Resolved 32red VS Rado16 (2100 Euro dispute)

[Rado16]

Look what they did to me at the so called the best casino ever- 32red.

I played a Live Dealer Baccarat. I made a big bet of 2100 eu betting at Player.
The dealer has dealt 9 for Player and 7 for Banker. So I won 2100 eu! I waited but my balance did not change as if I lost that bet.
I went to a gameplay check but could not find any information about this bet. It has disappeared!
I contacted 32red casino support. They promised to help. Then I waited for 2 weeks!!!
They always told me that they await a reply from Microgaming and also need to check a video feed.
And today I got a reply stating that they placing my bet of 2100 eu back to my casino
account and void my winnings because there was a technical fault on their side! I cannot believe it! There was only one error- my winnings were not credited to my balance! All the rest was absolutely valid- my bet was accepted and I saw with my own eyes the dealer
dealing the cards. I am 100% sure that they would never credit my lost bet back if I lost that bet.I would not even know that that bet was void. Can I accept this???
I also found a recent thread here at casinomeister where you can see the same story happenning to the other casinomeister user at 32red (what a coincidence- live dealer bets love to disappear at 32red casino somehow- not at any other Microgaming casino).
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/32red-live-dealer-baccarat-winning-bet-not-paid.27863/

The only difference between my case and his is that I bet 2100 eu and he only made 100 gbp bet. And they paid
him his bet and his winnings back eventually. In my case they want to punish me for what they call their own technical mistake! And in fact
it can easily be a dirty trick by the casino with the only purpose not to pay a winning bet. There certainly is a video record at Microgaming which will prove exactly how did that bet finish.
I warned them that will write here. They seem not to care. Please, support me. If they don't pay me my winnings they should never be considered the
best casinomeister casino. It is a cheating on winning players and using double standards in one case!

 

[chuchu59]

Either Ed Ware or Pat will reply to this thread I believe. However, I dont think you should 'warn' a casino that you will post here. This is not a place for 'threats'.

 

[NewOrleans]

32red is a highly respectable casino,I doubt they did that on purpose,it is probably a software error.The live casino is ran by another group and they are probably to blame.

The reason it is taking so long might be due to having to contact this group that runs the live baccarat.

I noticed not only 32red offers the same dealers,which is why the above statement is probably correct.

Did you save a screenshot?That always helps...I figure you didn't because you trusted 32red and I understand you 100% I would not have taken any screenshot to protect myself there as there is no need for that kind of stuff.

If your claim is legit you will not be ignored,this is a serious accusation as 32red has won 6 awards in a row.For something as serious as 2100$ you will get a swift response let us know what is going on.

 

[NewOrleans]

Before I forget,if this is an attempt to get attention mark my words you will be shamed for it.32red will be inspecting your account activity and will report back to us with the real information.

"32red STEALS 2100 eu from me" Very damaging accusation...

 

[AudiManinBoro]

Unfortunatly most casinos have the clause ` malfunction voids all bets and plays` in their T&C somewhere, i woudlnt surprise me if 32Red does too. However, in the interests of fairness as `best casino` several years running, if the player is indeed right and he did win that bet fairly and their IS video evidence that suports this, 32 red should him pay him his winnings. This is of course if the player is right, we havent heard the other side of this story yet and really need to do so.

 

[path]

32Red

Just to let you know that I am aware of this situation and am just pulling together all the relevant evidence.
Once I have all of this, I'll PM the OP and we can then take it from there.

Cheers for now
Pat

 

[Jufo]

You should have written up the deal ID number immediately when you saw that the winnings were not paid, so it would have been easy to track the hand in question.

Having been a victim of this same bug also at 32Red, my opinion is that unless the hand was declared void (V symbol) on the very spot, winnings should be paid even if there was a technical glitch affecting the payout. And the fact that 2100 was taken from your balance also shows that the stake was accepted and a winning stake should be honored.

 

[Rusty]

Sounds interesting.
This was live so hard to imagine what a technical issue could be that would warrant voiding winnings.
The bet was accepted apparently.
Dealer flatulence perhaps.

I am just joking and if it happened as Rado16 states then I can understand why they would be very upset.
I don't play 32 Red but they seem very good so I will wait with interest as to what Pat's investigation brings up.

 

[maxd]

... I dont think you should 'warn' a casino that you will post here. This is not a place for 'threats'.

Quite so and well said. Casinomeister is not here to be used as a stick to threaten anyone.

Since threats were obviously part of the motivation for this posting I have changed the thread title to something a little more even-handed.

 

[Rado16]

Quite so and well said. Casinomeister is not here to be used as a stick to threaten anyone.

Since threats were obviously part of the motivation for this posting I have changed the thread title to something a little more even-handed.

my english is not so good but I don't think that "to warn" means "to threaten" as chuchu put it in his post. I just wanted to inform the casino in advance about my actions.
regarding Path's promise: this casino had 2 full weeks to get things sorted out. I was waiting and hoping they will finally credit my account with what I won deservedly. But instead they prefered to steal. No other name for that.

 

[KasinoKing]

Since threats were obviously part of the motivation for this posting I have changed the thread title to something a little more even-handed.

I'm a little bit surprised you didn't move it to 'complaints' while you were at it...

I await the outcome of this case with interest.
I know these technical glitches can occur because it happened to me long ago playing live roulette at Ladbrokes: I saw the ball clearly land in one number on the video, but a different number came up on the electronic system and bets on the true number were not paid...

Let's give Pat a bit of time to sort this out.
KK

 

[maxd]

I'm a little bit surprised you didn't move it to 'complaints' while you were at it...

Ooopsy, quite so. Doing that now.

 

[Rado16]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here a reply which I received from Path.
Hi Rado16,

Please, firstly accept my apologies for the length of time that it has taken to resolve this whole query; two weeks from the date of the bet being placed is simply unacceptable and you have my assurances that we will work with our software providers to ensure that there is no repeat of this.

What has happened in this case, I am led to believe, is that there has been a discrepancy between the result as displayed on the video-stream and the data that was recorded in the gaming database. This gets branded a technical fault and we have a standard rule that says malfunction voids all bets and plays which has been applied in this case. In these circumstances your stake should have been immediately returned to you (irrespective of it being a winner or loser). That was the first error here, in that this wasnt completed automatically at that time and when we in turn chased it with our software providers they failed to add the stake back into your account. This shouldnt have taken two weeks to resolve as I said earlier and once again, you have my apologies.

I am waiting to receive the detailed evidence of this discrepancy and I will forward to you once I have it (likely to be tomorrow morning).

The case here hasnt been helped by your use of our Slots Welcome Bonus to play non-qualifying games which also do not contribute to the wagering requirements of the bonus.
Again, we do have a standard term attached to our various welcome bonus offers that limits the size of the maximum bet that can be placed to 25% of the value of the bonus. The staking pattern that you have adopted here does contravene this term and as a consequence higher wagering levels now apply.

I am also disappointed to see that you attempted to have this resolved in your favour by threatening to post here at Casinomeister if you didnt get the result you wanted. I would have much preferred that we could have attempted to reach a solution without being put under any duress.

In the meantime I would just like to say that when it comes to errors with the Live Dealer games (and dealing with queries generally) we do treat each individual case on its merits and look to resolve issues to the mutual satisfaction of the player and 32Red.

Thanks for taking the time to read this and I will be in contact once I have the detailed pieces of information from our software providers. This will then give me a much firmer base on which to make any decision about the status of your void bet.
__________________
Mr.Pat Harrison
Operations Director
32Red
[email protected]
Casinomeister Forum Member: path

-------------


Now look, she tells me : "there has been a discrepancy between the result as displayed on the video-stream and the data that was recorded in the gaming database."
And there was no any discrepancy! I saw what happened on the video screen and according to what I saw- I won. Moreover- there was NOTHING recorded in the gaming database- the bet was just missing from there. The only problem was that my winnings were not credited to my casino balance! Any check of microgaming video feed will support my words.
And the second part of Path's message was the most disappointing: she claims that I somehow
violated the term of "25% bonus amount as a bet size". For her knowledge- this rule is NOT applied in slot bonus of 32red casino. Is that the way to make me feel guilty and to accept the fact that this casino voids my winning bet?

 

[chuchu59]

First, I dont understand why you are going raving mad. Pat said that he would like to gather more information before making a decision. Second, how do you know there was no discrepancy from what you saw and the gaming database. Third, if you were using a slots bonus and using most or whole of the bonus to bet on a single game of baccarat, then you are abusing the bonus although Pat was careful in stating that this has not helped matters rather than saying winnings should be voided. I understand that this is a general term which is applied in addition to specific bonus terms.

A tip for you. Ranting like this will not gain you any sympathy from members here. We want to see players being treated fairly but when the casino is trying to make things work and you jump the gun by making all sorts of accusations it will only go against you. Please be patient until Pat gets all his data.

 

[Rado16]

ouh my God! they have just adjusted their rules! Look at the terms and conditions of the Slot bonus at 32red. It shows that it was last amended 28 of May! Thankfully I have a screenshot of the older terms where there is NOT any mention of 25% bet size limit. I can provide it by any request. I did not expect such a casino to behave in such a way! Now I am really worried for my money at this casino.

 

[sjn]

Doesn't a slots bonus mean you have to play slots???

 

[Rado16]

I am talking to Path using the messsenger at Casinomeister. He says that somehow I violated 25% bonus amount limit per bet. I write to him that this rule is not applied to this SLOT bonus. Path then goes and amends the rules so all I say starts to look like a lie. Can you imagine this, guys? And who do you call a reputable casino? My luck I have a screenshot of the older rules which was last amended on 26 of February 2009.

 

[Rado16]

chuchu, please go and read the terms of the bonus before accusing me of bonus abuse and

moreover stating that my money should be confiscated for violating bonus terms. Before I

made a deposit I learned the terms very carefully. Yes it is a slot bonus but it is ALLOWED

to play other games too. The only thing is that if I play non slot games- then my wagering

requirements will be increased and I was ready for that. There was no any mention of
the bet size limit in their terms of slot bonus (untli today when they amended it FOR ME).

And again chuchu-have more respect for other ppl's money. I was robbed and now you try to

support the robber without even knowing the case.


PS Guys, please support me. Since 32red understands that they can not to pay me a winning

bet (and there can not be any excuse here- the winning bet must be paid )- then they started

to accuse me in violating the bonus terms and even went further amending their rules in such

a way as not to pay me.

First, I dont understand why you are going raving mad. Pat said that he would like to gather more information before making a decision. Second, how do you know there was no discrepancy from what you saw and the gaming database. Third, if you were using a slots bonus and using most or whole of the bonus to bet on a single game of baccarat, then you are abusing the bonus although Pat was careful in stating that this has not helped matters rather than saying winnings should be voided. I understand that this is a general term which is applied in addition to specific bonus terms.

A tip for you. Ranting like this will not gain you any sympathy from members here. We want to see players being treated fairly but when the casino is trying to make things work and you jump the gun by making all sorts of accusations it will only go against you. Please be patient until Pat gets all his data.

 

[spearmaster]

You could start with posting the screenshot.

 

[Jufo]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here a reply which I received from Path.

What has happened in this case, I am led to believe, is that there has been a discrepancy between the result as displayed on the video-stream and the data that was recorded in the gaming database. This gets branded a technical fault and we have a standard rule that says malfunction voids all bets and plays which has been applied in this case.

Based on my experiences with this 'technical fault' (and it has happened to me not once but twice at 32Red) there was no discrepancy between the video stream and the recorded result. The result is displayed on a table next to the video-stream and these both showed the correct result. The hand was not declared void by the dealer on the spot. The only malfunction was that winnings were not credited.

If winning bets under such conditions are not honored then playing Live Baccarat at 32Red is simply not safe for the player.

 

[just play]

ouh my God! they have just adjusted their rules! Look at the terms and conditions of the Slot bonus at 32red. It shows that it was last amended 28 of May! Thankfully I have a screenshot of the older terms where there is NOT any mention of 25% bet size limit. I can provide it by any request. I did not expect such a casino to behave in such a way! Now I am really worried for my money at this casino.

I am curious as to what all the long time posters think of this? (if this is true, I haven't seen the old or new terms)

 

[Rado16]

You could start with posting the screenshot.

please check and compare. These are the new and old rules of the Slot Bonus (2 version- one before today and one- made today exclusively for . Pay attention that in the old rules there were 11 paragraphs, and in the new one, amended today ,there are 12...the new one is the one about 25% limit per bet. It was not there yesterday.

 

[Rado16]

please check and compare. These are the new and old rules of the Slot Bonus (2 version- one before today and one- made today exclusively for . Pay attention that in the old rules there were 11 paragraphs, and in the new one, amended today ,there are 12...the new one is the one about 25% limit per bet. It was not there yesterday.

I am sorry my attachments seems to be of a bad quality. Here I attach old terms again in a better resolution. The new terms can be found on this link.

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

 

[Rado16]

Don't understand what is going on. I have a good quality screen. After I attach it here it becomes a very low quality. Please advise.

 

[shoust]

Don't understand what is going on. I have a good quality screen. After I attach it here it becomes a very low quality. Please advise.

Png format is better for screenshots.

 

[kmay87]

Surely this is all irrelevant.

If you used a slots only bonus for playing something other than slots, the fact that you made a bet greater than 25% of your balance makes no odds...

 

[hakapuku]

Surely this is all irrelevant.

If you used a slots only bonus for playing something other than slots, the fact that you made a bet greater than 25% of your balance makes no odds...

As far as I know it is not Slot only bonus. Just only slots count for wagering. You can play other games too.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Based on my experiences with this 'technical fault' (and it has happened to me not once but twice at 32Red) there was no discrepancy between the video stream and the recorded result. The result is displayed on a table next to the video-stream and these both showed the correct result. The hand was not declared void by the dealer on the spot. The only malfunction was that winnings were not credited.

If winning bets under such conditions are not honored then playing Live Baccarat at 32Red is simply not safe for the player.

I am worried about this live dealer bug. Surely there is an ABSOLUTE definition of what happened, and this is what took place at the venue itself. There should be NO WAY that the "wrong" result is displayed to the player from a LIVE table, even through a video feed. This MIGHT happen though where the game is not truly live, but that the normal RNG selects from a bank of "live" video recordings, and displays the one appropriate to the game in question.

There really should be no question of having to compare anything with anything, this game was supposedly dealt "in the real world", on a real table, real cards, and a real dealer. This should make it possible to gather the correct result, rather than have to resort to the "technical malfunction" clause.

There have been many stories like this, and for this reason I do not trust "live" games as much as I do the software RNG powered ones.

Any claim that there is no independent archive video taken directly on site is a non-starter, as it would be inexcusable for MGS to have implemented such a lax system where wagers of this size are involved.

The OP's gameplay, according to Pat, does NOT help his case however, and what has probably happened is that it has alerted 32Red to a deficiency in the wording of their terms and conditions, rather than them having tried to apply a new term retrospectively to this player.

I am also wondering how it is even possible to place a 2100 bet on the "Baccarat slot" from the welcome bonus

 

[spearmaster]

And when exactly did you play? From what I can gather it was only two weeks ago?

 

[suzy1975]

get a grip radio

my english is not so good but I don't think that "to warn" means "to threaten" as chuchu put it in his post. I just wanted to inform the casino in advance about my actions.
regarding Path's promise: this casino had 2 full weeks to get things sorted out. I was waiting and hoping they will finally credit my account with what I won deservedly. But instead they prefered to steal. No other name for that.

Hi Radio, First things first i am an avid member of 32 red and what i will say to you is that they have the best casino reps/customer service in the industry(without a shadow of a doubt) and as Chuchu said what do you think casinomeister is for? Do you think you can THREATEN/WARN them and you will instantly get your 2100 euro? That said i am not always the easiest person to deal with(i am a woman after all) and by rights 32 red could have just dumped me from their list but they have not, they have always went the extra mile for me(hence me being an avid player) Steve Finnan and Pat Harrison are the 2 most approachable guys i know online and i am 1000% certain if its due, it will come to you but pleasegive them a chance to check this out fully as you will be aware.. a lot of folk will fight their corner (me being one) as they do not just fob you off and they have not won their 6 in a row because they are the meisters mates(i dont think) and as frustrating as it is i am sure you will get the fairest end available.

 

[Rusty]

Rado16 I understand you feel cheated but lashing out in all directions is not going to help your case.
ChuChu was giving you sound advice.
Take a deep breath before you respond and read over your reply before you post.

I am even more curious to what Pat's findings might be now.
There is obviously no love lost between parties here and I can see it from both points of view.
Rado seems to have a good case and 32 Red have had 2 Weeks to sort this out and give a proper explanation so it is a bit rich for them to say he should of give them time to sort it out before complaining.
From their point of view Rado16 seems to be very abrasive and is hardly endearing himself to anyone here let alone 32Red.

So far It looks like they got done by their own bonus terms and thought they would pull fast a One before rectifying their mistake in the T&C's.
Of course it may not be how it looks but it appears highly suspicious that Rado seems to be the only victim of this mysterious technical fault.

 

[just play]

Rado16 I understand you feel cheated but lashing out in all directions is not going to help your case.
ChuChu was giving you sound advice.
Take a deep breath before you respond and read over your reply before you post.

I am even more curious to what Pat's findings might be now.
There is obviously no love lost between parties here and I can see it from both points of view.
Rado seems to have a good case and 32 Red have had 2 Weeks to sort this out and give a proper explanation so it is a bit rich for them to say he should of give them time to sort it out before complaining.
From their point of view Rado16 seems to be very abrasive and is hardly endearing himself to anyone here let alone 32Red.

So far It looks like they got done by their own bonus terms and thought they would pull fast a One before rectifying their mistake in the T&C's.
Of course it may not be how it looks but it appears highly suspicious that Rado seems to be the only victim of this mysterious technical fault.

I agree with this post.

32Red had 2 weeks and that's not enough time?

Why is everyone jumping on Rado? He proved the terms were changed, he waited 2 weeks, and this "technical fault" has happend before?

I would be a bit peeved too if "the best casino" had done all this.


Why isn't anyone calling out 32Red like they would be with any other casino?

 

[hitobito2005]

Why isn't anyone calling out 32Red like they would be with any other casino?

32red have a very devoted following here.

This is one of the first bad things i've seen regarding them but the changing of terms does look bad, as well as the handling of the live baccarat bug. The 25% rule should not be applied as it wasn't in the terms at the time of accepting the bonus. I expect path or Ed will return to this thread soon - at least with this casino you can be pretty sure they won't be ignoring you.

 

[vinylweatherman]

32red have a very devoted following here.

This is one of the first bad things i've seen regarding them but the changing of terms does look bad, as well as the handling of the live baccarat bug. The 25% rule should not be applied as it wasn't in the terms at the time of accepting the bonus. I expect path or Ed will return to this thread soon - at least with this casino you can be pretty sure they won't be ignoring you.

I dont see higher management applying this rule, and Pat only said it "didn't help" that he played a game that didn't count.

This fault is more to do with MGS than 32Red, and it makes MGS look VERY BAD because this is par for the course for how MGS respond to software issues. In this case, they are "blowing off" 32Red as well as the player. 32Red may not even possess the winnings because of this fault, so would have to pay from their own funds, and try to claim it back from MGS (blood from a stone anyone).

I have been voicing gripes over MGS "technical issues" that have received no response or fix for YEARS from MGS, yet they have released many new games in the mean time.

As far as I can see, MGS just do not give a &^%$, even when an issue is forwarded through an operator. They certainly do NOT respond to communications from mere players.

 

[Pinababy69]

There isn't any doubt that 32Red have amended the terms. However, I don't believe it was done to try and apply that term retroactively. Everyone makes mistakes, and I think what probably happened is that it was an oversight that this particular terms was left off the previous page. Here is the exact term in question:

32Red welcomes players from all countries around the world (except for those prohibited. However, there are some players who wish to take undue advantage of this free chip welcome bonus offer. In the interests of fair gaming therefore, players may not place individual bets equal to or in excess of 25% or more of the value of the bonus credited to their account until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met. Any winnings derived from bets placed to the value of 25% or more of the bonus before wagering requirements for that bonus have been met will initiate a further wagering requirement of 100 times the amount won.

If you take a look at this page (which is for the $32 welcome bonus, available for ALL games):

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

You will see that paragraph #9 is exactly the same, and that page was last modified on March 17, 2009.

32Red welcomes players from all countries around the world (except for those prohibited. However, there are some players who wish to take undue advantage of this free chip welcome bonus offer. In the interests of fair gaming therefore, players may not place individual bets equal to or in excess of 25% or more of the value of the bonus credited to their account until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met. Any winnings derived from bets placed to the value of 25% or more of the bonus before wagering requirements for that bonus have been met will initiate a further wagering requirement of 100 times the amount won.

Either one of two things has happened. 32Red simply did not think to include that term on the $250 Slots Welcome Bonus, as they assumed that people using that would play slots, and it wouldn't be an issue. Or, as I stated above, it was simply an oversight. All that being said, if the term was not listed at the time the player played, then it shouldn't be an issue and I wouldnt expect the casino to hold him to it. Pat said that the player didn't help his cause with his style of play, not that the term WOULD be used against him. I'd also lay money down that Pat was under the impression that term had been included on the original page. I seriously doubt he's the one responsible for checking T&C's on a daily basis, and ensuring that each page is up to date. I would guess there is someone who should do that though.

As to the technical aspect of this, I honestly don't have a clue. It starts to go over my head when they talk about the interface between software and the graphics, etc. So I can't even comment on it. However, I do know that anything to do with software mechanics, comes down to Microgaming specifically, and not 32Red individually. However, that is still not an excuse for this to have dragged on for two weeks. If 32Red wasn't getting an answer from MG, they should have pressed them harder.

In answer to Just Play, I saw this thread really briefly earlier today, but honestly I was out the majority of the day, got home late, and my daughter is sick...so this wasn't number one on my priority list. I wanted to have the time to go through it properly before I commented.

I am going to wait to see what Pat has to say before I comment any further. He's not the type to run and bury his head in the sand, and I'm confident this will be dealt with in a fair manner.

I sympathize with the player's plight of waiting two weeks for a resolution, but honestly, when I read the quote below, he lost alot of any good feeling I may have had for him:

I warned them that will write here.

He found his way here and is obviously familiar enough with the forum to know that he can post a complaint. I wonder if he even bothered to PM Pat or Ed, when he opened this thread? I'm not saying he shouldn't have posted, not at all. But I would have told him (like I do everyone else) to PM the rep as well....in this case, Pat or Ed. And I absolutely hate when people USE this site and the CM name to threaten anyone. Pisses me off.

No doubt Pat will be all over this in the morning, so I for one, will wait to see what happens next.

One final note, there does seem to be problems with these live dealer games, from what I've read. And I do find that troubling to a certain extent.

 

[retlaw]

PS Guys, please support me. Since 32red understands that they can not to pay me a winning

bet (and there can not be any excuse here- the winning bet must be paid )- then they started

to accuse me in violating the bonus terms and even went further amending their rules in such

a way as not to pay me.

As a regular player at 32Red, I am sure your case will be treated fairly by Pat.
I know Pat as an honest man,devoted to his job.
Don't expect me to support you in this case, because I don't like people who use this forum to put others under pressure.
My native tongue is also not English ,and maybe worse than yours,but I try to remain polite in discussions.

 

[path]

32Red

Good morning and nice to see, in the main, informed and eloquent debate about this Live Dealer game.

I am chasing down MG for the relevant information and, while I await it's arrival, I would just like to take the opoportunity to clarify one or two points following the 'publication' of my PM to the OP.

The crux of the issue here is the voiding of the bet as a result of the 'technical fault'; the hand has been dealt in a real environment using real cards being dealt by real people. This is captured on video as one method of validation and as the cards are being dealt they are passed over a scanner. This action is also used as a means of validation of the result of the game. This is where the discrepancy lies and I require a much better understanding of what has happened here before I can make any reasonable decision.

The second point is that taking two weeks to get to this stage is simply unacceptable and while not entirely of our own doing we could have (and should have) managed our software providers to resolve the intial query in a more timely manner. I have apologised for the tardiness here and we will work behind the scenes to make sure that there is no such delay in the future.

I am not attempting to batter the OP over the head with our Terms and Conditions. I wanted to explain that while we will always apply our 'rules' to any given situation (as we have here), when seeking to resolve any subsequent dispute we will treat each case on its individual merits. I was attempting to explain that any decision here would be made harder by the way the OP has played his original Slots Welcome Bonus.

Finally, I quoted the '25% Rule' as I firmly believed it applied to all of our Welcome Bonus offerings. Sorry, that should be 'I knew' that they applied as I wrote the things. Anyway I qouted it in my PM, then checked the site and, to my surprise, found it wasn't being displayed. Needless to say that situation was corrected swiftly and hence the change in the information displayed. We are not looking to 'retrospectively apply' this in this case.

I trust that explains it so far and I'll pop back once I have the detail behind the 'technical fault' which is at the heart of the issue here. In the meantime if anyone does have any further questions then please drop me a PM.

Thanks
Pat

 

[Rado16]

Thank you for all those who supported me. You know, for me this is a big money. It is like 2-3 month of hard working. When I gambled 2100 eu that day I was thinking I am goin crazy.
Just imagine my feelings when all this happened. I bet, I win and...I lose. One of the worst experiences in my life. All these 2 weeks I was waiting for a fair resolution. And when yesterday I got a reply
that no winnings will be paid- I really went mad. And you can, probably ,understand me.
What made me especially mad was that 32red representatives started to invent the new and irellevant things in order not to pay me.

1) they said that I play non slot games on a slot bonus thus violating the terms of the bonus. BUT: the rules are that one is allowed to play on a non slot games just he should be ready that his wagering requirements will be increased.
This is an exact rule: "If a player is found to use a 'SLOTS ONLY' Welcome Bonus to play any other game other than a qualifying slot game, the wagering requirement for the bonus claimed will increase from 30 times the value of the bonus to 50 TIMES the combined value of a player's deposit and bonus and 50% of the wagering must still be made on qualifying games, thats 50% of 50 TIMES the combined value of your deposit and bonus"

So there was no any violation by me here and still they accused me for "playing non slot games on a non slot bonus". What was that? They don't know their own rules or what?

2) they claimed that according to their rules the bet size while playing with this bonus should not exceed 25% of the bonus amount received. And this was a clear misinformation- since there was not such a rule for this bonus. And then they added this rule to their rules yesterday. I don't know if it was done specifically for me
but it happened right after I informed Path that this 25% rule is not applied in my case.

3) They still did not give a clear answer as about why did they refuse to pay me my winning bet, the bet which I saw winning with my own eyes. Path is always saying to me that he needs to gather all the information as if 2 weeks
and my 20 emails was not enough time to gather this information. On the other side I can see that Path is using this time amending the bonus rules and inventing the new and irellevant reasons no to pay me.


P.S. even if they pay me my winnings I am supposed to make 25000 wagering (most of which on slots).

 

[Rado16]

Pat,

There was not any discrepancy. The cards were read correctly and the green ball showing 9 was displayed on the upper left side of the screen. So this argument is not valid. And the video recording will certainly prove this fact too.




P.S. I don't quite understand that part of the individual merits. So if there was a "good guy" (as per your own 32redish parameters) involved in this kind of situation, then you would probably aknowledge that this technical fault is your fault and would pay him his winnings. Now with me, a "bad guy" (playing non slot games etc) you will never agree to aknowledge the fact that he made a winning bet and will try to do everything just not to pay him. Did I understand that right? And what about FAIRNESS as it is?

 

[Rado16]

And when exactly did you play? From what I can gather it was only two weeks ago?

yes it was something like 16-17 days ago

 

[spearmaster]

Rado -

By 'discrepancy' Pat means what was recorded in the database, he's not saying you're lying, nor is he saying that the video is incorrect. Software glitches happen - and if the video shows that you won, I'm sure you will be paid.

I think it would be best if you give Pat a bit more time - he's not just some support person, and he is extremely diligent and approachable - you're not doing yourself any favors by continuing to dispute what has been said.

Pat,

There was not any discrepancy. The cards were read correctly and the green ball showing 9 was displayed on the upper left side of the screen. So this argument is not valid. And the video recording will certainly prove this fact too.




P.S. I don't quite understand that part of the individual merits. So if there was a "good guy" (as per your own 32redish parameters) involved in this kind of situation, then you would probably aknowledge that this technical fault is your fault and would pay him his winnings. Now with me, a "bad guy" (playing non slot games etc) you will never agree to aknowledge the fact that he made a winning bet and will try to do everything just not to pay him. Did I understand that right? And what about FAIRNESS as it is?

 

[KasinoKing]

P.S. I don't quite understand that part of the individual merits. So if there was a "good guy" (as per your own 32redish parameters) involved in this kind of situation, then you would probably aknowledge that this technical fault is your fault and would pay him his winnings. Now with me, a "bad guy" (playing non slot games etc) you will never agree to aknowledge the fact that he made a winning bet and will try to do everything just not to pay him. Did I understand that right? And what about FAIRNESS as it is?

I agree with Spear, you have clearly made your points & put your case - there is no need to keep banging on about it!
Please try to sit on your hands & be patient for a while & give Pat the time he needs to investigate this fully; don't worry, this issue will not go away until a definitive answer has been given.
You may be new to 32Red, but those of us who have been playing there for years know that their excellent reputation for customer fairness is more than justified.

KK

 

[same_old]

Sorry to travel off the garden path here a little, but- Pat mentioned if there is a software glitch then the stake will be returned regardless if it was a win or a loss?. What would have happend if there was a glitch and the customer had lost the hand thinking they did lose it, they wouldnt complain so how would you know if it was a glitch, do all hands get checked for glitches etc and would have this been picked up regardless of the complaint. did I just make sense here.


Regards,

Same_old

 

[Jufo]

Sorry to travel off the garden path here a little, but- Pat mentioned if there is a software glitch then the stake will be returned regardless if it was a win or a loss?. What would have happend if there was a glitch and the customer had lost the hand thinking they did lose it, they wouldnt complain so how would you know if it was a glitch, do all hands get checked for glitches etc and would have this been picked up regardless of the complaint. did I just make sense here.

Regards,

Same_old

It is not likely that the bet would have been returned. I had to chase the matter and send multiple e-mails to get my stake back when this same error occured to me. Had I not done this, nobody would have known that I am missing funds. So if you happen to lose in Live Baccarat you should ask your stake back just in case

 

[Rado16]

Hi Radovan,

Thanks for your patience while I have been reviewing the various gaming server logs and video clips as supplied by our software providers.

According to the records on the gaming servers you connected to hand ID 2841 on 13th May 2009 at 13:15:27.207 and placed a bet of 2,100 on player to win. At this point, the connection between the bar code reader on the table and the gaming server has been dropped for whatever reason (this could be for a number of things; ISP issues, cabling problems, hardware problems, etc.). So, as far as the gaming server is concerned, it didnt generate any cards for that hand.

The video clip of this hand (attached for your reference) shows that the hand then played out to a TIE with both the Dealer and Player scoring 4. Obviously if the hand had played out without problem then you would have actually lost this bet. Under our rules the hand was made void owing to this technical fault and the stake for your losing bet was refunded. The details of the log on the gaming server can be seen in the attached word document

I know that this is completely at odds with the way that you believe that this hand played out but we have to rely on the integrity of the data that has been supplied by our software providers. The important and critical part of this data is that which is recorded by the gaming server, namely (in this case) that no cards were generated owing to the disconnection as previously explained.

That all said, we will now take the time to resolve what is an unacceptable situation (given not only the above but the errors and time taken in getting to this stage) and I will back in contact before the end of the day with our solution.

Kind regards

Pat Harrison
Operations Director

32Red
88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888

Guys, here is the reply from Pat I received today. The is only one and the most important thing which I
want to say now: they say that that problem hand was finished as a TIE. THIS IS NOT TRUE ! I don't want
to discuss the other parts of Pat's email now but only this one because this is where the misinformation is.
It was not a TIE hand!!! The cards were this: for player King and 9, for banker 10 and 7. The video
which they attached is not the right video. Please, advise me what to do now!!!

 

[winbig]

So you're saying they doctored the logs?

The video clip of this hand (attached for your reference) shows that the hand then played out to a TIE with both the Dealer and Player scoring 4. Obviously if the hand had played out without problem then you would have actually lost this bet. Under our rules the hand was made void owing to this technical fault and the stake for your losing bet was refunded. The details of the log on the gaming server can be seen in the attached word document

 

[Scooter7]

Hi Radovan,

Thanks for your patience ...snip... the hand then played out to a TIE with both the Dealer and Player scoring 4. Obviously if the hand had played out without problem then you would have actually lost this bet...snip

Um...

If the hand was a tie, then the Player (and Banker) bets push, they don't lose. Setting aside the primary issue of contention here, I'm very unimpressed that the spokesperson for the casino would make a statement with such a glaring error.

 

[Rado16]

Guys,

Just think about one thing: it happened on 13 of May. Then it took the casino 2 weeks
to investigate this. After this investigation in no one email they told me that the
hand in discussion was finished as i TIE and thus I should not talk to them about
any kind of winnings not credited! Can you imagine this? Then Pat took 5 more days during which
he did not say me that too. And only now they say that that hand was a TIE! And I assure you that
this is an absolute lie! Player won that hand! Pat knew that if they aknowledge the fact that
the Player won - then they will have to pay me! So the only way not to pay was to say
that that hand finished as a TIE or I even lost it.

the video which they sent shows only the dealer- no time ,no results on the left upper side, no deal number- nothing. It is not a hand that I played!
Now the MUST sent the same video with the full screen information-showing the time of the bet.

 

[Jufo]

First of all, in ties stakes are returned. They are not lost.

This explanation that the hand was a tie is interesting because this is the exact same response I received when I first encountered this same glitch in March 2008. This the e-mail I received back then:

"From: 32Red-CSR <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Baccarat Problem
Date: Thursday, March 13, 2008, 6:27 AM
Hi Juho,

Thanks for your reply and apologies I never fully explained
the situation.

The game was actually void due to the error that you
experienced. We can now see your playcheck history for this
game, which shows as the result being a tie, but this game
has been classified as "Table void technical error" and
therefore we have returned your stake for the bet.

Apologies for the inconvenience caused by this error, the
network operator have confirmed they have applied a fix to
ensure no further games are affected.

Kind regards,

Jonathan
Player Support Team Leader
32Red
5 times winner of
Casinomeister Best Casino"

 

[Rado16]

Rado16

one more thing- Pat was talking about discrepancies! Not about the simple fact that the bet has finished as a TIE!

here is what Pat wrote me 5 days ago:

What has happened in this case, I am led to believe, is that there has been a discrepancy between the result as displayed on the video-stream
and the data that was recorded in the gaming database. This gets branded a technical fault and we have a standard rule that says malfunction voids all bets and plays which has been applied in this case. In these circumstances your stake should have been immediately returned to you (irrespective of it being a winner or loser). That was the first error here, in that this wasnt completed automatically at that time and when we in turn chased it with our software providers they failed to add the stake back into your account. This shouldnt have taken two weeks to resolve as I said earlier and once again, you have my apologies.

I am waiting to receive the detailed evidence of this discrepancy and I will forward to you once I have it (likely to be tomorrow morning).
----------

I repeat- I one that hand. It was a big hand- 2100 eu. So I was all attention when I bet it. i remember all the cards which the dealer dealt.
And the hand that 32red presented - it is a totally different hand. They lie!