I don't agree. If casinos had the right to interpret their rules in anyway they want to, they could almost practically lie to their customers if they wanted to.
And yes, I've PM'd CW's Rep.
Casino Complaint Aladdin's Gold Casino locked my account and is refusing to pay
- Thread starter petr1
- Start date
- Status
I don't agree. If casinos had the right to interpret their rules in anyway they want to, they could almost practically lie to their customers if they wanted to.
And yes, I've PM'd CW's Rep.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like it would be a risk-free way to play. If I deposit and win, I tell them I'm not a student - if I deposit a bunch of times and lose, I simply make a small withdrawal and then tell them I'm a student and I get all my deposits back.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
- Location
- Denmark
lol....I would LOVE to see anyone post here, that they got as much as 3 cents of their deposits back for being a student.
Please post, if anyone managed that one !
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
I remember reading that they did. Most of those 'students' aren't around the forum anymore, but maybe Bryan would know?
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Location
- Here
I can't remember if it was ever answered, but adults who had life changes (loss of job, career changes, etc) who decided to return to school, were they exempt from this clause?
Errr, maybe it was...*having another one of those stupid senior moments again* I think I remember asking if , being 51 years old, I wished to return to school to change careers if this would put me in the category as a full time student. I think Tom answered it would and that I wouldn't be able to play at CWC. Fudge, now I need to go back and reread that stupid thread again.
So, the age thing wasn't relevant, it was simply a "student" thing...
Errr, maybe it was...*having another one of those stupid senior moments again* I think I remember asking if , being 51 years old, I wished to return to school to change careers if this would put me in the category as a full time student. I think Tom answered it would and that I wouldn't be able to play at CWC. Fudge, now I need to go back and reread that stupid thread again.
So, the age thing wasn't relevant, it was simply a "student" thing...
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
It's changed to "under 25 and enrolled..." now I think.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Location
- SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
Annie,
In excluding full-time students CWC is playing the moral responsibility card. It follows that they should, when accepting new registrations, place a barrier for this category of players and ask them to check a box to this effect. The fact that they havent done so makes me wonder whether they are waiting to pounce on those who didnt read the terms and won giving them a convenient excuse to confiscate winnings. If they wish to exclude full-time students so be it but they should be able to pick these out on registration. If the players deliberately checked the wrong box the casino can then use the ts and cs as a reason not to pay.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
I'm wondering if the OP could post here and say whether they got their deposit refunded...?
takethemoney
Banned User - Chargebacks at Slotastic
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2004
- Location
- Washington
I'm sure the deposit was refunded, as should be with any prior deposits as well. This is a credible casino and I'm confident the deposit(s) were refunded.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Location
- Pictland
Sorry to contradict Chu but that's not quite the full story. If the player is a UK resident -- and yes, I know that may not apply in the OP's case -- then CWC has legal responsibilities that have to be respected. I could dig up the references on that but if you remember the previous student case I was strongly opposed to CWC's "interpretation" of the case until I found out that it was based on legal advice and precedent in UK law. That makes it a legal issue not a moral one. As to how this applies, if at all or in any way, to non-UK residents I have no knowledge.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Location
- SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
Max, even if we are talking about legal responsibilities here there is no reason why CW did not require a player to declare whether he is a full-time student on registration. Same case as with a player's age once the birth date is registered as being below the legal age, the registration should fail and no bets should be accepted. To come to these lengths and then disqualify a player using the ts and cs as a shield is not right IMO.
If I hadn't won, would've I ever got my deposit back? No. I'm sure there are students who have made a deposit(s) but never won anything and yet CWC is keeping their money. They are literally stealing their money because at no point do they have a chance to win anything. This isn't right.
Actually, they don't even have the Terms as their 'shield' in my case. Rules should be taken precisely so it's fair for everyone. This casino group shouldn't be on the accredited list.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Location
- SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
Petr,
Experience tells me that there is nothing to come out from conversations with live support. Try sending a pm to their forum rep Tom though I think their stance on this issue is already very clear though I cant understand why they continue to no nothing about it with the only course of action being confiscation of winnings after one has played. Shouldnt action have been taken to prevent students from player right from the start?
Dont hound the live chat staff anymore. They are just frontline staff and have no authority to reverse decisions especially over policy issues.
Experience tells me that there is nothing to come out from conversations with live support. Try sending a pm to their forum rep Tom though I think their stance on this issue is already very clear though I cant understand why they continue to no nothing about it with the only course of action being confiscation of winnings after one has played. Shouldnt action have been taken to prevent students from player right from the start?
Dont hound the live chat staff anymore. They are just frontline staff and have no authority to reverse decisions especially over policy issues.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Location
- Pictland
No arguments there, I was under the impression that's already how it was done.
Just what I expected. CW's Rep is saying pretty much the same thing as everyone else that I should've known that University and College means all kind of schools. I'm still wondering why the hell shouldn't rules be taken precisely? If they meant all students, then they could just write the rule in this way for example: "All full-time students aged 25 or under are not permitted to play on our casino." Simple as that.
I've also sent them 2 emails, one over a week ago and one on Satuday. No answers.
I've also sent them 2 emails, one over a week ago and one on Satuday. No answers.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
Even then someone will show up saying "I only go to school for 4 days a week, so I'm not a full time student." and then there will be this argument about what constitutes 'full-time' and the whole mess will start again.
Personally I think the Club World group should just implement a policy that any player who is 25 year old or younger needs to be preverified before being allowed to deposit. It would save a whole lot of hassle for them as well as the players that don't read the terms or don't understand what they mean.
BTW petrr1 - you did get your deposit(s) refunded already? It's pretty important for other players to understand that your deposits weren't 'stolen' because of this term.
You are right. However, this case is not about interpreting the meaning of "full-time" or anything like that. This is just about should the rule be taken precisely or not.Even then someone will show up saying "I only go to school for 4 days a week, so I'm not a full time student." and then there will be this argument about what constitutes 'full-time' and the whole mess will start again.
Personally I think the Club World group should just implement a policy that any player who is 25 year old or younger needs to be preverified before being allowed to deposit. It would save a whole lot of hassle for them as well as the players that don't read the terms or don't understand what they mean.
BTW petrr1 - you did get your deposit(s) refunded already? It's pretty important for other players to understand that your deposits weren't 'stolen' because of this term.
IMO, they can't just say "Oh, even though it says only university and college students, we meant all students". Hypothetically, it's like if there was a rule about not allowing German players and then they would say "Oh, even though it just says Germany, we meant the whole Europe."
And yes, Club World's Rep refunded my deposit. If I hadn't won, I would've never got my deposit back. One more reason why they should at least add a question (e.g Are you a student?) to the registration form.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
By your argument if they had the term separate and obvious on registration you still wouldn't have thought it applied to you because of your interpretation of what the term actually meant. You admitted that you didn't read the term before playing, if you HAD read it on signup, would you have thought that it didn't apply to you and signed up and played anyhow? Or would you have asked support first?
I wouldn't have taken the risk because if for some reason they didn't understand that Gymnasium isn't same as College or University.
After my account was closed I tried to figure out why does the rule mention only College and University students. My first thought was that it must be because especially College students often live in (student) dorms sharing the same IP which would cause trouble.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
You already took the biggest risk possible......you didn't read the terms before you played
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
For CWC to have to name every kind of educational institution in the world in that term is impossible. I agree that they should have a better system in place to keep students from depositing in the first place - but in this case you didn't read the terms, if you had you wouldn't have played, so how can you blame the casino? In my opinion, you should just let it go. It wasn't that big of a cashout, you got your deposit back, all you're really out is a bit of time you spent playing and writing this thread.
It's only the Club World group who has this student rule, there are lots of other RTG casinos to play at. And once you're no longer a student, then I'm sure Club World would be glad to have you back.
BTW, where I come from a gymnasium is a building for playing sports, so it seems kinda funny to think of it as educational.
Even if I didn't read the terms (well, I did check them quickly), it shouldn't be the reason for confiscating my winnings. Instead of naming every kind of educational institution they could just say "Full-time students are not allowed to play."For CWC to have to name every kind of educational institution in the world in that term is impossible. I agree that they should have a better system in place to keep students from depositing in the first place - but in this case you didn't read the terms, if you had you wouldn't have played, so how can you blame the casino? In my opinion, you should just let it go. It wasn't that big of a cashout, you got your deposit back, all you're really out is a bit of time you spent playing and writing this thread.
It's only the Club World group who has this student rule, there are lots of other RTG casinos to play at. And once you're no longer a student, then I'm sure Club World would be glad to have you back.
BTW, where I come from a gymnasium is a building for playing sports, so it seems kinda funny to think of it as educational.
Why should I give up when I haven't broken the rules? They have had a lot of time to clarify the rule and yet they have done nothing for it.
The only question we should be discussing is, did I break the terms? If you can find a rule that I did break, please post it here and explain which part of it I did break. The part that I broke has to be written to the rule because I have only agreed to those rules when I registered.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
Yes, you did break the terms.
You are enrolled in the EQUIVALENT of Uni and College. In my country, College is another name for High School, so high school students from my country would be banned.....but you're saying that high school students in your country would be fine because its called something different?
Give me a break.
Move along people.....nothing to see here.....please disperse....
You are wrong. Gymnasium isn't equivalent of University and College.
Read this:
Also...
All Gymnasium students have to accomplish
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
to be able to graduate.According to Wikipedia Abitur is one of "Admission tests to colleges and universities".
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Location
- SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
Petr,
Let's just say that you didnt give a shit to the terms and conditions until it really mattered. Otherwise, you would have clarified it with the casino before playing instead of arguing all day after admitting you are a full-time student. I still believe the casino should explain why it did not bother to verify whether the player is a full-time student at the point of registration. They are well aware of the problem since it caused a furore last year yet they decided to do nothing and only cried foul after a student plays and wins. A responsible outfit would do its utmost to ensure that those ineligible eg those residing in restricted jurisdictions, underaged juveniles, problematic gamblers cant even start playing. The fact that the casino failed to do what it should do and then come out with the ts and cs in its defence after allowing an eligible player to play and win is unwothy of accreditation IMO.
Both parties have erred and I believe it would be best for them to sit down and negotiate a settlement. It would also be beneficial to CWC to devise a solution to bar this ineligible group on registration not after.
Let's just say that you didnt give a shit to the terms and conditions until it really mattered. Otherwise, you would have clarified it with the casino before playing instead of arguing all day after admitting you are a full-time student. I still believe the casino should explain why it did not bother to verify whether the player is a full-time student at the point of registration. They are well aware of the problem since it caused a furore last year yet they decided to do nothing and only cried foul after a student plays and wins. A responsible outfit would do its utmost to ensure that those ineligible eg those residing in restricted jurisdictions, underaged juveniles, problematic gamblers cant even start playing. The fact that the casino failed to do what it should do and then come out with the ts and cs in its defence after allowing an eligible player to play and win is unwothy of accreditation IMO.
Both parties have erred and I believe it would be best for them to sit down and negotiate a settlement. It would also be beneficial to CWC to devise a solution to bar this ineligible group on registration not after.
PenDragyn21
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2009
- Location
- The Lair
First things first, CWC should fix the Term so its clearer. Then we'll see about having them pay RTG to make a change to the registration software just for them.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Location
- Edmonton Canada
They could say "...college or university OR ANY OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION..." maybe?
I've sent two emails for CWC, one for the manager 2 weeks ago and one to the email department almost a week ago. I haven't heard anything from them. Also, CW's Rep keeps ignoring my questions, I waited 2 days to get an answer from him and this is all he had to say: "You are a student and therefore you are not permitted to gamble in our casinos. As such your account has been closed and your deposit refunded."
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2008
- Location
- Sweden
I still think that rule is weird.
So lets say I am 50 years old and decides to go back to school. I am financially stabil, but I am not allowed to play because I am studying...
Lets say i study just to have something to do during the day?
Well it is in their rules, no arguing there, but still....
So lets say I am 50 years old and decides to go back to school. I am financially stabil, but I am not allowed to play because I am studying...
Lets say i study just to have something to do during the day?
Well it is in their rules, no arguing there, but still....
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
He's on Christmas break at the moment, like most of the administration at CWC. You just have to be patient.
It wouldn't apply to you. They have made this clear in one of the other threads - too long to search through at the moment
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2004
- Location
- Bexhill on sea, England
No, you would be OK because you would be over 25.
For what it's worth, I think this "No students" rule is totally ridiculous.
I appreciate & support Club World's moral stance in trying to dissuade students from gambling at a time when the vast majority are severely strapped for cash, but the way they wrote the rule is just WAY too ambiguous, as this thread has proved once again.
IMO if they want to keep this rule in, they should either exclude EVERYONE under 25, or vet all players under 25 to find out their actual education/work status and decide if they will accept them as players BEFORE allowing them to deposit.
I'm going to talk to CWC at the CM meeting later this month and try to find out exactly what they are trying to achieve, and why.
KK
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Just don't define ANY institution, say what they mean - no full time students under 25 ABSOLUTELY.
The registration form does not ask this question, it is done upon verification. This clearly took place when the OP made his first withdrawal, and was asked "are you a student" by CS as part of this process. The submission of payslips is ALSO only requested after the player has ALREADY registered and made at least one deposit. Other than at first withdrawal, CWC often ask for verification after the first couple of deposits have been played through.
They only refund deposits lost by students if the student in question becomes aware they could never win, or CS find out the player is a student and closes the account.
It can't really be about responsible gambling, else every government in the western world would be actively encouraging irresponsible gambling via state lotteries and B & M casinos, where EVERY legal adult can play, regardless of means. The UK lottery can even be played by minors at the age of 16, even though along with fruit machines it is considered one of the most readily available forms of gambling. In fact, recent changes have made it easier to spend on the lottery at the age of 16 than on fruit machines, as these are now in 18+ exclusion zones which by law must be constantly policed to prevent minors from even LOOKING, let alone playing. Lottery products on the other hand, are available at even the smallest shopping parades, and even places with no pub will have lottery products readily available.
Most players DO reason that the "student term" at CWC is about on-campus teams of students using shared computers and IP addresses laying into the promotional offers, and is thus interpreted as a clarification of the "one account per shared environment" rule. Those who study outside such a structured shared environment are bound to assume that the term is not targetted at them as they are not in a shared environment, and are just like any other normal adult in the community, but happen to study rather than work.
This term fails because it is TOO specific, and this detail masks the actual intent behind the rule, which is to ban EVERY under 25 who is still undertaking ANY kind of education rather than either being in work, or applying for work.
Despite the fuss last time this happend, CWC have refused to implement the suggestion that the question "are you a student" should form part of the registration process, and be a compulsory field to which the answer "yes" or "no" needed to be given. This would at least make students wonder WHY this question was being asked, and would hopefully have them contacting CS if not reading the terms they thought only contained a bunch of "lawyer speak" that shoudn't really worry the average player just wanting to play for entertainment.
Who here (UK) reads the poster with all the terms every time they walk into a pub or arcade to play the fruities. I HAVE read them, and they are designed to cover forms of cheating often used against the games, and the ordinary player looking to try their luck with a few quid needn't worry if they hadn't read them. There are no nasty surprises like "only visitors to the services who have come in a motorised vehicle may keep any winnings", even though such places are designed as rest stops for motorists, even though many players would nip through on foot from a nearby city, town, or even village purely to play the machines all day.
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Location
- Here
This is a stupid rule any way you look at it. Many of the college students I know also work, many have full-time jobs. So, because they are enrolled in college and are under 25 they are "presumed" to be irresponsible?
Yet, at the age of 18 they can go to war and die for us. If they are fortunate enough to survive their stint in the armed services, they decide to enrol in college after their four year stint, they can't gamble at CWC because they are deemed "not old enough to be responsible to know what is good enough for themselves?" B*llsh*t, the rule stinks and needs to be done away with, rewritten to list precisely what they mean by student so there aren't players caught up in this "trap", OR just say they don't want players under the age of 25 (which would eliminate all this nonsense).
Yet, at the age of 18 they can go to war and die for us. If they are fortunate enough to survive their stint in the armed services, they decide to enrol in college after their four year stint, they can't gamble at CWC because they are deemed "not old enough to be responsible to know what is good enough for themselves?" B*llsh*t, the rule stinks and needs to be done away with, rewritten to list precisely what they mean by student so there aren't players caught up in this "trap", OR just say they don't want players under the age of 25 (which would eliminate all this nonsense).
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Location
- Sweden
If I don't remember wrong I got a call from all Club World casinos when I made my first deposit with them. Six calls, and each time they ask me to verify who I was.
Would it be so difficult for them to ask those who are under the age of 25 if they are full time students when they make the call? It wouldn't take so many secunds more.
Maybe I'm wrong and not everyone has to speak to them but what an easy way it would be.
Would it be so difficult for them to ask those who are under the age of 25 if they are full time students when they make the call? It wouldn't take so many secunds more.
Maybe I'm wrong and not everyone has to speak to them but what an easy way it would be.
Ok. Five days ago I sent the Rep (Tom) a message and yesterday I asked him if he could possibly answer the message and also make a reply to this thread. Today he answered "Hello, you have already had my answer on a number of occasions."
All he has pretty much said previously is that I'm a student and that's why I'm not allowed to play.
I'm just trying to figure out why should the rule apply on me. I'm not enrolled in university, college or in any equivalent educational institutions. I thought the meaning of rule was to avoid problems with students sharing the same IPs in student dorms, as it's pretty common for at least college students to live in dorms.
Also, I'm still waiting for a reply from the casino manager. I sent him a message on 26th of Dec.
All he has pretty much said previously is that I'm a student and that's why I'm not allowed to play.
I'm just trying to figure out why should the rule apply on me. I'm not enrolled in university, college or in any equivalent educational institutions. I thought the meaning of rule was to avoid problems with students sharing the same IPs in student dorms, as it's pretty common for at least college students to live in dorms.
Also, I'm still waiting for a reply from the casino manager. I sent him a message on 26th of Dec.
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Location
- Here
And unfortunately, that is probably the ONLY answer you will receive. They don't
want ANY student under the age of 25 playing in their casinos. The rule applies to YOU because YOU admitted YOU were a student. End of story. You can continue sending the rep emails, and he will continue to reply with the same answer. And I'm fairly certain the casino manager will give you the same response as the rep. Rules are rules and you failed to abide by them.
As you've noticed, most here agree the rule sucks! But the casino has stood by this crazy rule, and apparently has no desire to change it. It doesnt matter how many emails you send, how many forums you post on, the casino is going to stand by it's rules. Live and learn and if you are going to continue playing at online casinos steer clear of the CWC group until you are no longer a student under the age of 25.
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
You are wasting your time. They will not budge. They have already said in a previous case that the rule is there to prevent students not able to support themselves from gambling away money given to them for their studies. The 25 years rule was added to clarify that those who have had a career but return to study later in life CAN play, even though they are students enrolled at a college or university, and would be sharing IP addresses, etc.
They have taken it upon themselves to impose this rule to protect players, even though there is nothing in responsible gambling guidelines that asks them to do this.
Interestingly, a provision made by the Greek government to impose a higher age limit for online gambling than for land gambling has been the subject of a complaint to the EU by the OPERATORS, who claim that this extra measure to protect players from the dangers of instant gratification online gambling is unfair, and against EU rules. They argue that the SAME age limit should apply wherever and how the gambling takes place. Who brought this complaint? ONLINE CASINOS.
It would have been VERY interesting had the Greek government ONLY protected certain categories of young players, rather than imposing a blanket higher age limit. It could have ignited this student argument all over again, and the detailed arguments in the EU courts over this could STILL ignite the student protection item, given that it would be the operators presenting them.
If the EU court rules it illegal to add additional restrictions over and above the age of majority for online gambling, a case could be brought against casinos that impose age limits higher than the age of majority themselves using the same line of argument that the Greek govermnent used in it's own case (protection of vulnerable groups of adults).
It is clear WHY online operators made this complaint, they want to be able to market to Greek players as soon as they reach the age of majority, rather than waiting for a few years until they have come to terms with their adulthood, and thus gamble more responsibly.
If they lose, the Greek government could just as easily raise the age for B & M gambling, so the operators may not get the outcome they were hoping for. Worse, it could set a precedent for other countries to raise the minimum age for gambling to protect the more vulnerable 18-21 age range, which includes almost all the students that by their own argument CWC believes should NOT be able to gamble online due to them not being as "responsible" as 18-21 year olds who have joined the workforce, or are on unemployment benefits.
For the present, READ THE GODDAM TERMS, this is not the ONLY example of a nasty surprise catching the unwary because they have assumed that "all casinos are the same", and there is therefore no need to examine the terms.
The publicity surrounding this student issue at CWC is such that it will appear on any basic Google search on the casino group, thus tipping off even those that only do basic research.
It is NOT the case that just because a casino is accredited here at CM that players can forgo the need to read the terms. Another rule that catches even MORE unwary players than the CWC student issue is the max bet on a bonus rule, often expressed as xx% of the bonus credited. Failure to spot this cost a player at Mummy's Gold over 5K.
Reading the terms first is why I don't like Playtech, and currently don't play at any. Their nasty surprise is reserved exclusively for the British, so they are not seeing any of my money if I spot such a term. The "anti Neteller" term is another thing that ensures a casino doesn't see my money, which is how Ladbrokes lost me over 2 years ago, along with Rushmore (which turned out to be a stroke of luck). Cassava casinos also have a "Neteller hating" term last time I looked.
CWC don't have such a term, but they DO have the student one. They DID see my money, but I saw far more of theirs
It was I that got uninstalled by CWCHi All,
I realise that this rule is not popular however I don’t think there is any doubt about its application in this case.
The bottom line for petrr1 is that when we asked him if he was a student he said yes. It was only after he found out that we don’t permit people who are still in full time education to gamble in our casinos that he changed his mind.
While a Gymnasium is not explicitly mentioned in the terms it is clear to anyone who reads this term what its intention is, and we cannot be expected to provide an exhaustive list of educational institutions on an on-going basis.
Kind Regards
Tom
I realise that this rule is not popular however I don’t think there is any doubt about its application in this case.
The bottom line for petrr1 is that when we asked him if he was a student he said yes. It was only after he found out that we don’t permit people who are still in full time education to gamble in our casinos that he changed his mind.
While a Gymnasium is not explicitly mentioned in the terms it is clear to anyone who reads this term what its intention is, and we cannot be expected to provide an exhaustive list of educational institutions on an on-going basis.
Kind Regards
Tom
No. I didn't change my mind. After the call I asked from live chat why does to rule apply on me even though I'm not enrolled in college or university (or any equivalent). I also asked what proof do they have that I'm a student and they told me that the call was recorded. At no point in the call was I told that the call was being recorded which is illegal at least in Finland.
Instead of listing all educational institutions you could just write e.g. "No full-time students allowed".
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Rather than try to list all possible institutions, why not list NONE, and keep it simple, a blanket "no students under 25 years of age". There would then be no need for any student to try to work out whether their form of study is covered by this rule as ALL forms of full time study will be covered. Even defining "full time" can lead to arguments, so even this qualification should be left out, even if part time students can make arrangements to play if they can demonstrate means.
The current wording seems to have lead to the impression that college and university has been listed because of the shared environment issue, rather than the issue of "problem gambling". This is the most common reason why other operators don't like students who register and play from university. The rule at CWC carries no explanation of WHY it is there, leaving players to figure it out for themselves.
Not entirely. It seems there are TWO interpretations, and the one MOST players seem to "interpret" from the wording is that it is a shared environment issue. The true intent came out during the long discussion in a previous thread, and is a line of thinking unique to CWC, and hardly one that players would pick up as "common knowledge".
The OP failed to read the terms, so has tried to argue the case after the fact. However, if he HAD read the terms, would he have still played in the belief that Gymnaseum was not covered, and even the idea of shared environments being a problem would not be a concern if he played from home.
Unfortunately, the ONLY cases that come to light are where a student has had winnings confiscated, and the impression is that students ARE playing and losing having either failed to spot this term, or misinterpreted it, with CWC happily taking their money because they don't ask the question "are you a student" until the first withdrawal is requested.
Despite students not being considered responsible enough to gamble at CWC, they ARE expected to take FULL responsibilty for actually reading the terms, rather than just clicking the "I agree" box as many mature ADULTS do, despite some DECADES of life experience.
Where is the protection at the point of registration, such as explicitly having the player declare that they are not a student when they sign up, rather than a bland "I have waded through 8 pages of mostly indecipherable legalese and understood every word of it". Lets face it, if we were all honest about this question, the only players casinos would have would be lawyers and idiots.
I read the terms at CWC, and understood MOST of it. I believed that the bits I didn't fully understand were not going to be relevant as they related to matters such as copyrights, ownership of "company devices", right to download the client and use it, agreeing not to "reverse engineer" anything from the site, including the client.
I also see the "we can change the terms at any time without notice", so this literally means that even if you DO read and understand the terms, you agree that the casino can simply "pull a fast one" and not pay in any case, and it is only by looking at past history of the operator that you can determine whether this stunt has ever been pulled in the past.
When I first saw the student term, I also believed it was all about shared environments and student "clubs" playing en masse for bonuses to supplement their studies, and gaining advantage through being able to play as a club, rather than isolated individuals. This is the known problem with university environments, loads of clever players able to share information and collude during play.
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Location
- Here
Here is what the T&Cs state, directly from Aladdins Gold website...
1. The Player is at least 18 years of age or has reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction, whichever is greater. Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in a College or University are not permitted to play in the Casino.
CWC if you want to keep this silly student clause, rewrite it...
"Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in ANY type of educational institution are not permitted to play in the casino." This eliminates the need to list numerous types of institutions.
Also, to begin that term off with "the player is at least 18 years of age"... is misleading. An 18 year old non-student is more responsible than a 25 year old full-time student?
1. The Player is at least 18 years of age or has reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction, whichever is greater. Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in a College or University are not permitted to play in the Casino.
CWC if you want to keep this silly student clause, rewrite it...
"Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in ANY type of educational institution are not permitted to play in the casino." This eliminates the need to list numerous types of institutions.
Also, to begin that term off with "the player is at least 18 years of age"... is misleading. An 18 year old non-student is more responsible than a 25 year old full-time student?
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Location
- SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
So when did you pop the question to him? After he played and won? I think this warrants an explanation.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2007
- Location
- Texas, USA
We can kick this topic around for the next 100 yrs. and it won't change a thing.
The term is there. However ambiguous, whether we like it or not, it's there and will be adhered to by the Casino. You agree to any and all when you check the box that you have read them.
If this question had never been asked and this problem never come to light, could this person have passed verification? If not, then we would be having another round of what the casinos should and shouldn't do.
Bottom line, better have your ducks in a row before playing at an online casino. Don't assume you know a rule. If a bell goes off when you read the T&C's, you'd better ask for clarification, get it in writing and you might stay out of trouble.
The term is there. However ambiguous, whether we like it or not, it's there and will be adhered to by the Casino. You agree to any and all when you check the box that you have read them.
If this question had never been asked and this problem never come to light, could this person have passed verification? If not, then we would be having another round of what the casinos should and shouldn't do.
Bottom line, better have your ducks in a row before playing at an online casino. Don't assume you know a rule. If a bell goes off when you read the T&C's, you'd better ask for clarification, get it in writing and you might stay out of trouble.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2004
- Location
- SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
As a responsible outfit and an accredited casino CW should ensure that players declare whether they are students at the time of registration. If they had declared they were students the problem would not exist because the casino wont accept play at all. The fact that they only tried to verify whether the op is a student after playing smacks of using legitimate means to confiscate winnings ]. The rule is there for a reason, either moral or legal and the casino should have taken steps to ensure these students shouldnt be playing at all. Dont tell me they didnt think of asking for a declaration from new players since it wasnt too long ago that this issue caused a furore here. I hope Tom can give me some answers here.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2007
- Location
- Texas, USA
Chu,
Personally, I think that the rule is less than clear. But I can see where any casino cannot make all the rules to fit every player they have. By that I mean, here in the US, this problem would never arise because anyone under 21 is not allowed to gamble period, online, B&M, horses etc. But in other countries, the legal age is much lower. So the casino has to pick a stop spot with the language that works in the country they are in.
I don't think that $200 is going to make or break CW one way or another so I certainly don't think that they are hiding behind this rule to keep from paying the player.
I still think there was a reason they called for verification in the first place. Something that set off a red flag. Maybe it was his age, maybe something else. We won't ever know so speculation runs rampant.
Personally, I think that the rule is less than clear. But I can see where any casino cannot make all the rules to fit every player they have. By that I mean, here in the US, this problem would never arise because anyone under 21 is not allowed to gamble period, online, B&M, horses etc. But in other countries, the legal age is much lower. So the casino has to pick a stop spot with the language that works in the country they are in.
I don't think that $200 is going to make or break CW one way or another so I certainly don't think that they are hiding behind this rule to keep from paying the player.
I still think there was a reason they called for verification in the first place. Something that set off a red flag. Maybe it was his age, maybe something else. We won't ever know so speculation runs rampant.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Location
- Ontario
I'm not sure that the rule is clear when it comes to students NOT enrolled in a college or university. The change to no students under 25 would eliminate that ambiguity.
While the OP's amount is small and not worth pursuing in a court of law, courts tend to interpret things very narrowly. Clubworld wrote the term, and it doesn't specifically prohibit play by high school (or gymnasium, or technical vocational institute for that matter IMO).
I think it would be prudent to amend the term, as a non-university or college student could have a much larger win which would be worth them pursuing legally.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2010
- Location
- NY
Honestly, when I saw the word student it meant just that. Whether they are attending highschool, college, a university, a student is a student no matter what grade.
Just my 2 cents.
LH
Just my 2 cents.
LH
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Location
- Ontario
Well, when I see enrolled in college or university, it means just that. It's that clarification that makes things less clear if they mean ALL students, no matter what grade.
- Status
Similar threads
Casino Complaint
Del oro Casino - Fraud
Casino Complaint
Leo vegas scamming with session limit
Non-Bonus Complaint
Bitstarz has stolen my money ...
