Accredited Casinos - Time For A Change?

[julester]

Firstly, there is only one Meister.....and he rules.....so this is not, in any way, a 'knock' against anything on this site. What follows is merely as suggestion.

The level of ongoing posts relating to slow pay, no pay, reversal of cashouts, bonus ambiguities etc. is quite extraordinary. It is quite clear that most 'reputable' casinos take accreditation very seriously and most players (that know about it) the same. However, some of these casinos also play within the accreditation rules to the detriment of the player. In my opinion, this is unacceptable. I believe the accreditation criteria should be changed so that it's more specific and the player understands EXACTLY what they will be getting. How about dealing with just three points:

Must pay winnings in a timely manner

In my view, this is too vague. ALL casinos can pay winnings IMMEDIATELY if they choose but don't because of processing costs and other issues etc. Perhaps immediate is unreasonable but within 48 (worst case) isn't. There is no possible excuse why this shouldn't be done......there will be plenty of reasons.....but no possible excuse.


Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.

If think this should include reverse withdrawals or 'flushing'. If a player asks for their account to be 'flushed', it should be done immediately EVEN at the expense of a slightly longer withdrawal. I can think of at least two accredited casinos that will only flush accounts for VIP's. The relevance of being a VIP? None! Casinos that don't flush accounts are simply hoping that the player will plough the money back. Remember, I am not advocating that the 'pending' period should be removed altogether - simply that the player has the option of what to do with their money.


Finally, I would like to propose that security vetting is completed within 24 hours. It takes as long as it takes for someone to check that bank statements, credit cards, passports etc. match up. Also, I think that players should be made fully aware of what the requirements are for withdrawals BEFORE their first deposit. There was a post on CM a few weeks ago suggesting that players should pass verification before they are allowed to deposit. A number of people suggested that nobody would deposit under those rules and casinos would go out of business. I think there is a moral issue here.

Up until recently, to join a casino / club in the UK, you had to complete the application form and were prevented for joining the establishment for 24 hours. The logic behind this was to prevent ‘impulse’ gambling. I actually think this is a good idea but in the day and age of instant this / that, it might not be practical. Accordingly, I think it is not unreasonable that if a casino is taking our money immediately, they agree to sort the verification process out at the same time as the withdrawal. Why should you have to wait for ages?!

Enough waffle, what you would end up with is the following

- Must pay withdrawals within 48 hours by the faster possible means
- Must flush accounts on request
- Must agree to undertake verification within 24 hours of document submission

At the end of the day, it's only my opinion but perhaps it will generate a bit of discussion. Casinos need to start treating their customers with respect. Some of the nonsense that goes on is nothing short of outrageous......and that's from the accredited boys. The rogues are a different matter and shouldn't be touched regardless!

julester

 

[KasinoKing]

- Must pay withdrawals within 48 hours by the faster possible means
- Must flush accounts on request
- Must agree to undertake verification within 24 hours of document submission

I basically agree with the first one (though ANY casino could run into unforeseen problems from time to time)
I totally agree with the second one.
The third is probably not practical due to weekends and other delays which could come into play in verifying the information.
I would suggest a time-frame of 72 hours (3 days) maximum might be workable.

KK

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Great post julester, nothing in there I disagree with so I'm not going to just repeat it all

As for your specific suggestions:

1) 48 hour pay - I'm sure this is possible, I've had to 'prod' one accredited casino in the last couple of months because I had a withdrawal sat at pending for nearly 72 hours, really quite annoying. (Fair enough it was processed quickly after that but it's quite clear what their hope was with regards to me reversing....)

2) Flush on request - Sort of linked to (1) and IMO perhaps more important. It is my opinion that any casino worth its salt and with any degree of moral integrity must ALWAYS flush a withdrawal at a player's request and I feel there is no valid reason at all for any casino to say that they can't/won't do this. Gamblers are by their nature compulsive folks and the casinos prey on this. Abhorrent behaviour IMO.

3) Document verification - I agree with Kasino that 24 hours is perhaps too short, but I think all casinos should offer players the opportunity to 'pre-approve' their documentation as part of the sign-up process or at any point thereafter, and make it clear exactly what that documentation is.

A great example that I went through recently was at Pinnacle Casino. I was able to sign up and deposit and start to play as one would expect at any casino, but it was made crystal clear BEFORE my deposit was accepted that I would be required to submit a set of documentation within 72 hours. I have no problem with that and TBH it seems like a good system. It gets over the 'I don't want to go through all that crap before I can play' hump, but also means the player gets the documentation stuff out of the way upfront.

Finally, and on a wider note, there is the utterly bizarre T&C at (accredited) Red Flush that was flagged up by Cylon recently, whereby the casino reserves the right to void all winnings if the player....... uses the MG software's built in autoplay feature. If that term can possibly be construed as being anything other than 'unfair towards the player', I'd really like to hear someone argue that viewpoint.

Point being is that there's a lot of stuff that could and should be improved about accredited casinos' standards, just my opinion of course

 

[julester]

Great replies!

The point of the post was really the principal rather than the specifics. I guess what i am saying is that the 'accreditation' process could be improved and is probably a little outdated. When you introduce non specific rules, you end up with grey areas.....and I don't like grey areas! KK makes an interesting point about the verification process ie 24 hours being too short. I don't disagree BUT if a casino takes your money 24 hours a day, everything to do with their operation should also be running 24 hours a day.....given the nature of the business.

The other thing is that with more stringent 'rules', the accreditation would have so much more credibility. It would increase the revenue of the good casinos and their players would happier. It doesn't mean the rest of the casinos would be bad.

Put it another way. I am a casino talking to you, the player "deposit with us 24 hours a day. If you cash out, we will hold onto your winnings even though you don't want us to. After that we will
pay you 'promptly'. This could be a week although the majority get paid earlier. Oh yes....we need to confirm your identity first. Not sure how long that will take and sorry we didn't tell you before you deposited. You must appreciate that we may have lost your custom if we had of done".

It doesn't sound quite right. I think if there is a will on the forum, we can make things change.....for the better.

Apologies for the poor grammar. Writing this on a phone and impossible to edit!

Julester

 

[skiny]

- Must pay withdrawals within 48 hours by the faster possible means
- Must flush accounts on request
- Must agree to undertake verification within 24 hours of document submission

Great idea. And the upside would also be the new accredited section would now fit on the back of a match book or bar coaster with room left over for the Casinomeister logo and a picture of Bryan's happy face.

Think of the advertising possibilities.

 

[butterflyboogie]

I think your ideas are wonderful. One thing for sure, the casinos that honor this are the ones that truly want a good relationship with the customer. So which casinos want to step up to the plate and be the first one to say....yes, I'm willing? Instead of just being accredited, Brian could start a new section called "Cream of the Crop".

 

[julester]

Follow up

I think your ideas are wonderful. One thing for sure, the casinos that honor this are the ones that truly want a good relationship with the customer. So which casinos want to step up to the plate and be the first one to say....yes, I'm willing? Instead of just being accredited, Brian could start a new section called "Cream of the Crop".

I don't even that casinos need to be categorised further. The accreditation requirements, in themselves, are fine. They just need to be more specific. Many business will do the minimum and it's normally only market demand that force change. I remember years ago, when you ordered a mail order product, it would "arrive within 28 days". Could you imagine that happening now? Nobody would order anything - everything has to be immediate. The same logic applies to withdrawals. We are 'happy' to receive our payments within x days because we are used to it - it is the norm. However, if I make an online payment now from my own account, it will often arrive the same day, next day worst case. It's a nonsense. Casinos can do it.....but won't do it.....because they don't have to do it!

As said in my original post, how many posts relate to the same thing? If this emotion could be harnessed and managed, casinos would have to change the way that they do business. In the bigger picture of world affairs, this is a tiny thing.....but as the saying going "every little helps".

I wonder what the meister himself thinks of an accreditation overhaul?

julester

 

[maxd]

I wonder what the meister himself thinks of an accreditation overhaul?

Just a reminder that the way to ensure that Bryan sees this -- he's a busy guy, could be some time before he stumbles across it -- is to use the Report Post feature:

Attach Removed (Old not found)

Mention in your message that you'd like him to share his thoughts on the subject. He'll see the Report and drop by when he can.

 

[chayton]

Valid points, I agree. It seems that casinos that flush withdrawal are becoming a dying breed, some that used to flush no longer do. If they don't flush then I'd like to see no longer than 24 hours to process. Waiting 48 isn't bad, but when the 'pending period' doesn't include weekends, that becomes an issue for me.

One more thing I'd like add is maybe accreditation should be looked at for those casinos who spam or allow their affiliates to spam. I have to say that MOST casinos put a stop to it when they're made aware of it, but some don't seem to care or even deny it has anything to do with them. JMO, it's a major pet peeve of mine.

 

[Silencio]

Must pay winnings in a timely manner

In my view, this is too vague. ALL casinos can pay winnings IMMEDIATELY if they choose but don't because of processing costs and other issues etc. Perhaps immediate is unreasonable but within 48 (worst case) isn't. There is no possible excuse why this shouldn't be done......there will be plenty of reasons.....but no possible excuse.

I'm not sure how realistic this is, cause I haver never worked at on online casino, I have no idea how hard the people at 32Red for instance have to work to pay customers so swiftly.
Maybe it would be a good idea to have a, for lack of a better term, super-accredited label? Praising those who run the few extra miles..
But then again most of us already know..

 

[julester]

Follow up

I'm not sure how realistic this is, cause I haver never worked at on online casino, I have no idea how hard the people at 32Red for instance have to work to pay customers so swiftly.
Maybe it would be a good idea to have a, for lack of a better term, super-accredited label? Praising those who run the few extra miles..
But then again most of us already know..

The real issue here is that is the players that are the ones compromising.....not the casinos. And, at the risk of repeating myself, they get away with it because they are allowed to......because there is no set in stone benchmark.

You are right about most players (certainly on CM) knowing the casinos that 'go that extra mile' but let's be blunt about it using this example. What's so special about paying players promptly? It's only because they are a rare breed that they are considered a cut above the rest. I see that as a nonsense. It's their job!!!!

If you own a 24 hour restaurant, you should expect customers to order food 24 hours a day. If you own a 24 hour garage, people expect to get fuel 24 hours a day. I believe that casinos should operate in the same way. They take our money immediately and should be able to respond to queries / withdrawals immediately. Yes, OK, with the www lots of businesses techincally operate around the clock and sure you aren't going to get live chat with the local bookstore at 2am! However with casinos, it's the very nature of what they do. There is NO excuse. None!

Super accreditation should be awared for excellence beyond the norm.....not what should be the norm in the first place!

Just IMHO!

julester

 

[Silencio]

The real issue here is that is the players that are the ones compromising.....not the casinos. And, at the risk of repeating myself, they get away with it because they are allowed to......because there is no set in stone benchmark.

You are right about most players (certainly on CM) knowing the casinos that 'go that extra mile' but let's be blunt about it using this example. What's so special about paying players promptly? It's only because they are a rare breed that they are considered a cut above the rest. I see that as a nonsense. It's their job!!!!

If you own a 24 hour restaurant, you should expect customers to order food 24 hours a day. If you own a 24 hour garage, people expect to get fuel 24 hours a day. I believe that casinos should operate in the same way. They take our money immediately and should be able to respond to queries / withdrawals immediately. Yes, OK, with the www lots of businesses techincally operate around the clock and sure you aren't going to get live chat with the local bookstore at 2am! However with casinos, it's the very nature of what they do. There is NO excuse. None!

Super accreditation should be awared for excellence beyond the norm.....not what should be the norm in the first place!

Just IMHO!

julester

Well it's all very complicated, and far from black & white. How about the U.S.- friendly casinos? The Meister would have to make a separate version for them as well.
Also paying players in a timely fashion. How about the influence it has on the pay-out rate?
Some Casinos maybe pay players a couple of days slower, so the amount of players not able to stand the heat and reverse the withdrawal increases. But.. as the payout rate stays the same, what does this do to the chance you have to actually win something?
I could go on and on.
And mind you, I was one of those players who was never able to cash out (even at 32Red, well just once), so I understand the pain of losing it all back. That's why I hardly ever play any more. I let my writers do that awful part

 

[julester]

Well it's all very complicated, and far from black & white. How about the U.S.- friendly casinos? The Meister would have to make a separate version for them as well.
Also paying players in a timely fashion. How about the influence it has on the pay-out rate?
Some Casinos maybe pay players a couple of days slower, so the amount of players not able to stand the heat and reverse the withdrawal increases. But.. as the payout rate stays the same, what does this do to the chance you have to actually win something?
I could go on and on.
And mind you, I was one of those players who was never able to cash out (even at 32Red, well just once), so I understand the pain of losing it all back. That's why I hardly ever play any more. I let my writers do that awful part

Point take but I don't see it being complicated. Take the reverse withdrawal. I think it should be the players choice, not the casinos. If the reason for not doing it relates to the payout %.....it's probably massaging figures to benefit the casino, not the customer.

I respectfully suggest that the 'detail' per say is irrelevant - yes, this will take work. It's the principal that needs consideration.

I will shut up now

 

[Silencio]

Point take but I don't see it being complicated. Take the reverse withdrawal. I think it should be the players choice, not the casinos. If the reason for not doing it relates to the payout %.....it's probably massaging figures to benefit the casino, not the customer.

I respectfully suggest that the 'detail' per say is irrelevant - yes, this will take work. It's the principal that needs consideration.

I will shut up now

No no, about the payout %, I mean if you have a backbone like an elephant and are The Meister at cashing out. You might be better off at a casino which isn't at the top of the bill when it comes down to paying out the quickest.
Just a theory though..

And please don't shut up
I think you have a valid point with the difference in accreditation. It can always be improved / get even better..

 

[cheetahwind]

Actually to those who are suggesting the cream of the crop ordeal.
CM already has one of those. It's called the Casinomeister Awards. Where that once a year he recognizes the good and bad casinos. Gives player an idea of what casinos are great, which casinos could use some improvement, and which ones really should just be avoided. So I really think "upgrading" the system would only repeat what he already does once a year.

 

[julester]

I don't think so!

Actually to those who are suggesting the cream of the crop ordeal.
CM already has one of those. It's called the Casinomeister Awards. Where that once a year he recognizes the good and bad casinos. Gives player an idea of what casinos are great, which casinos could use some improvement, and which ones really should just be avoided. So I really think "upgrading" the system would only repeat what he already does once a year.

What I am suggesting is not the 'cream of the crop'. It's simply that the accreditation process if defined and not open ended i.e. an accredited casino will pay winnings in 48 hours, reverse withdrawals are optional etc. This should be NORMAL - not some added benefit which we all feel grateful for. It really is very simple. Which one of these would you prefer:

Must pay winnings in a timely manner (current)

or

Must pay winnings within 48 hours (suggestion....or something similar).

No ambiguity and no room for misunderstandings. A list of specific rules to achieve accreditation with a sensible level of manouverability for the casinos to operate without it causing them unecessary problems. it would a) make the player feel more in control / secure and b) make accreditation so much more valuable.

julester

 

[cheetahwind]

No and I get what your saying. I'll agree there is a call for some more strict payment time frames, authentication time frame, and what not. I was just saying to the others who were suggesting that Casinomeister offer different levels of accreditation. Would complicate his job and also duplicate the Casinomeister Awards he puts on once a year.

What I am suggesting is not the 'cream of the crop'. It's simply that the accreditation process if defined and not open ended i.e. an accredited casino will pay winnings in 48 hours, reverse withdrawals are optional etc. This should be NORMAL - not some added benefit which we all feel grateful for. It really is very simple. Which one of these would you prefer:

Must pay winnings in a timely manner (current)

or

Must pay winnings within 48 hours (suggestion....or something similar).

No ambiguity and no room for misunderstandings. A list of specific rules to achieve accreditation with a sensible level of manouverability for the casinos to operate without it causing them unecessary problems. it would a) make the player feel more in control / secure and b) make accreditation so much more valuable.

julester

 

[Seventh777]

Point take but I don't see it being complicated. Take the reverse withdrawal. I think it should be the players choice

My sentiments entirely, and this aspect alone has seen my once vast range of casinos I deposited at regularly, dwindle down to around 10 at max, it appears that a few of the wiser ones have caught onto this and are grudgingly changing their withdrawal options to suit, the others, unfortunately, will carry on taking a similar road to that of Purple Lounge.

 

[Silencio]

Actually to those who are suggesting the cream of the crop ordeal.
CM already has one of those. It's called the Casinomeister Awards. Where that once a year he recognizes the good and bad casinos. Gives player an idea of what casinos are great, which casinos could use some improvement, and which ones really should just be avoided. So I really think "upgrading" the system would only repeat what he already does once a year.

Even though I agree it would complicate Casinomeister's job too much, the accredited casinos are a minor part at best of the Casinomeister Awards. So I fail to see your point.

 

[binshakindown]

Firstly, there is only one Meister.....and he rules.....so this is not, in any way, a 'knock' against anything on this site. What follows is merely as suggestion.

The level of ongoing posts relating to slow pay, no pay, reversal of cashouts, bonus ambiguities etc. is quite extraordinary. It is quite clear that most 'reputable' casinos take accreditation very seriously and most players (that know about it) the same. However, some of these casinos also play within the accreditation rules to the detriment of the player. In my opinion, this is unacceptable. I believe the accreditation criteria should be changed so that it's more specific and the player understands EXACTLY what they will be getting. How about dealing with just three points:

Must pay winnings in a timely manner

In my view, this is too vague. ALL casinos can pay winnings IMMEDIATELY if they choose but don't because of processing costs and other issues etc. Perhaps immediate is unreasonable but within 48 (worst case) isn't. There is no possible excuse why this shouldn't be done......there will be plenty of reasons.....but no possible excuse.


Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.

If think this should include reverse withdrawals or 'flushing'. If a player asks for their account to be 'flushed', it should be done immediately EVEN at the expense of a slightly longer withdrawal. I can think of at least two accredited casinos that will only flush accounts for VIP's. The relevance of being a VIP? None! Casinos that don't flush accounts are simply hoping that the player will plough the money back. Remember, I am not advocating that the 'pending' period should be removed altogether - simply that the player has the option of what to do with their money.


Finally, I would like to propose that security vetting is completed within 24 hours. It takes as long as it takes for someone to check that bank statements, credit cards, passports etc. match up. Also, I think that players should be made fully aware of what the requirements are for withdrawals BEFORE their first deposit. There was a post on CM a few weeks ago suggesting that players should pass verification before they are allowed to deposit. A number of people suggested that nobody would deposit under those rules and casinos would go out of business. I think there is a moral issue here.

Up until recently, to join a casino / club in the UK, you had to complete the application form and were prevented for joining the establishment for 24 hours. The logic behind this was to prevent ‘impulse’ gambling. I actually think this is a good idea but in the day and age of instant this / that, it might not be practical. Accordingly, I think it is not unreasonable that if a casino is taking our money immediately, they agree to sort the verification process out at the same time as the withdrawal. Why should you have to wait for ages?!

Enough waffle, what you would end up with is the following

- Must pay withdrawals within 48 hours by the faster possible means
- Must flush accounts on request
- Must agree to undertake verification within 24 hours of document submission

At the end of the day, it's only my opinion but perhaps it will generate a bit of discussion. Casinos need to start treating their customers with respect. Some of the nonsense that goes on is nothing short of outrageous......and that's from the accredited boys. The rogues are a different matter and shouldn't be touched regardless!

julester

I agree will all of these with a slight adjustment to the 3rd point, verification within 24 hours. I believe this actually helps establish trust between the casino and the player. For instance, following my first deposit at an "accrediated casino," prior to me being allowed to deposit a second time, I was required to be verified. Although this was not normal from my experience, I complied since I was interested in playing a bit more at the casino. The cool thing was that following me submitting my documents to the security team, I was verified within 15 to 20 minutes. I have had no problems since then and the casino knows who I am. I think this may be the best way to handle security verification, since it is a compromise: the player can make one deposit, to try out the casino without having to provide information on one's first born, but by the second deposit the casino can begin the process of limiting their liability with respect to accepting fraudlent credit cards, bank cards, etc.

Just a thought, however.

 

[TheLastCylon]

Firstly, there is only one Meister.....and he rules.....so this is not, in any way, a 'knock' against anything on this site. What follows is merely as suggestion.

The level of ongoing posts relating to slow pay, no pay, reversal of cashouts, bonus ambiguities etc. is quite extraordinary. It is quite clear that most 'reputable' casinos take accreditation very seriously and most players (that know about it) the same. However, some of these casinos also play within the accreditation rules to the detriment of the player. In my opinion, this is unacceptable. I believe the accreditation criteria should be changed so that it's more specific and the player understands EXACTLY what they will be getting. How about dealing with just three points:

Must pay winnings in a timely manner

In my view, this is too vague. ALL casinos can pay winnings IMMEDIATELY if they choose but don't because of processing costs and other issues etc. Perhaps immediate is unreasonable but within 48 (worst case) isn't. There is no possible excuse why this shouldn't be done......there will be plenty of reasons.....but no possible excuse.


Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.

If think this should include reverse withdrawals or 'flushing'. If a player asks for their account to be 'flushed', it should be done immediately EVEN at the expense of a slightly longer withdrawal. I can think of at least two accredited casinos that will only flush accounts for VIP's. The relevance of being a VIP? None! Casinos that don't flush accounts are simply hoping that the player will plough the money back. Remember, I am not advocating that the 'pending' period should be removed altogether - simply that the player has the option of what to do with their money.


Finally, I would like to propose that security vetting is completed within 24 hours. It takes as long as it takes for someone to check that bank statements, credit cards, passports etc. match up. Also, I think that players should be made fully aware of what the requirements are for withdrawals BEFORE their first deposit. There was a post on CM a few weeks ago suggesting that players should pass verification before they are allowed to deposit. A number of people suggested that nobody would deposit under those rules and casinos would go out of business. I think there is a moral issue here.

Up until recently, to join a casino / club in the UK, you had to complete the application form and were prevented for joining the establishment for 24 hours. The logic behind this was to prevent ‘impulse’ gambling. I actually think this is a good idea but in the day and age of instant this / that, it might not be practical. Accordingly, I think it is not unreasonable that if a casino is taking our money immediately, they agree to sort the verification process out at the same time as the withdrawal. Why should you have to wait for ages?!

Enough waffle, what you would end up with is the following

- Must pay withdrawals within 48 hours by the faster possible means
- Must flush accounts on request
- Must agree to undertake verification within 24 hours of document submission

At the end of the day, it's only my opinion but perhaps it will generate a bit of discussion. Casinos need to start treating their customers with respect. Some of the nonsense that goes on is nothing short of outrageous......and that's from the accredited boys. The rogues are a different matter and shouldn't be touched regardless!

julester

I completely agree. I've been dealing with Pinnacle's casino (The only Galewind Software casino of which I'm aware) recently and my payouts there have been measured in minutes. Every casino can do that.

The third point is a problem that I have not yet encountered, but since you mention it, I'm assuming that it can be an issue. Pinnacle, along with NordicBet, confirmed my identity and fully activated my account within an hour.

I see this forum as the bully pulpit. This is the place where we can make noise to demand change of the casinos. Making official classifications, like the Accredited List, more stringent and difficult to achieve does nothing but benefit the consumer.