- Joined
- May 13, 2014
- Location
- Wolverhampton
The mind boggles as to what they will come up with regards to the OP.
If I understood correctly then they have paid them part of their winnings already, correct?
If they've paid part of the win then surely they are openly "admitting" that no terms were broken, they cannot have been, otherwise NONE of the win would have been paid surely?
From where I am sitting then providing the OP does not play their balance back then a month from the original w/d they should be able to withdraw and be paid more.
If I understood correctly then they have paid them part of their winnings already, correct?
If they've paid part of the win then surely they are openly "admitting" that no terms were broken, they cannot have been, otherwise NONE of the win would have been paid surely?
From where I am sitting then providing the OP does not play their balance back then a month from the original w/d they should be able to withdraw and be paid more.