all winnings removed if withdrawal before WR met

[Nate]

Yep, I agree. this should be a simple issue to resolve. It just depends how how far the Casino will go to ensure they are 'recovering' funds weekly by T&C's breaches (Some not deliberate).

A simple example would be 3dice's Tourney mode - You are ONLY able to play what the tourney specifies. The software advises you that a particular game is not allowed in the current tourney and also doesnt allow you to access it...

Also, i remember that i deposited on a previous balance of a few cents and when i tried to WD, the software said that i still had to complete a WR before WD - So it is possible to do.

Ah well... Will they cite that they are unable to do this or there are costs involved?... Anything is possible if other casinos are able to do it. It's as simple as getting the 'Upgrade' from the manufacturer or paying for the development of such.

Nate

 

[labell]

I agree any reputable casino should be able to show the player the playthrough remaining so that when playthrough is met the player knows. Most RTG's do this and so does Rival. I have one MG account and my winnings are listed as bonus in my balance until the playthrough is met.

If the casino doesn't show playthrough balance in my opinion that casino is trying to bamboozle players and use that clause as an excuse not to pay.

Absolutely agree, and if the software does not show wr then the entire balance should be returned to the casino account with a message to the player about how much wr remains! Definitely predatory and I'd only expect this behavior of total confiscation from a rogue casino.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Absolutely agree, and if the software does not show wr then the entire balance should be returned to the casino account with a message to the player about how much wr remains! Definitely predatory and I'd only expect this behavior of total confiscation from a rogue casino.

This was Purple Lounge, Microgaming. The software ALREADY had the facility to physically PREVENT a player making a withdrawal before WR has been met, and this happens in MOST MGS casinos. This was particularly nasty, because there IS a playthrough indicator, and this player played until this showed that all his WR had indeed been met. This was a predatory exploitation of a SOFTWARE BUG by Purple Lounge, as an INCORRECT indication that WR had been met was given to the player, so no amount of checking on the players' part would have made this bug in any way obvious.

There are other bugs in the MGS bonus system, and I found yet ANOTHER only last week, down to a balance tracking error between cash & bonus balances during the play of one of those promotions where xx free bonus slot spins are added to one of the games, with winnings from these spins being paid out as a bonus, not cash.

Casinos don't think it's fair when a PLAYER exploits a software bug for profit, so how come it's fair when a CASINO does it.

CM members said "no" (see poll), hence you no longer see Purple Lounge in the accredited list.

Some casinos have decided that the "bottom line" is more important than doing the "right thing" by players, so when they get "advantage played" by players even more "ruthless" than they are, so be it.

I had a call from them last December, their VIP team wanted to know why I had quit all of a sudden. I told her this tale, and she agreed that this was totally unfair -- then I revealed to her that it was HER CASINO I was talking about She said she would get back to me after asking about this with her bosses - never heard a thing (looks like she got "slapped down" from on high, and they are NOT going to change their behaviour).

I was a significant depositor there, we are talking £ thousands per month sometimes, not a few tenners once in a while.

...and I mean WAS


I am £25,000 ahead at PL, so this incident made me think I could be next, even for the most minor of perceived violations.

 

[petro]

I don't understand what this means;
"In a word, it sucks, but them's the breaks."
Can anyone translate it? (Serious question.)

 

[Casinomeister]

I don't understand what this means;
"In a word, it sucks, but them's the breaks."
Can anyone translate it? (Serious question.)

It's a bad term, but there is not much you can do about it. So live with it.

 

[felicie]

It's a bad term, but there is not much you can do about it. So live with it.

How about 'it's not fair but no one said it was going to be'?

 

[petro]

I voted unacceptable for an "Accredited Casino" becasue the T&C;
"Players who withdraw before meeting the requirement will have the bonus and all winnings removed," seems to have no logical purpose behind it besides making more money for the casino.

 

[sweiger]

I voted unacceptable for an "Accredited Casino" becasue the T&C;
"Players who withdraw before meeting the requirement will have the bonus and all winnings removed," seems to have no logical purpose behind it besides making more money for the casino.

So did I. It's not only unacceptable for an accredited casino, it's unacceptable on the whole. It's rogue behaviour IMO.

Casinos has the advantage anyway, i.e. they decide wether or not you're elegible to be paid. Why then punish a player who in good faith thought WR has been met? It can be a mess keeping track of your wager, and it somehow spoils the fun of playing.
Although I've seen this term in a lot of casinos, I never ran into a situation where they actually forced it on me if I miscalculated WR.
But if the bonus was the sticky type (typical Playtech), I had it removed at cashout time. So if I had to make further play to meet WR, it would be without the removed bonus. That's enough penalty I think.

 

[Bencuri]

I'm opening this thread back up because I do not feel it received the exposure it deserved. I was out of town and Max had this open only for a day - closed it until I got back. Well obviously I'm back now.

What we have here is a term that I feel is predatory in nature. We received a PAB from a member who withdrew prematurely - he had not finished his wagering requirements. The casino confiscated his bonus and winnings as per the terms and conditions stating that they could do so because it was there. I would expect any casino - especially one that is listed in our Accredited section - to return all funds to the player's account and give them a heads up what they need to do to complete the wagering requirements.

Not all players are math heads; some are newbies who get excited and cash out prematurely. Some may also think that if the software will let you cash out, it must be ok (as in this situation).

In my opinion, this term is not fair and breaches the "Standards for Accredited Casinos"

https://www.casinomeister.com/accredited-casinos/

I would like further input from our members on this.

Further Admin note: I've modified the poll changing "rogue-like" to "unacceptable for an accredited casino".

Meister you say this: 'That is clearly in their terms - the terms YOU agreed to when you signed up.' I learned from you that if a casino sanctions you because you broke a rule in their terms, you agree on that it is fair. So I just don't understand your point. Now please decide: is a rule a rule, or not? I cannot follow your logic now at all.

 

[Casinomeister]

Meister you say this: 'That is clearly in their terms - the terms YOU agreed to when you signed up.' I learned from you that if a casino sanctions you because you broke a rule in their terms, you agree on that it is fair. So I just don't understand your point. Now please decide: is a rule a rule, or not? I cannot follow your logic now at all.

Your suspension was for 7 days, I've just ramped this up for a month. Happy trails...