32K GBP Not Paid By Epoca Casino

[DannyB]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 ) 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]

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]

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.

 

[mattsgame]

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.

 

[Dinahnana]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[chayton]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Dinahnana]

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]

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.

 

[Dinahnana]

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]

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]

Anything on this Max?

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

 

[maxd]

Anything on this Max?

Yes, I need to update this. Will do so shortly.

 

[maxd]

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.

 

[Dinahnana]

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.

 

[maxd]

He must have been betting over 60 a spin.

Way, WAY over 60 as it happens. 50-100% of the bonus depending on the dates of play.

 

[Dinahnana]

Way, WAY over 60 as it happens. 50-100% of the bonus depending on the dates of play.

Holy crap those are big bets. He shouldn't have been paid anything at all IMHO as this shatters the max bet term to bits. The casino would have been well within their rights to deny him all of his winnings.

 

[maxd]

The casino would have been well within their rights to deny him all of his winnings.

Yes, agreed, as I pretty much said in posts #2 and #5 of this thread. The OP had been saying the Terms did not apply. I'm waiting for his (private) response to this latest stuff before making a final decision.

 

[DannyB]

The 30% rule was also related to the welcome bonus back then when I played.

I have the screenshot which I try to attach to my next post to support

 

[DannyB]

Look below, it is clear the 30% rule is related to the signup bonus only


Before any withdrawals are processed, your play will be reviewed for any irregular playing patterns e.g. playing of equal, zero margin bets or hedge betting, which all shall be considered irregular gaming for Sign-Up Bonus Play Through Requirement purposes. Other examples of irregular game play include but are not limited to, placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of the bonus credited to your account until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met and any other pre-and post Bonus activity. The Casino reserves the right to decide in its sole discretion which activities constitute "irregular play" for Sign-Up Bonus Play through Requirement purposes from time-to-time and to withhold any withdrawals where irregular play has occurred to meet Sign-Up Bonus Play through Requirements.

 

[sandtag]

Look below, it is clear the 30% rule is related to the signup bonus only


Before any withdrawals are processed, your play will be reviewed for any irregular playing patterns e.g. playing of equal, zero margin bets or hedge betting, which all shall be considered irregular gaming for Sign-Up Bonus Play Through Requirement purposes. Other examples of irregular game play include but are not limited to, placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of the bonus credited to your account until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met and any other pre-and post Bonus activity. The Casino reserves the right to decide in its sole discretion which activities constitute "irregular play" for Sign-Up Bonus Play through Requirement purposes from time-to-time and to withhold any withdrawals where irregular play has occurred to meet Sign-Up Bonus Play through Requirements.

I dont think any casino would pay you if you bet over 50-100% of your bonus, even almost all the accredited ones would see this as advantageous play even if that wasnt your intent.

 

[spintee]

We all no for years now casino or not, terms and small print are there 1 thing only, To turn us over, We do not need 6 thousand paragraphs with hidden links and on separate pages, I'm pretty sure any person can make a bonus clear and simple (maybe not me)
But come on, I have seen these new multi platforms now & rules are simple and clear, Its about time any bonus should have a clear and simple rules & not spread about every where, Click here, click there, Before you know it your lost in translation with 30 pages open,
Im sick and tried of reading um, There spending a fortune on games ect (Ailens)which personal I would have more fun spinning a few toilet rolls around than spend a few quid and write a simple rule page out, But I guess we all again know why they do not....

 

[DannyB]

I have been paid by many casinos regardless of the bet size.

The terms mentioned in many places signup bonus and I felt free to play as I wish any ongoing deposit . I don't remember if I miscalculate the coins and placed too much or if it was a credit bet.I make mistakes sometimes betting too much when the balanced is showed as coins.

 

[maxd]

Under the casino's general T&Cs related to bonuses I see the following:

5.8.1 Before any withdrawals are processed, your play will be reviewed for any irregular playing patterns. In the interests of fair gaming, equal, zero or low margin bets or hedge betting, shall all be considered irregular gaming for bonus play-through requirement purposes. Other examples of irregular game play include but are not limited to, placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of the bonus credited to their account, ... Should the Casino deem that irregular game play has occurred; the Casino reserves the right to withhold any withdrawals and/or confiscate all winnings.

As I read it (a) that applies to any bonus and (b) that puts you and your play record at odds with the Terms you agreed to. If you can demonstrate that those Terms did not exist when you placed your bets -- that would include the Spring and Fall of 2013 -- then there may be something to discuss further. Otherwise it's time to stick a fork in this PAB of yours because as I see it we are done here.

 

[Dinahnana]

I have been paid by many casinos regardless of the bet size.

The terms mentioned in many places signup bonus and I felt free to play as I wish any ongoing deposit . I don't remember if I miscalculate the coins and placed too much or if it was a credit bet.I make mistakes sometimes betting too much when the balanced is showed as coins.

You had to have known what you were doing when you were placing massive bets with regards to your bonus size. I don't think there is a casino out there that would allow that while a bonus is in play. Also its pretty hard to miscalculate anything on a MG slot. I mean to get to 50 betsize you would need to click on coin value many times. If you wanna bet big do it on a straight deposit with no bonus. As Max would say simples

 

[DannyB]

They changed the terms , I will attach a screenshot and send max a copy

 

[maphesto]

I really have checked those terms with some help from Wayback Machine and those are terrible, but they really state that whatever bonus you use they can limit the winnings to 6xbonus amount if they want.

If they want they can even implement that term to a 15% bonus...which means that the player can't even have his deposit back, just 90% of it...

It was added early in 2013.

I really hope they change their terms.

 

[maxd]

They changed the terms , I will attach a screenshot and send max a copy

Haven't received anything from you but you may not need to bother. Following up on maphesto's mention of Wayback, this was the applicable Term as of 26 March 2013 which was a few days before your initial deposit and play, if I recall correctly:

5.8 Before any withdrawals are processed, your play will be reviewed for any irregular playing patterns e.g. playing of equal, zero margin bets or hedge betting, which all shall be considered irregular gaming for Bonus Play Through Requirement purposes. Other examples of irregular game play include but are not limited to, placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of the bonus credited to your account until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met and any other pre-and post Bonus activity. The Casino reserves the right to decide in its sole discretion which activities constitute "irregular play" for Bonus Play through Requirement purposes from time-to-time and to withhold any withdrawals where irregular play has occurred to meet Bonus Play through Requirements.

Again, seems to me you are, and were, on the sharp end of their pointy stick. Yes, I know those Terms suck, that is why you should not have agreed to them. But you did and as previously stated, you own the consequences.

This is dragging on for way too long and I have other issues to attend to: I'll give you one more day to make your final statements and present whatever you think is relevant. After that the book on this will be closed unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise.

 

[BBKPoker]

Guess I'm glad I stopped playing here if they are using this as a reason. Live chat told me several months ago you could bet whatever you wanted on welcome back offers and 30% only applied to sign up offers. I suppose I should have screenshotted it, but they always paid me fine no matter what I wagered, so I didn't see a point, really.