32K GBP Not Paid By Epoca Casino

DannyB

Dormant account
PABinit
Joined
Nov 4, 2013
Location
London
I played an ongoing offer back in August 2013, since then the pitch a bitch brought no positive result I am left with no choice but to bring it to the forum , forgive me Max but the casino seems to be careless.

I made a deposit of 400 ,got a 50% bonus and managed to win 33,825 GBP.

They paid only 1200 (6 times bonus) saying the max cashout according to the terms is 6 times bonus.

The term they mentioned was of the welcome bonus and not ongoing.

Back then the 6 times rule was only related to the welcome bonus and not ongoing bonus.

I even have a screenshot "where a signup bonus has been granted to you"... and then the max 6 times rule.
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
Yeah, understood. I'll look this over again but afaicr the max payout Terms did apply to your situation.

FWIW the last I heard from the casino peeps they were gathering the data to support their case and were going to forward that to me. Never happened afaict.

I've tried to re-contact the rep who was handling things, alerted him to this thread.
 

DannyB

Dormant account
PABinit
Joined
Nov 4, 2013
Location
London
Thank you Max but..... The maximum 6 times can't apply because it says clearly and I have a screenshot "where a signup bonus has been granted to you..."
 

onkel

New Member
PABnonaccred
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Location
Larnaca, Cyprus, Cyprus
6x bonus is obviously a "scam" in itself - on a 50% bonus that would only allow you to book a win of twice the size of your deposit. Seems more and more casinos just use the bonuses to lock players' deposits in and make sure they're ground to zero (while limiting the amounts players can win if they somehow get lucky)
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
The maximum 6 times can't apply because it says clearly and I have a screenshot "where a signup bonus has been granted to you..."

As I said, it was my understanding that it did apply, but this is all just conjecture until the casino responds in further detail. Still waiting for that.
 

Jasminebed

Game old gal
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Location
Ontario
I don't have the details of the player's case, but am I correct in understanding that the SUB limits wins to a max cashout, but the player contends that this was not his SUB? That there is nothing to support it is the same rules for subsequent bonuses?

I can't quite tell if this PAB is resolved (but not in the player's favour), or it's just ground to a halt due to lack of info?

I really don't want the OP to comment if it will endanger his PAB.

I am no fan of deposit bonuses that limit winnings. If a player signed up for a bad bonus and agreed to it, tough luck and thanks for pointing that out to us.

But if a casino is applying SUB bonus terms to subsequent bonuses without being clear they too are limited, that's rogue IMO.

My favourite non-accredited casino (some will be good guessers :p) used to have a SUB term that limited first deposits under $250 to 10x first deposit cashout. Honestly it kept me from making a deposit at this casino for a long time, and I didn't cashout from my first deposit, and I knew when I deposited it was a term. There was a pretty generous match to offset it, so I went in eyes wide open. Another forum member did exceed that 10x, and pm'd me about it, because they went back to re-read terms before withdrawing. I said AFAIK that's their rule, so you might as well just play down to it for the comp points. This was by pm, and my best guess on the issue.

After playing well past the WR on the SUB, my fellow CMer was well over the 10x deposit limit still, but by then the casino got back to him and honoured a withdrawl that was smaller than what is was once the WR was met, but in excess of the 10x. They recognised a genuine player and used some discretion which was wise if not obligatory. As far as I can tell from posts, this CM friend remains a player there.

If you have not finished investigating Maxd due to the casino dragging its boots providing you proof that the term applied to the player's deposit, a warning should be issued that they are uncooperative.

If Epoca provides proof this term applies, I'd just say steer clear, you can do better elsewhere.
 

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
PABinit
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Location
SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
Yeah, understood. I'll look this over again but afaicr the max payout Terms did apply to your situation.

FWIW the last I heard from the casino peeps they were gathering the data to support their case and were going to forward that to me. Never happened afaict.

I've tried to re-contact the rep who was handling things, alerted him to this thread.

Max,

When was it when they said they gathering facts and will then forward these to you. If its been an inordinate period of time it doesn't bode well for the Riverbelle group who had as I recall used dubious terms to deny winnings in the past.
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
My understanding is that the delays in the case were caused by two things: the casino rep not getting back to me -- until now -- with the supporting data on the case + me not following up on things due to being swamped with other things.

Anyway, I've just received a packet of stuff from the casino peeps. Hopefully that will answer the primary outstanding question(s) in the PAB and allow that process to conclude. Since this has become a public issue now rather than just a private one I'll update here shortly.
 
Last edited:

mattsgame

Meister Member
webmeister
CAG
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Location
Out Of Town
This is the term:

5.7.4 Where a Bonus has been granted to you, subject to you being required to have met all wagering requirements, you will be limited to a maximum withdrawal value of 6 times your first deposit amount and any remaining balance will be forfeited. This clause will only be applied at the discretion of casino management. All progressive wins are exempt from this clause.

I do not like this one bit tbh.. The OP won 32k and at their discretion only paid the 6x, I wonder if the op won just over the 6x if they would have even battered an eye lid. It also says there on your FIRST deposit amount, I hope that does not count for future deposits x bonuses as this would be completely wrong and if they mean just the first deposit bonus the OP was not playing with that (If we believe the OP's story) and its worded very poorly.

Will be keeping a close eye on this as I do like the Digimedia group but this term is so wrong in my eyes, it is across a few of their casinos and not just Epoca.

Andrew when was this term implemented at your casinos? I thought you guys were better than this.
 

osulle

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
In my head
This is the term:

5.7.4 Where a Bonus has been granted to you, subject to you being required to have met all wagering requirements, you will be limited to a maximum withdrawal value of 6 times your first deposit amount and any remaining balance will be forfeited. This clause will only be applied at the discretion of casino management. All progressive wins are exempt from this clause.

I do not like this one bit tbh.. The OP won 32k and at their discretion only paid the 6x, I wonder if the op won just over the 6x if they would have even battered an eye lid. It also says there on your FIRST deposit amount, I hope that does not count for future deposits x bonuses as this would be completely wrong and if they mean just the first deposit bonus the OP was not playing with that (If we believe the OP's story) and its worded very poorly.

Will be keeping a close eye on this as I do like the Digimedia group but this term is so wrong in my eyes, it is across a few of their casinos and not just Epoca.

Andrew when was this term implemented at your casinos? I thought you guys were better than this.

This is a terrible term and not clear at all AFAICT; it looks like if you win on a bonus in the future the casino can invoke this clause because it says where a bonus has been granted to you. If they haven't done already they seriously need to change this as it can be viewed as predatory. If I read the term wrong correct me.
 

wigan rl

Dormant Account
Joined
Jul 22, 2011
Location
Wigan
It's near 7 months down the line and they can't get Max all the stuff 'until' it goes public hmmmmm

If what the op is saying is true then the full amount should be paid if not then this is classed as rouge in my eyes
 

DannyB

Dormant account
PABinit
Joined
Nov 4, 2013
Location
London
The terms you see now are not the same terms I found back then.

I took a screenshot right after I figured out the casino make problems.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
The term as it stands is definitely predatory and rogue. It makes depositing and playing any bonus pointless. Winning will simply cause stress, as in 'what proportion of my winnings will the casino, at their discretion, pay me?' I couldn't play under those terms, and if they were added in reaction to the OP's large win ex post facto, then it is rogue behaviour, effectively unwarranted confiscation of winnings.
Let's hope that Max gets a quick and effective line of communication with the casino in this case. Taking the OP at his word you'd have to support him in this case.

I have their terms here from Wayback for spring 2013 before the player had the issue:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Now the term 5.7.4 concerning '6x first deposit max w/d if bonus taken' was added MAY 2013 and prior to this wasn't there as you can see in the above link (NO term 5.7.4)

So, if the player deposited and this issue was created BEFORE the term was added in May 2013 then he has a valid case. If he joined and took the bonus afterwards, unless the casino has fiddled the date on its 'last updated' header, then he is a victim of valid (but utterly sh!te) T&C's.
 
Last edited:

chayton

aka LooHoo
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Location
Edmonton Canada
At both Jackpot City and River Belle the term says signup bonus

5.7.4 Where a Sign-Up Bonus has been granted to you, subject to you being required to have met all wagering requirements, you will be limited to a maximum withdrawal value of 6 times your first deposit amount and any remaining balance will be forfeited. This clause will only be applied at the discretion of casino management. All progressive wins are exempt from this clause.
 

CompleteFailure

Newbie member
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Location
Hong Kong
6x bonus is obviously a "scam" in itself - on a 50% bonus that would only allow you to book a win of twice the size of your deposit. Seems more and more casinos just use the bonuses to lock players' deposits in and make sure they're ground to zero (while limiting the amounts players can win if they somehow get lucky)


Thanks for this thread!

I was about to sign up to golden riviera and was going through the ghastly terms. I came across the clause and googled it cause I wasn't exactly sure what they meant. So this means I can only win 6x my deposit? They say it's only applied at the discretion of the casino so it means if I win more, I might get it but I might not. Very odd.

Where a Sign-Up Bonus has been granted to you, subject to you being required to have met all wagering requirements, you will be limited to a maximum withdrawal value of 6 times your first deposit amount and any remaining balance will be forfeited. This clause will only be applied at the discretion of casino management. All progressive wins are exempt from this clause.

On another note they have this term:

Winnings from these accounts will not be paid out more than the amount of the purchases made on the account. We apologize to the customers from the countries detailed below for the inconvenience caused. The countries are from certain parts of South East Asia, Eastern Europe and Southern Africa;

They don't detail any countries, they only detail regions. Well, I am from one of those regions so what am I to make of it?
 

PaaskeDenmark

Always think positive
webmeister
PABnoaccred
CAG
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Location
UnKnown
Thanks for this thread!

I was about to sign up to golden riviera and was going through the ghastly terms. I came across the clause and googled it cause I wasn't exactly sure what they meant. So this means I can only win 6x my deposit? They say it's only applied at the discretion of the casino so it means if I win more, I might get it but I might not. Very odd.

Where a Sign-Up Bonus has been granted to you, subject to you being required to have met all wagering requirements, you will be limited to a maximum withdrawal value of 6 times your first deposit amount and any remaining balance will be forfeited. This clause will only be applied at the discretion of casino management. All progressive wins are exempt from this clause.

On another note they have this term:

Winnings from these accounts will not be paid out more than the amount of the purchases made on the account. We apologize to the customers from the countries detailed below for the inconvenience caused. The countries are from certain parts of South East Asia, Eastern Europe and Southern Africa;

They don't detail any countries, they only detail regions. Well, I am from one of those regions so what am I to make of it?

Vegas Partner Lounge is not allowed to accept Players from the following countries: United States of America, Belgium, Denmark, Cypress, France (France Metropolitan, French Guiana, French Polynesia, French South Territories), Greece, Italy (Vatican City), Spain, and South Africa.
 

CompleteFailure

Newbie member
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Location
Hong Kong
Vegas Partner Lounge is not allowed to accept Players from the following countries: United States of America, Belgium, Denmark, Cypress, France (France Metropolitan, French Guiana, French Polynesia, French South Territories), Greece, Italy (Vatican City), Spain, and South Africa.

Yes, they details those below but none of them are from Southeast Asia or Eastern Europe. Only one is from Southern Africa (South Africa) and all the rest are from completely different regions (North America, Western Europe, French Territories) so the clause doesn't logically follow from the preceding one. I assume that clause has nothing to do with the SEA, EE, SA clause above. It's bizarre.
 

osulle

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
In my head
Vegas Partner Lounge is not allowed to accept Players from the following countries: United States of America, Belgium, Denmark, Cypress, France (France Metropolitan, French Guiana, French Polynesia, French South Territories), Greece, Italy (Vatican City), Spain, and South Africa.

Okay unless I am totally cracking up and read the terms incorrectly Vegas Partner Lounge does not have the 6x max withdraw on a bonus? I checked the terms before I signed up with 777Dragon and have a pending withdrawal from there.
 

CompleteFailure

Newbie member
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Location
Hong Kong
Okay unless I am totally cracking up and read the terms incorrectly Vegas Partner Lounge does not have the 6x max withdraw on a bonus? I checked the terms before I signed up with 777Dragon and have a pending withdrawal from there.

Oh, I don't know about 777Dragon. I was looking at Golden Riviera.

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


Paragraph 4.5

I've noticed the Microgamming sites seem to just copy their terms from each other or get from the same sources.
 

osulle

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
In my head
Oh, I don't know about 777Dragon. I was looking at Golden Riviera.

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


Paragraph 4.5

I've noticed the Microgamming sites seem to just copy their terms from each other or get from the same sources.

777 Dragon is Vegas Partner Lounge and this term is not in their terms AFAICT. I was worried there for a second because their first deposit bonus is 200% up to 50 so first deposit is $25. I won on the third deposit bonus and deposited more $80 for the 50% because I had more to deposit (another casino paid me). I checked the terms before I deposited to make sure that 6x rule wasn't in there.

It seems strange that some Vegas Partner Lounge casinos have this stupid term and others don't. It is really a stupid term.
 

dusky

Dormant Account
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Location
England
Whether the player is in the right or wrong here what a truly appalling term that is.

"How dare you have the audacity to win money from us" pretty much. I would stay clear from the entire group, as I've just said on another thread they already have the house edge and can bring in other terms so there is no need to create one that limits players on this scale.
 

mattsgame

Meister Member
webmeister
CAG
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Location
Out Of Town
Anything on this Max?

I see the rep has viewed the forum but not replied about the terms (Not the PAB)
 

maxd

PAB (Complaints) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
Ok, I've gone back through the case data provided and afaict the OP was indeed in violation of the casino's "max bet" Terms on both deposit occasions relevant to his PAB case. I have contacted him via email with further details.

ADDED: whatever we may think of the casino's Terms the OP agreed to and was bound by them. When he violated them he put himself in a position of losing everything. The fact that the casino offered the 6x payout -- which I understand the OP took -- was a kindness since they were under no obligation to do so.
 

osulle

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
In my head
Ok, I've gone back through the case data provided and afaict the OP was indeed in violation of the casino's "max bet" Terms on both deposit occasions relevant to his PAB case. I have contacted him via email with further details.

ADDED: whatever we may think of the casino's Terms the OP agreed to and was bound by them. When he violated them he put himself in a position of losing everything. The fact that the casino offered the 6x payout -- which I understand the OP took -- was a kindness since they were under no obligation to do so.
Agree I think the OP was lucky to get paid anything at all. 30% of the bonus is pretty high on a bonus of 200 in this case. He must have been betting over 60 a spin. Op was lucky to come out of this with some cash in his pocket.
 
Top