Resolved 17,000 non payment by Videoslots.com

[dreamguardian1]

Hi, I’m the casino representative for Videoslots.com.

I have already spoken to Talitha through email and I have checked this issue with the management, and have replied back accordingly.

Unfortunately you have breached one of our bonus abuse terms.
You wagered a total £100 per spin with an average bet size of £20 per line. Then after the third spin you won a substantial win and reduced your average bet size to £5 per line.

As you can read in our terms and conditions, you are not allowed to reduce your average bet size equal to 75% or more during a bonus qualification after a substantial win.

Therefore this is a clear case of breach of terms and conditions even though you may personally not agree with the particular term, you have though accepted these terms when you had registered on our site. Moreover, your Original deposit amount was returned to your account.

If you have any further complaints, we recommend you to do a PAB.

Best Regards,
Lucas

While some of their bonus terms read like greek to many of us, i do also recommend reading them. In this case i think it was an honest mistake, no you are not going to get the winning but you at least did get your deposit back which is more than i can say for most casino's. I think "Lucas" is being more than fair without directly saying it. Gave you deposit back and did not close your account. While i do not agree with these rules which seem to constantly change at their whim, sometimes all we can do is lick our wounds and move on.

 

[ChillBill]

i do not agree with these rules which seem to constantly change at their whim, sometimes all we can do is lick our wounds and move on.

Voting with your feet in instances like this is the sensible thing to do.

 

[Jasminebed]

If there's an "honest mistake" it's that the casino didn't write terms to coincide with the behaviour they want from players. I see that they have made some clarifications to the term. These cannot be applied retroactively.

I think that casinos can make honest mistakes, just as players do. But just because my mistake of failing to read a term or check to see if things were different than the last time I played doesn't mean I'm entitled to winnings under a terms violation.

If English is not your first language, use a good translator. If you have a corporation or company, spend a little money on a lawyer to write your contract.

If your promotions team can't figure out how to offer a bonus that won't bankrupt the casino, hire a consultant. At least spend some time over at a bonus beater forum to look for the common strategies and how to figure out the EV of a bonus. There are threads here about figuring EV, variance, a lot of things.

Casinos are free to change terms, and encouraged to do so for further clarity.

If the player's PAB is successful and they pay the player, I'll believe that's good faith on the casino's part.

If you don't like a player's playing style, either bonus ban or outright ban after playing. There is no spirit of the bonus to void winnings that is acceptable, accredited or not.

 

[vinylweatherman]

If the OP had been playing 20 Lines at $5 each, and dropped to one line @ $5, and came in arguing that his betsize was still $5 and hadn't violated the 75% reduction, most of us would say he had, and a reasonable interpretation of bet size is the size of the bet in dollar value, with his $100 bet dropping to $5 a spin to complete WR, and most of us would be saying tough luck OP, you breached the term. Do you think Videoslots would be claiming a terms violation in the above case?

You might not think Redbet's $5 a bet or .50 a line is generous enough, but it is clear.

That's the problem. The casino is changing the meaning of the term to support their decision not to pay. By the interpretation they have used to deny this win, the above strategy would NOT be a violation as the bet is still $5.

100 down to 45 may be substantial, but it is not 75%, more like 55%.

It is also odd that they even ALLOW a max bet of $100 as their ceiling from which bet reductions are calculated.

I bet that if the OP just kept on betting at $100 throughout, and had hit after hit to give them 170K, not 17K, this too would be a violation.


It seems the terms are written so that EVERYTHING can be argued to be a violation at the whim of the casino, in effect, allowing them to decide who to pay, and who not to, but pretending it is down to a clear set of criteria, rather than the whim of management.

If vague terms are being used in a predatory manner, it is considered rogue behaviour.

Sooner or later, this casino will confiscate winnings from another player (maybe one who bets $5 per line throughout, but moves from a slot with many lines to one with far fewer), and use a different interpretation of these same rules to explain it, an interpretation that would mean this player should be paid. If this happens, it will be conclusive evidence of intent to behave in a rogue manner.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Why is Scrooge not a video slot at this casino Why JUST Scrooge getting singled out, it's not even a progressive.

I can play Triple Magic though, yet this would make the bonus slightly +EV, and I could bet at the same level throughout, a nice 50c per line, perhaps $1 per line. There IS only one line, so I would be forced to stick to the same bet throughout, as the gap between line bets is at least 50%, and even 100%. I would come close to violating the 75% rule if even the bet was changed.

Very strange that this BS is coming from an MGS casino. The fact that they keep on having to change the terms every time it has an argument with a player shows that they were poorly drafted to start with.


Triple Magic will be banned next week, now that I have pointed it out, then I can go on about Summer Holiday and have them scrambling to ban that too if they have it, it's **% - ***% RTP according to the MGS marketing flyer

 

[clees42]

what if 1 slot has max bet 100 and the next has max bet 20?
what about the 243 ways slots?

 

[mattsgame]

Another case of a casino creatively interpreting their own terms to their advantage. It's worth noting that this isn't the first time this casino pulls something like this. I think we have a pattern of behaviour here:

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/videoslots-confiscated-my-winning.51245/

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/deucebag-vs-videoslots.48364/

Granted, the last case was resolved in the player's favor in the end.

You forgot max's warning in September Video Slots is enforcing predatory "max bet" Terms

Which looks like they did a similar thing and changed the term not long after the warning are we seeing a pattern here or what? when ever there is a bonus issue the t&c are changed.

EmuCasino is one of their white labels who opened by spamming players, myself included. No idea where they obtained my email from Because this stellar operation is connected to VideoSlots.com I consulted Google and just found this:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

If what's said above is true, the owner of videoslots.com has a checkered past.

I had something about them in my first post in this thread but removed it as it wasn't very nice. Anyway have they not been denying that they are related in anyway? Even to Max.

It appears that a number of points that have been written are inaccurate and slightly misleading. As such, I wish to clarify the situation to avoid any misunderstandings.

Please see below points that clarify the the situation:

EmuCasino.com is owned by EmuGroup Ltd
EmuGroup Ltd operates and is registered in Malta (registration number C56590)
EmuCasino.com is licensed in Curacao (98585) under Panda Media N.V.
We are currently in the process of becoming licensed by the LGA


Our company, brand and product (EmuCasino) is completely owned/managed independently to the operations of Panda Media Ltd (Videoslots.com).

 

[Talithu7]

Problem solved

Dear friends,

The matter has been settled between me and the casino.

Steve Russo of gambling grumbles is the facilitator of this peace process

I will post a link to his report as soon as he puts it up.

Thanks everybody for your support.

 

[maxd]

The OP informed me via PM that their issue was resolved before I had a chance to log the PAB into our system. Good to hear! I'm marked the case "Withdrawn" so the OP still has their One Free Shot available.

 

[akrus88]

Congrats to OP!

I truly hope videoslots adjust their terms to be more clearer for further distractions.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Congrats to OP!

I truly hope videoslots adjust their terms to be more clearer for further distractions.

They need to forget about "clarifying" and go back to the beginning to produce a set of terms that say what they mean. Rather than complicated sets of criteria, distill them into the simplest set they can without losing any of the meaning.

Many casinos distill things down to a simple "Max bet is xx% of the bonus credited until WR is completed". They do NOT exclude slots seemingly at random from the standard categories, although exclusion of network progressives is fairly common (not that a "bonus abuser" should be interested in them as the aim is to beat the current bonus, not take a very long shot at a progressive with a sub 90% RTP base game). Excluding non slots is now very common, so they could advertise a "slots bonus" and restrict play to non progressive slots. Even their latest max bet rule is too high given their attitude to players who bet big and win. If they are that worried, drop it down to, say, 10% of the bonus credited. They could even consider an absolute max like 32Red's 6.25 and RedBet's 5 for the welcome bonus at least.

 

[Mouche12]

I am very happy for the OP, congrats!

So, will Videoslots amend their bonus terms? I hope so!

 

[Jasminebed]

I do hope the resolution was payment in full to the OP, because he complied with the terms as written at the time.

Unambiguous terms are good for both the casino and the player.

75 percent of previous average bet can be very difficult for a player to know or follow. MG slots come from one line to 100 or more. I might bet $3 on the classic Wheel of Fortune game, a $3 bet, but also a $3 line. If I then decide I want to play Boogie Monsters, a 40 line slot... should I be betting at least $.75 per line? Oh wait, that puts the player into the position of breaking the max bet rule possibly, with a $30 total bet.

It won't be long before someone will break that rule. They might try to get help from CS, who may not really understand themselves. In most ways, it's more complicated than the previous rule, other than a definition of substantial. There are games I play $2 a spin on, and other high variance ones I don't dare bet more than 45 cents most times.

Use the starting bonus or deposit to limit betsize, and a dollar value as well to limit betsize. I've did a lot of reading here at the forum over the years, isn't the player that plays hard all the way through a bigger risk than the player that drops and low rolls for the casino?

32Red hasn't gone broke yet from offering their SUB, and the WR is much lower than at Videoslots.

Assuming it wasn't cut a deal with a panicked player who took what they could, I will give Videoslots the benefit of good faith for now.

But every issue, resolved or not, valid or not, that makes the forums tarnishes your reputation. Clear and unambigous terms minimize that risk.

If a casino is deliberately trying to ensnare players with rules begging to broken, and subject to multiple interpretations to confiscate winnings.

Get rid of any "suspect to be" spirit of the bonus terms. If you suspect a player to be an advantage player, show him the door after payment.

Very happy for the OP, hope your payment is swift and hassle free.

 

[MisterBJ]

Details of the agreement is HERE xhttp://www.gamblinggrumbles.com/Reports/VideoSlots.com_What-was-not-clear-now-is

So what do you guys think? Me Personally thinks Video Slots OWES this person.

 

[Jasminebed]

While I would have perferred to see this player paid out their win, they did agree to what was essentially a DO OVER at the point the casino deemed to have breached a term that didn't exist at the time.

I'd think it was an excellent compromise had the player broken the existing term by not fully understanding it.

I hope the player goes on to win even more than $17 K, I really do.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Not full payment, but a compromise. Still a substantial payment though. I am not entirely happy, but I am sure the OP accepts that 13K of the 17K now is perhaps better than saying "no" and losing the chance and having the original decision stand.

It seems the difference was nit picking, as after the reinstatement of the 13K, the OP had to finish WR at £6 per line instead of £5. Given that at £5 per line the amount increased from 13K to 17K, at £6 per line and the same outcomes, the casino would have been facing an even BIGGER payment.

It's a shame that karma didn't come round and bite the casino in the ass by the OP having a MASSIVE hit on the £6 per line compromise that had them wishing they had paid the original 17K. £45 per spin is already a huge bet, but they wanted even more.

In theory, it could have been ground out at £6 per line on ONE line, surely even worse an "abuse" than the casino originally objected to.

The compromise still means that the OP had to accept a retrospective change in the terms and finish under the new rules after having won big under the old.

This does NOT get Videoslots off the hook, as they should have paid the OP under the old rules, and then implemented the new ones.

However, they seem to stand by their statement that each line is a separate bet, so we can keep an eye on any future issues where this view means no terms were broken, but where they then argue that each line is NOT a separate bet in order to confiscate a win.

 

[Jasminebed]

I think the player panicked into taking what is a bad deal for them, for fear they won't get paid anything.

They hit on only $300 of playthrough on a $800 x 40 or $32,000 WR left basically. Doable for sure, but no sure thing. I guess expectation would be to lose 5% of that or around $1600? Still, it's slot, big swings are possible for sure, especially with big bets.

Now they are in a position of possibly a stall tactic while the casino hopes they lose more money, when they could win more. Will a new term violation be pulled out? Probably not, I'm sure both the player and the casino don't want to see that happen.

The OP's original play was at 5 lines, they can now go play at $6 a line on 5 lines, or $30 a spin, less than the original amount the casino seemed to feel unacceptable play.

I don't truly feel good for the player until they cashout and have been paid. But I sure feel a lot more optimistic for them now, and hats off to Mr. Russo and Videoslots to coming to a speedy compromise.

Best of Luck Talithu, keep us posted on how you make out with your DO OVER!

 

[lnspin]

Would love to see this player hit for 100k then see what excuses they come up with..

Funny Email today from there affiliate department, asking me to promote them, i just trashed it but should have sent them a few links to threads about them on this forum

 

[MisterBJ]

I agree...The casino owes this player $17K. They are playing word games. This casino knew full well. They were talking about 75% in betting and not line per bet. This is a good reason why people need to research first. Or use the accredited list which is provided here.

 

[dealer wins]

Is this what playing with a bonus has become in 2013

Only play certain games
Only play certain amounts
Only change stake a certain amount
Bonus can be removed even AFTER wagering requirement met on a whim
Make an innocent mistake with any of the above and bye bye bonus

Sounds about as enjoyable as having colonic irrigation playing with a bonus these days.

 

[Mouche12]

Talitha, I keep my fingers crossed that you win 70K or something while finishing the WR, best of luck to you and keep us posted!!

 

[Talithu7]

I have played the wagering. This time at 50 per spin.... but within the new rules.

Documents approved.

I am now waiting for my first payment.


thanks again for your support.

 

[akrus88]

Hopefully you didnt loose too much . Would have love to see screenies from your journie

 

[Jasminebed]

Please share the final amount after wagering with us... it's killing me!

Stay strong throughout the payment schedule, it's a sick feeling to play back a big win. Most of us know this already.

 

[Talithu7]

The final amount was 7,100... bad luck.

I just got paid the final installment. They have a policy of charging 3.9% fee for withdrawals beyond the first one which is free. I did not want to wait another month to0 save the pennies. wanted to get out of it ASAP. take the money and run!!!! run run run. do not look back.

the trick is to request withdrawals imemdiately, and just not reverse..... easy

Please share the final amount after wagering with us... it's killing me!

Stay strong throughout the payment schedule, it's a sick feeling to play back a big win. Most of us know this already.

 

[MisterBJ]

Ouch!!! I hate that you had to give back $10,000. But profit is better than none. I hope others will read this thread and AVOID Videoslots.com. They are the virtual casino of MG. This is a prime example, why Casinomeister's accredited list is so so important.

 

[newton0038]

Suckered

Started playing there a while back, seemed to always see reels line up in the "just missed" positions. Minimum bettor no bonuses ever hit on a slot, but of course I would "just miss" and spin again. Played a couple days back on the new Green Lantern. $40 lasted about 4 mins at their minimum $1.20/ spin. Being the sucker I am, deposited $25 today and played SEVENS HIGH, well the $25 was gone in less than 15mins at 25cent/spin. Not a win to speak of profit wise and not even a sniff of a bouns round ather than the luring 2 bonus icons then the 3rd just out of the play screen. They are manipulating games to increase the chance you will play it agian and go broke," look the icons just about hit a big one, spin it again degenerate" there is no possible way the icons line up the way they do and call it random, if it was random, winners would also be produced. This game must be at no more than 30% return. No winners at VIDEOSLOTS.COM ( have played this at Bet365 and it at least was about 95% return)

 

[KasinoKing]

Started playing there a while back, seemed to always see reels line up in the "just missed" positions. Minimum bettor no bonuses ever hit on a slot, but of course I would "just miss" and spin again. Played a couple days back on the new Green Lantern. $40 lasted about 4 mins at their minimum $1.20/ spin. Being the sucker I am, deposited $25 today and played SEVENS HIGH, well the $25 was gone in less than 15mins at 25cent/spin. Not a win to speak of profit wise and not even a sniff of a bouns round ather than the luring 2 bonus icons then the 3rd just out of the play screen. They are manipulating games to increase the chance you will play it agian and go broke," look the icons just about hit a big one, spin it again degenerate" there is no possible way the icons line up the way they do and call it random, if it was random, winners would also be produced. This game must be at no more than 30% return. No winners at VIDEOSLOTS.COM ( have played this at Bet365 and it at least was about 95% return)

I don't know why you bumped a 3-year old thread to post this...
But anyway, the casinos have ZERO control over how a game plays or pays - you were just unlucky, that's all.
Videoslots is one of the most respected casinos on the planet - they don't "tweak" their games.

Welcome to the forum - stick around, there's a LOT of useful information here!

KK

 

[newton0038]

I don't know why you bumped a 3-year old thread to post this...
But anyway, the casinos have ZERO control over how a game plays or pays - you were just unlucky, that's all.
Videoslots is one of the most respected casinos on the planet - they don't "tweak" their games.

Welcome to the forum - stick around, there's a LOT of useful information here!

KK

Im confused as to how I only get 104 spins at 25¢/spin from $25. Their 96% is bullshit. Oh well they got me again. I knew there was a reason for staying away for 2 years. They just started spamming me last week and i took their free 3 day race offer which sucked as it is not on mobile. No way they are a 96% casino when the bankroll is at zero with such little play.

 

[Deeplay]

Im confused as to how I only get 104 spins at 25¢/spin from $25. Their 96% is bullshit. Oh well they got me again. I knew there was a reason for staying away for 2 years. They just started spamming me last week and i took their free 3 day race offer which sucked as it is not on mobile. No way they are a 96% casino when the bankroll is at zero with such little play.

What ??? You deposit $25 and expect to get 96% RTP ? Dont think you understand how it works. To get close to the TRTP you would need to take a sample over 1000s of spins. You could have easily had an RTP of 500% but you lucked out nothing more. No one sucked you in, you made the choice to deposit, luck was not with you and you lost. Simple as. Video slots are as stand up as they can get. The casino dont have any influence or control over out comes. Sore looser I would say

 

[mina1929]

Too many of them lately, unfortunately

I can really understand what Casinos have to put up with, that's why when I am on live chat, I am extra nice to them because they have to put up with so much nonsense all day long and everyday.

 

[LOOKAWAY]

Im confused as to how I only get 104 spins at 25¢/spin from $25. Their 96% is bullshit. Oh well they got me again. I knew there was a reason for staying away for 2 years. They just started spamming me last week and i took their free 3 day race offer which sucked as it is not on mobile. No way they are a 96% casino when the bankroll is at zero with such little play.

Nothing wrong with Video Slots and you shouldn't dig up an old thread.

You could start your own thread and ask players if they could even get close to the bum deal you got.

Your winnings from $25 at 0.25 spins was just 1 Dollar!

Don't think I have played green lantern well probably somewhere in my past.

Spinata Grande took me 75 to the 100 the other week over two casinos was starting to like that slot.

But 75 to 100 is for high variance slots and 50 to 100 medium variance on average not including big line hits bonus rounds and free spins.

I could probably play the next decade and not do as badly as you did.

 

[newton0038]

What ??? You deposit $25 and expect to get 96% RTP ? Dont think you understand how it works. To get close to the TRTP you would need to take a sample over 1000s of spins. You could have easily had an RTP of 500% but you lucked out nothing more. No one sucked you in, you made the choice to deposit, luck was not with you and you lost. Simple as. Video slots are as stand up as they can get. The casino dont have any influence or control over out comes. Sore looser I would say

Why can't they send me my spins icon positions screenshots if there is nothing to hide? All they offered to send me is my bets for for each spin. Sore loser, not looser

 

[Deeplay]

Why can't they send me my spins icon positions screenshots if there is nothing to hide? All they offered to send me is my bets for for each spin. Sore loser, not looser

Your deposits are small and it is way to low to make any judgement on such a small number of spins. RTP Is calculated over millions of spins not 100s. And if you think your gonna get 95 or 96% dead on with each deposit then your thinking is all wrong. The games are not bent this casino has nothing to hide. They can not and do not influence RTP. You had a bad run if we take your figures at face value and now your looking for an excuse for this.

Man up take the hit and if you cant maybe quit gambling ;-) I know if I felt the games were somehow fixed or manipulated by a casino I would never play again.

Its very easy ... the maths model is built into to every game to ensure 99.9% of us loose in the end.

Not sure what part of that you fail to understand