Accredited Casino "VIP Casinos"; Resolved

[paul1]

So anyway, the commotion is about their refusal to stick to posted terms.... not about a rep giving me false info. If that had been the case (that is, if DW had clearly been excluded on the website, but the rep had mistakenly told me that it was allowed) I think their solution would have been fair. However, that is not the case.

Wow. You still haven't played this out? My goodness, give 'em some action on Pai Gow or something acceptable and be done with this.

You shot an angle, and it didn't pan out as well as you thought it would. And now you're being really really stubborn, and INSISTING that the casino do what you want done, even though this reputable casino has already admitted their omission and given you credit for the DW action you had given them already, which they did not have to do. Seems to me they have already been NICE to you. Like I've said. This casino group is rated A+ by Sportsbook Review and that rating is not handed out to just anyone.

When I first looked at this casino and their bonus terms several months ago, I immediately noticed all the video poker that they did not allow. Since I like video poker, I scratched that bonus off of my list of things to do. But you looked at it close enough to uncover an ommission. Again, seems to me you were just looking for an angle and unwisely went for it.

Playing video poker for that bonus was just inviting trouble, and you're lucky it's a reputable casino. I can think of some other places where you would already have been locked out and money confiscated.

VIP Sports and Casino and Horses are rated A+. Top of the line.

 

[gaming_mouse]

When the thread first saw life, I asked the rep to take a look at it. He was probably as busy as me, saw it, made a quick comment, and left. Yeah sure, this left a lot of room for improvement, but no one here bothered to PM him again and say "look, we need more answers."

Hey Bryan,

I was the one who PM'd the rep as soon as I created the thread. I did not PM him again after his repsonse, however, because his response made clear that he had not even taken the time to read all of it.

In hindsight, perhaps I should have PM'd him again, but his sign-off -- "
If you feel differently please let me know how we can make it more clear to the player" -- indicated to me that he would be reading the thread.

Anyway, I will keep your advice in mind for the future. I thought it would be best to get you involved while somthing could still be done to correct the situation. I apologize if this was the wrong approach, or if this makes your work harder. That was not my intention.

Thanks again,
Jonah

 

[rreevy]

You shot an angle, and it didn't pan out as well as you thought it would. And now you're being really really stubborn, and INSISTING that the casino do what you want done, even though this reputable casino has already admitted their omission and given you credit for the DW action you had given them already, which they did not have to do. Seems to me they have already been NICE to you. Like I've said. This casino group is rated A+ by Sportsbook Review and that rating is not handed out to just anyone.

I don't see why playing a video poker game that's not excluded (especially if, as I gather from the thread, there are a few other VPs that were also not on the list) equates to 'shooting an angle'. The only thing that suggests this is that gaming_mouse both checked with a CSR and took the trouble to take a record of that conversation. On the other hand, if the player really was 'shooting an angle', why check and risk them saying 'oops, we made a mistake'?

Also, as someone else pointed out, why not just say 'all forms of video poker' if that's what they meant? Many casinos do. A lot of MG casinos exclude all blackjack and video poker games for some offers - they don't normally list each variation of the games separately, when they mean to exclude them all.

gaming_mouse is NOT being 'really really stubborn' and all he is insisting on is that the casino stick to the terms that applied when the bonus was issued.

I don't see why the casino's rating is really relevant. A casino not sticking to its T&Cs is unacceptable. I don't see why its past reputation makes it any more or less so.

I agree that this thread has got too long. In my view this should be simple:

1. If there is a list of 'excluded games' for a bonus, and a given game is not on the list, it should be safe to assume that that game is NOT excluded.

2. Once the player claims a bonus/makes a qualifying deposit, the T&Cs valid at this point are the ones that apply.

 

[paul1]

I don't see why playing a video poker game that's not excluded (especially if, as I gather from the thread, there are a few other VPs that were also not on the list) equates to 'shooting an angle'. The only thing that suggests this is that gaming_mouse both checked with a CSR and took the trouble to take a record of that conversation. On the other hand, if the player really was 'shooting an angle', why check and risk them saying 'oops, we made a mistake'?

Also, as someone else pointed out, why not just say 'all forms of video poker' if that's what they meant? Many casinos do. A lot of MG casinos exclude all blackjack and video poker games for some offers - they don't normally list each variation of the games separately, when they mean to exclude them all.

gaming_mouse is NOT being 'really really stubborn' and all he is insisting on is that the casino stick to the terms that applied when the bonus was issued.

I don't see why the casino's rating is really relevant. A casino not sticking to its T&Cs is unacceptable. I don't see why its past reputation makes it any more or less so.

I agree that this thread has got too long. In my view this should be simple:

1. If there is a list of 'excluded games' for a bonus, and a given game is not on the list, it should be safe to assume that that game is NOT excluded.

2. Once the player claims a bonus/makes a qualifying deposit, the T&Cs valid at this point are the ones that apply.

From my first response to this, I speculated that the casino, being a reputable one, would make right by this. It was their mistake, afterall. And it appears that they DID make right by it.

I also agreed from day one, that it would have made more sense to just say "NO VIDEO POKER!" duh.

So what's the problem? There ain't one.

 

[soflat]

Wow. You still haven't played this out? My goodness, give 'em some action on Pai Gow or something acceptable and be done with this.

Pai Gow the card game or dice? Some other card and dice games are excluded, so Pai Gow might be excluded as well.

 

[rreevy]

From my first response to this, I speculated that the casino, being a reputable one, would make right by this. It was their mistake, afterall. And it appears that they DID make right by it.

I also agreed from day one, that it would have made more sense to just say "NO VIDEO POKER!" duh.

Sorry Paul, I have to disagree. The casino will only make right by this when they agree that gaming_mouse can meet all of the wagering requirements on Deuces Wild, not just what was wagered before he contacted the CSR to check how much had been wagered. It was not listed as an excluded game when gaming_mouse got the bonus, and allowing them to excluded halfway through meeting the WR would be unfair (and possibly setting a dangerous precendent!)

I agree that it would have made more sense to say 'no video poker' if that's what they meant. But they didn't and, if I understand right, Deuces Wild was not the only VP game not excluded (or so I gather from this forum... I'm not actually that familiar with RTG's video poker). What I didn't understand was that you seemed to be suggesting the player should have assumed that they meant to exclude Deuces Wild. All I meant was that casinos do sometimes exclude some games but not very similar ones (as in my earlier blackjack example).

Was the 'duh' really necessary? I don't find it necessary to insult people just because I disagree with them.

 

[Linus]

You shot an angle, and it didn't pan out as well as you thought it would.

He (1.) read the rules carefully, (2.) checked to make sure he understood them, and (3.) played according to the rules.

In what way is that "angle shooting"?

 

[soflat]

Hey Bryan,

I was the one who PM'd the rep as soon as I created the thread. I did not PM him again after his repsonse, however, because his response made clear that he had not even taken the time to read all of it.

I think he read it fine because the thread prompted them to go and change the T&Cs specifically excluding the game you referred to.

 

[paul1]

Was the 'duh' really necessary? I don't find it necessary to insult people just because I disagree with them.

Hey Revy. That "duh" wasn't an insult to you. It was a general all-purpose duh and it was implying that the casino should have obviously worded their excluded games as "NO VIDEO POKER". (which they still haven't btw)

Besides, I don't get rude on this forum, because it is moderated and rudeness can easily get you 30 days in the cooler like Caruso. Word has it, that the cooler is dark, damp, and cold. You only get bread and water. And they make you listen to music by the Ramones for 24/7. It's hell.

The "duh" was not directed at you. duh!

 

[chuchu59]

Wow. You still haven't played this out? My goodness, give 'em some action on Pai Gow or something acceptable and be done with this.

You shot an angle, and it didn't pan out as well as you thought it would. And now you're being really really stubborn, and INSISTING that the casino do what you want done, even though this reputable casino has already admitted their omission and given you credit for the DW action you had given them already, which they did not have to do. Seems to me they have already been NICE to you. Like I've said. This casino group is rated A+ by Sportsbook Review and that rating is not handed out to just anyone.

When I first looked at this casino and their bonus terms several months ago, I immediately noticed all the video poker that they did not allow. Since I like video poker, I scratched that bonus off of my list of things to do. But you looked at it close enough to uncover an ommission. Again, seems to me you were just looking for an angle and unwisely went for it.

Playing video poker for that bonus was just inviting trouble, and you're lucky it's a reputable casino. I can think of some other places where you would already have been locked out and money confiscated.

VIP Sports and Casino and Horses are rated A+. Top of the line.

If gambling mouse can be locked out for this and have his money confiscated, we might as well call it quits. In the King Neptune's thread, it was argued that the player didnt read the prevalent Terms and Conditions and played an excluded game VP game and hence his winnings were disallowed. Now this player follows the Ts and Cs to the letter and is accused 'shooting an angle' and labelled as being stubborn for insisting that there is nothing in the terms that disallow Deuces Wild. I know that this is a reputable casino and that is why they should resolve this quickly otherwise their reputation could be tarnished. They gain respect not only because of past deeds but also because of their commitment to be fair and honest.

I notice that VMS hasnt been to this forum since he last posted so to be fair to both him and the casino he should be given an opportunity to redress this issue although I do find it funny that he did not attempt to follow-up in any way right after his posting which may or may not be accepted by the player and the forum members.

 

[VMSCasinos]

All,

Thank you the feedback! I apologize for my previous response to this posting it was a bit misleading. I will take full responsibility for the fact that Deuces Wild wasnt included in the list of Terms and Conditions. This was a mistake on our end and we are attempting to rectify the problem. The terms and conditions on the website are being updated to include all of the Video Poker games.

We decided to individually list all of the games because of feedback from our customers to avoid confusion. The actual list is a bit long because of the amount of games offered by RTG. I did see the post that mentioned having a list that contains the games included in the roll over. We will entertain the notion of changing to that format in the future.

In the end I think that we handled the situation appropriately by honoring the text that was listed on the website at the time by allowing Deuces Wild to count for the players roll over requirement. If we were a casino that didnt care about our reputation we could have easily excluded the game from the rollover. We strive to handle every interaction with our players fairly and professionally. We are in the process of revamping our casino customer support team to provide better service to our player base.

In regards to the poker network comments we are in the process of moving to Microgaming. We are expecting to launch the new poker network by the end of this week.

I hope that this post addresses all of the concerns in the thread.

Thank you,

John

 

[gaming_mouse]

In the end I think that we handled the situation appropriately by honoring the text that was listed on the website at the time by allowing Deuces Wild to count for the players roll over requirement.

John,

Thanks for your response.

Unfortunately, your last reply still avoids the main concern raised in this thread. It is very simple: When I signed up, the terms posted on your website allowed Deuces Wild. If you do not allow me to finish out my ENTIRE playthru using that game, then you have NOT HONORED "the text that was listed on the website at the time."

At this point, I am just about ready to give up. I urge you to respond directly to my claim above, because that is what everyone in this thread is waiting to see. Ultimately, you will either say "Yes, we are sticking to the posted terms" or "No, we aren't." But you cannot argue that the half compromise given to me thus far honors your posted terms. It does not.

I ask that you please respond once more to this thread, so that your final decision is clear. If you decide not to honor the terms under which I signed up, then I will finish out my playthru on 3-card poker and that will be that. However, I believe that your reputation among the respected posters here will be damaged.

Thanks once again for your last reponse,
Jonah

 

[chuchu59]

VMS,

If your casino really did care about your reputation, the right thing to do would be to let Gambling Mouse to fulfill the WRs playing Deuces Wild. If you arent going to do that , how can anybody have any faith in your casino where the Terms and Conditions can be changed anytime and the casino can claim that this can take effect retrospectively but will exercise discretion. This simply isnt good enough. When a deal is made, the prevailing Terms and Conditions should apply. Otherwise, where is the protection for the player. You might as well say the WRs are 20x of deposit and bonus and change them when the player reaches 15x to 30x and when he reaches 25x you say 'sorry, we just changed it to 50x and you have to comply. To put it simply, the new Terms must not have any retrospective effect and by that I mean they cannot be applied once the player has started playing. Fair enough?

 

[soflat]

VMS,

If your casino really did care about your reputation, the right thing to do would be to let Gambling Mouse to fulfill the WRs playing Deuces Wild.

They should let everyone finish the WR on Deuces Wild.

Did they even notify players of the change in T&Cs? That would be bummer for anyone who did not contact support to find out that their play did not count.

 

[VMSCasinos]

Once again I misunderstood your last post. I was under the impression that we had informed you that Deuces Wild would count for your roll over. When I initially spoke to our Customer Service representative she informed me that you both agreed that Deuces Wild would count for the roll over.

At this point you have played $9,788 in combined play at our casino. Once you reach $12,000 please contact me and I will process the payout right away. If it is an issue for you to calculate your play pleases contact me and I will gladly review it. We will wave any processing fee for your transaction.

If there are any other players this issue is also affecting please contact me directly.

Thank you


John

 

[gaming_mouse]

Once again I misunderstood your last post. I was under the impression that we had informed you that Deuces Wild would count for your roll over. When I initially spoke to our Customer Service representative she informed me that you both agreed that Deuces Wild would count for the roll over.

John,

What I was told was that the DW would count for the 9K in wagering I had *already* done, but that it would not count for any future wagering.

To clarify: Are you now saying that I am allowed to play DW in order to fulfill my remaining playthru? That is certainly what it sounds like, and that is all I've been asking for, but since there has been alot of confusion throughout this thread, could you please confirm this one more time.

Thank you,
Jonah

 

[VMSCasinos]

Yes, DW will count for the roll over requirement. Once again I apoligize for the confussion.

Thank you,

John

 

[gaming_mouse]

Yes, DW will count for the roll over requirement. Once again I apoligize for the confussion.

Thank you,

John

Update for everyone. John approved my remaining wagering on DW, and I put in a cash in request today. I don't expect any more problems here, and I would like to thank everyone who participated. This is my first experience with these forums, and it is really great to know that Casinomeister system works, and that, at least in certain cases, this site provides real help to people who would otherwise have no recourse to unfair treatment.

Jonah

 

[gaming_mouse]

Update for everyone. John approved my remaining wagering on DW, and I put in a cash in request today. I don't expect any more problems here, and I would like to thank everyone who participated. This is my first experience with these forums, and it is really great to know that Casinomeister system works, and that, at least in certain cases, this site provides real help to people who would otherwise have no recourse to unfair treatment.

Jonah

And..... paid in under 2 hours. That was a nice touch.

 

[paul1]

And..... paid in under 2 hours. That was a nice touch.

I've got only one thing left to say.

A-PLUS!