 6 hours more time, he would have received the message that I would like to have his phonenumber or skype to discuss the issue. like I send him at the 26th of April 2011 (to max@casinomeister.com)

First of all. I am not trying to hide myself behind a wall of excuses, I am trying to tell you the facts. About how this situation is escalated to a big problem for us. This is not Max's fault, this is a big miscommunication and in order not to have these kind of situations again, we will re-organise our communication process for special cases.

I am truly sorry that this happened. But there was no reason for me to not to respond to casinomeister.com since we are confident that we have done the right invesigations in the case of the "Involved Player" and don't have anything to hide.

@Casinomeister

I can fully understand that your opinion is, that it's not professional that we put our full explanation on your forum. With from you point of view, personal information from the customer. From our point of view it was a name that was used for a fraudulent account, we didn't see this a personal information. But still I can understand your opinion.

The main reason that we have posted this explanation is that we didn't know what to do, because Max told us that he was not the contactperson for this case anymore and that Bryan was not replying to us at that moment.

At the same time on a dutch forum there was already a big discussion about our website. The only way for us to do something was to put our clarification also online at casinomeister.com. And hope that we would be removed from the forum and roque list.

Max and Bryan. We agree with you that our communication was not the strongest part in this case. I hope that this explanation gives you an idea about how this could happen.

Again we will improve our communication process regarding special cases.

We would appreciate it very much if this topic: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...xic-asset.html could be removed from the forum.

Since you have my personal emailadress you could also contact me personally regarding this issue.


Many thanks!

[vinylweatherman]

The obvious weakness is that your support system can ONLY cope with communications from players, and has no facility to handle communications from third party adjudicators where no player username is given. This is further compounded by the fact that front line support use cut & paste, rather than FW: when escalating an issue to the second line in-house team. This removes all the history from the correspondence, which users of email usually assume is kept when involved in an exchange. The 3 tier system also leads to delays at each point, and it is this lengthy delay, coupled with the communication problem, that lead to time running out on Pokerhuis, and them being "tossed over the side" a mere 6 hours before 3rd tier management had managed to open a route to communicate with Max.

In most cases, operators have a fast track method that Max can use, so normally Max does NOT rely on having to contact front line support when having to deal with a player issue.

It also seems that one a ruling had been made, there was no means for the player to appeal internally against the decision, since "procedure" was then "talk to the hand", with tickets being closed, and emails being ignored.

When the player came to Max, he had already tried to use the internal appeals procedures, and had not even got a reply beyond the first decision, which is where the PAB procedure comes into play.

If it matters so much to Pokerhuis that this website has placed them in the pit, they should have been pre-emptive in giving Max or Bryan one of the 3rd tier contact addresses, so that the issue could have been raised straight away with someone with the authority to deal with it.

If it matters that any other major website places Pokerhuis in their versions of the rogue pit, they should ensure that the webmasters of such fora have a 3rd tier contact address to raise any issue without having to run the gauntlet of the 3 tier and outsourced support system.

Innocent players can be wrongly branded fraudsters, and innocent casinos can be wrongly branded rogue.

Pokerhuis seems to believe that their methods get it right 100% of the time when branding a player a fraud (thus no functioning appeals process), yet are seeking to appeal the decision made by Bryan on the grounds that he made a mistake when deciding they deserved entry to the pit.

Threads will NOT be removed, it happened, and is a matter of history, however the warning can be updated, and then rescinded. However, the thread will remain as a historical record of what happened, as will this discussion.

The *snip* is reserved for when personal information is posted, or something is posted that infringes copyright, and the copyright holder has requested it to be removed. This is why there have been some *snips* done to the original explanation given by the Pokerhuis rep.

[rainmaker]

It also seems that one a ruling had been made, there was no means for the player to appeal internally against the decision, since "procedure" was then "talk to the hand", with tickets being closed, and emails being ignored.

Good reply VWM, but I think this section is a bit unfair. It is quite normal for casinos to make their own "final ruling" with a reference to their T&C. I don't think this practice is blameworthy. If the casino are convinced that the player is a "fraudster", then I don't see the point of using a lot of resources to discuss with the player. Most of casinos T&C will state that the casino may close account / withheld winnings etc if a player breaches T&C. So a bit unfair when you write like this is a "special" practice at pokerhuis. The player must therefore find other ways to "procedure" his/hers case (the proper jurisdiction etc).

In general, I think the casino rep in this thread has given a good explanation. But I agree, their communications skills must probably be improved.

I must agree with the rep. I don't see any wrong in using "sensitive" information if the casino has clear evidence that the player and player information is fraudish (since the "sensitive" information most likely is fake). But I also understand Max for editing in this case.

[vinylweatherman]

Good reply VWM, but I think this section is a bit unfair. It is quite normal for casinos to make their own "final ruling" with a reference to their T&C. I don't think this practice is blameworthy. If the casino are convinced that the player is a "fraudster", then I don't see the point of using a lot of resources to discuss with the player. Most of casinos T&C will state that the casino may close account / withheld winnings etc if a player breaches T&C. So a bit unfair when you write like this is a "special" practice at pokerhuis. The player must therefore find other ways to "procedure" his/hers case (the proper jurisdiction etc).

In general, I think the casino rep in this thread has given a good explanation. But I agree, their communications skills must probably be improved.

I must agree with the rep. I don't see any wrong in using "sensitive" information if the casino has clear evidence that the player and player information is fraudish (since the "sensitive" information most likely is fake). But I also understand Max for editing in this case.

The player DID seek to use a dispute resolution service, the PAB service here. Pokerhuis were clearly not set up to deal with any player attempting to use a mediation service, and this is why this problem came along and bit them on the ass.

We all know that casinos sometimes get it wrong in such cases, so there does need to be an independent appeals process.

How would you feel if you had your winnings confisacted in error because the casino made a mistake and identified you as a fraudster, and then ignored any attempt you made to submit an appeal, even through a mediation service.

Using the licensing jurisdiction is NOT a proper substitute, since many casinos use jurisdictions that do not even take player complaints, and some that do take little action in making sure the player has been dealt with properly.

Because of this, the only real protection players have against being suckered in by a rogue operation is to have access to information based on the experiences of others. The rogue pit is one such piece of information that players can use to help them to steer clear of the worst operators.

Pokerhuis didn't seem to think internet fora that important until they heard that they had been tossed in the rogue pit here. They then decided that it WAS important after all, and now have to spend time dealing with the fallout.

Many casinos are in the rogue pit BECAUSE they fail to treat players fairly, use jurisdictions that offer no protection for the player, and ignore all mediation approaches.

Until the managed to contact Max, Pokerhuis looked like just another operator who had deliberately ignored all communications on the issue, so were tossed in the pit.

Bryan does sometimes use the pit as a means to prod an operator into opening a line of communication, and this seems to have worked in this case, as it has in the past.

Max didn't just use the front line support, he was given alternative contact details, and failed to get a reply, not even an "I'll get back to you when I am back in the office".

Even though no investigation can be done when not in the office, if you can read the email, you can also REPLY with an "I'll get back to you" straight away, even if it will be a while before a proper reply can be given.

A simple "I'll get back to you" would probably have been all it took to prevent the eventual tossing over the side, as it would at least show the operator was communicating. From the evidence presented, it looks like the operator had a strong case, and Max may now find that the complainant has stopped responding now that he knows what the casino has on him, and will be forwarding to Max.

[rainmaker]

How would you feel if you had your winnings confisacted in error because the casino made a mistake and identified you as a fraudster, and then ignored any attempt you made to submit an appeal, even through a mediation service.

Using the licensing jurisdiction is NOT a proper substitute, since many casinos use jurisdictions that do not even take player complaints, and some that do take little action in making sure the player has been dealt with properly.

The rep has told us in this thread that the case was carefully investigated by the management. The casino made their decision based on this, and the rep also told us that the player was informed of this decision. This is in my opinion completely normal practice. The case has allready been handled by the management, so there is clearly no more "appeal" opportunities "in house".

About licensing jurisdiction. Yes, I agree. It is often not a proper substitute, but it is a players choice to play under the specific jurisdiction.

I don`t know if this player is a fraudster or not. All I am saying is, that the casino (as the rep describes it) has handled this case in a correct manner.

I must also say that it looks like Bryan/Max handled this in a good way (as always), based on the information that they had.

[joemac17]

I am just now reading this and I want to chime in as I'm the player in question. I emailed repeatedly and opened multiple support tickets asking for status updates from Pokerhuis. Most of the time they simply closed the tickets with absolutely no response (precisely what Max has encountered) and the few times they did respond it was to tell me (repeatedly) that they were having issues with Neteller. I have offered to allow them to wire me, however their cashier would not allow me to enter my wire details.

I emailed them and asked them if I just emailed them all of my info if they would send me my payment, but again, they didn't feel that warranted a response either. Reading this thread is the literal first time I have heard anything from them about player fraud, uk groups or any other of a number of absurd accusations. In fact, at no point did anyone even mention that confiscation was being considered until I began to be assertive and opened a ticket each day because no one ever bothered to respond to me, and my requests for management were ignored and I had already waited over a month.

I still have some of their infrequent responses to the multiple tickets I opened in my email from them stating that I would be paid when their Neteller issues were resolved and also emails from support asking me to send them screenshots of the cashier not accepting wire details so they could resolve the issue and pay me by wire instead. Now I try and get some assistance from a third party and suddenly I'm a fraudulent player who supposedly belongs to some long defunct group that opened many accounts some time ago? Ridiculous. That should be extremely fishy and suspicious to anyone who has done business with any online casino.

The reason they gave me for refunding my deposit was "abnormal playing behaviors" with no explanation of what that meant. I have played well over what is required by their terms and conditions in wagering, probably as much as three times as much as I was doing well winning, and I played a wide variety of terrible games and had the good fortune to actually win doing so. I would think most casinos would be celebrating have a player gambling in their casino.

The casino has not handled this in a professional manner, and considering I have already offered to have them pay me by wire using my bank details, and am willing to provide my credentials such as passport, driving license, etc and they already have my address, email and Neteller details it should be a simple matter for them to determine that I have a single account and am not part of whatever secretive gambling cabal they seem to think I am involved in. I think this is a lot of smoke and mirrors to avoid paying a winning player or to hide whatever financial issues they may have since they seem to have no problem accepting Neteller payments but a world of problems paying out.

[joemac17]

Also, I find it mindboggling you actually publicly posted my full name on this forum, and that you have no problems hopping on internet forums to clear your name, but can't be bothered to respond to emails or tickets. You also can't just blame this on a first line/second line miscommunication problem, I was directly emailed by mark@pokerhuis.com and subsequently ignored entirely by him as well after being promised to rereview my account when I insisted on being paid.

[3mptyseat]

I have been trying those slots in fun mode, and I am down 20k euros in 1.5 hours? How did u do it?