Question would you play if this was part of the Terms?

Helloooo Casinomeister-ites,

Got a question for you and yours. Check out the following casino Term that was recently discovered, take a mo to answer the poll:

Term X: It will be a condition of your agreement with us that any complaints and disputes are, and remain, confidential both while we seek a resolution and afterwards. You agree that you will not disclose the existence, nature or detail of any complaints and disputes to any third party (which will include the discussion of any such complaints and disputes in any chat room or forum offered by ourselves or any third party). If you do so, that will be considered a breach of the Terms and Conditions and we will no longer be obliged to continue seeking a resolution to your complaint and dispute and will be entitled to freeze (and potentially close) your account.

Click to expand...

I voted Never Play....

Reason: From those terms and conditions, it basically says that if you have a dispute and complain to ANYONE but US, then we have the right to Freeze your account.

I can see this as damage limitation but on the other hand also as a way to sweep things under the carpet. Sorry, that term is dodgy! No reputable Casino would use it.

Nate

Of course not. Why anyone would play some place like that I will never know. I would actually have thought it was an illegal term as they are basically telling you you have no choice but to accept what they say and you cannot go anywhere to complain. Would be like wiiliam hill telling me that I have to accept them not paying me on a winning bet and I am not allowed to go to the gambling commission or something similar.

maxd said:

Helloooo Casinomeister-ites,

Got a question for you and yours. Check out the following casino Term that was recently discovered, take a mo to answer the poll:

Click to expand...

Well coming into this question blindly, I see little difference between this term and many others with regard to being a new player - that is, sometimes it seems like weird, inscrutable terms exist in all casinos (with a few rare exceptions) for the likely purpose of denying a winning player a very juicy payout on the basis of having violated this weird term.

So yes, I would probably play. I'm also not one to raise many disputes, even when I could, so I doubt I would need to be reminded of this unofficial 'nondisclosure agreement' even in cases where I was unhappy with the resolution of a rare dispute.

I hear you guys! If it were me I'd flip the bird and hit the road but hey, I'm just me. Hence the poll.

Quite curious how many folks, if any, would simply shrug and press on. There are strange things done 'neath the midnight sun by the men [or women, Loretta] who moil for gold.

(apologies to the good Mr. Service)

Saw the thread this was posted in and immediately thought it was dodgy.

It's like you could have a large win, they could refuse to pay you on the smallest technicality, and they would/could only use channels they know would more than likely rule in their favour.

I'd give it a wide berth.

That was a nice way of saying "We are the jury, judge and executioner". What casino have such a term?

no I wouldn't.

With such a variety of reputable places to play at I would never consider playing at any casino that had any terms that I was not comfortable with.

I think people who have never had any problems with casinos previously might just go ahead. Those of us who have experience with having to get someone else to step in to get our money may be a bit more cautious.

I don't know anything about the casino, but that kind of high-handedness always puts me off a bit. And just imagine, if the casino that Ray and I had the PAB against a few years ago had that term, he might STILL be waiting to get paid from his jackpot win. So personally if I saw that term it would make me really leery about playing there.

It sort of reminds me of this one resort I saw an article about - they were fining their customers' credit cards $500 for any bad reviews on yelp!

I wonder what those say that are giving this casino their liscence...or they maybe don't have any?
At least to them there should be a door open but not according to those rules.

Horrible rules. I need to start reading them.
Wait...I never sign up anywhere that hasn't been dragged around here for a while

paul7388 said:

Of course not. Why anyone would play some place like that I will never know. I would actually have thought it was an illegal term as they are basically telling you you have no choice but to accept what they say and you cannot go anywhere to complain. Would be like wiiliam hill telling me that I have to accept them not paying me on a winning bet and I am not allowed to go to the gambling commission or something similar.

Click to expand...

I checked their site and they have UK licence, so I guess UKGC approved those terms. And I don't think "third party" includes gambling commissin here.
They say on their site that if you are unsatisfied from resolution of your complaint the next step is to contact IBAS. So this is only about forums, private mediators etc.

But of course it is a bad term. There are casinos who don't respond to private mediators, but they don't close your account for complaning.

asghan said:

I checked their site and they have UK licence, so I guess UKGC approved those terms. And I don't think "third party" includes gambling commissin here.
They say on their site that if you are unsatisfied from resolution of your complaint the next step it to contact IBAS. So this is only about forums, private mediators etc.

But of course it is a bad term. There are casinos who don't respond to private mediators, but they don't close your account for complaning.

Click to expand...

Yes that's what I would have thought. But im also taking into account the earlier post that had this..... in particular the one that forbids a user from seeking assistance with a dispute outside of the operator's control .... Which would mean not being able to take it to gambling commission etc. which would be illegal. But even if its about forums what right has anyone to tell you that you can not discuss with people anything to do with your dispute even after its closed or they can close your account.

paul7388 said:

But even if its about forums what right has anyone to tell you that you can not discuss with people anything to do with your dispute even after its closed or they can close your account.

Click to expand...

Which is kinda funny that UKGC has no problem with this. Wasn't UKGC supposed to protect UK players better?

It's a proceed with great caution from me (if it wasn't for the UK licence, it would be a "make for the exit"). They cannot enforce the "afterwards" part other than by taking the player to court for libel. The casino would NEVER do this except in the most extreme cases as whatever the outcome, the PR would deal a "killer blow" to their credibility.

I expect they are trying to protect themselves from fraudsters who use publicity as leverage to blackmail the casino into paying up.

Showing that something you said is true is a defence to a libel action, and if they take a player to court and lose, the publicity about them trying to get away with ripping off consumers with a dodgy gagging clause would kill the business. Other companies have tried this tack before, and it hasn't worked. If anything, it just makes matters even worse for them when the customer DOES get the media involved.

The caution is that one would ONLY break this term when 100% certain that all other avenues have been exhausted. This would require considerable patience.

It basically gives the casino carte blanche to create a dispute or delay in order to instigate a reaction from the player, who in frustration would likely go public, thus the term becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Wouldn't take a p!ss there let alone deposit.

dunover said:

It basically gives the casino carte blanche to create a dispute or delay in order to instigate a reaction from the player, who in frustration would likely go public, thus the term becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Wouldn't take a p!ss there let alone deposit.

Click to expand...

Having looked at it, neither would I. I have seen better games at Slotland, the original HTML version!!

I wonder if the UKGC have even read the terms before granting the licence, I don't think it's something they worry about as other laws already protect consumers against rogue terms.

I personally think ANY casino with a term like this in it should get a Golden Fast-Track Ticket to the Rogue List!.
It is totally ludicrous

KK

The 'Afterwards' part seals it for me.

I would always be willing to give the casino a chance to deal with any issue using their own internal review process but once the decision is rendered if they refuse to do the right thing the general public must be made aware.

The casinos stick together with their blacklists and databases and whatnot. The regulators, for the most part, ignore players complaints so we, the players, must stick together and use forums like this to let other players see how these establishments deal with problems and any casino that seeks to stifle the voices of their players deserves no players.

if they explicitly put in that PAB via max can be raised and would not breach the terms, I may consider, else never play for me

1. I would not deposit

2. I would send them a rather "complimentary" e-mail, congratulating them on the following...

The consummate ease with which they ensured that they would never see a penny of my money.

Their nomination for "self-defeating joke term" of the year.

Would never touch such a place tbh.

Some people here have played at a casino with similar terms:

Part of 7.4

Should You approach any other party or make any public statement relating to Your complaint or dispute at any time prior to or after contacting our regulatory authority with the intention of purposely damaging the image and reputation of the Casino, Your act of doing so shall result in Your surrendering all rights to any claim whatsoever against the Casino and Your account shall be permanently closed and all winnings confiscated.

Click to expand...

The trouble here was their licensing regulatory authority was Curacao So good luck there.

This term was finally removed but they still had this one:

7.2

The Casino shall have the right to block or close Your Player Account at its absolute discretion in the event that the Casino suspects that You are in breach of these T&C or that You are engaged in illegal activities of any sort or that You are a compulsive gambler or that You are facing financial hardship or for any other reason which the Casino considers appropriate in order to protect its reputation and business interests.

Click to expand...

This reads like, "Say something bad about us and boom, bye bye".

ummmm nope

free lube with sign up package at least it wont hurt as bad when they f&*k you out of your money

Haven't read the entire thread, just skimmed - but from what I've saw, the answer is obviously a resounding "NO WAY!".

Oh, Curacao, you say? Shouldda known

My hairs in my neck went up right away after reading that specific part of the t&c's...
So I pressed - NAY

Never play at such a dodgy establishment! Gorramit!