beravek7 VS Fortune room

[dancinggoon]

Yes, which is quite possibly why a fair number of us have already said exactly that, even here in this very thread, and in so many fewer words.

Its great to see that so many agree, but what will happen now?

FL is clearly in breach of the casinomeister Standards for Accredited Casinos:

- Must not disqualify any player from a payout if terms & conditions are met, except for situations of fraud (multiple-accounts, bogus ID documents, chargebacks, etc.,).
- Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.
- Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.
No player shall be involuntarily placed into a situation which breaches the terms and conditions during the course of play.


I doubt that this is fair for the other Accredited Casinos, wich are holding on these standarts, while FL does not care. Furthermore it even damages the good reputation of casinomeister.

 

[maxd]

Its great to see that so many agree, but what will happen now?

As I've said, that is an ongoing discussion here between Bryan and the moderators. Results are TBD. Change is not going to happen overnight, until it does and then we'll see what we see.

 

[skiny]

Yes, which is quite possibly why a fair number of us have already said exactly that, even here in this very thread, and in so many fewer words.

I shouldn't laugh. I'm just as bad.

 

[Beravek7]

This is a reply I got from Ecogra :

"Dear Pavel,



We have investigated your query with Fortune Room Casino and have made the following findings;



· Your account was suspended because you transgressed their clause which prohibits play in an environment where you are doing it for professional play instead of personal entertainment.

1.3.Refusal to Register, Deregistration, Exclusion & Suspension

1.3.1. We may refuse to register you as a Player or elect to deregister and exclude you or suspend you as a Player from the Casino at any time if we deem that your participation at the Casino is, shall be or has been previously, in any way not for personal entertainment [i.e. professional], fraudulent, illegal or that your participation is or has been abusive, collusive or irregular in any way.



· The investigation that they based their suspension of your accounts on was due to the fact that you would place bets where the deviation in your bet values contravened another one of their terms which states the following:

Placing high value bets with the single intention of increasing your balance, thereafter you substantially decrease your bet size, while reasonably not decreasing your bankroll.

Any irregular play will result in immediate disqualification from a bonus and the casino reserves the rights to withhold any withdrawals and/or confiscate all winnings. Irregular play will be dealt with in the same manner as professional play, as detailed in clauses 1.3. and 1.4. of our General Terms and Conditions.



Bearing the above in mind we are confident that the operator has acted in accordance with their published Terms and Conditions and as such we must inform you that we find your dispute to be invalid.





Regards,

Devon"

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

Since the explanation was absolutely non-specific - I wrote to the one more time.

"Hello!


I am really disappointed with your reply. Yes I did play 10 per bet on slots and then 3.20. But the word "SUBSTANTIALLY"
in the rules is not specific. How much is substantially? If they would write than one cannot decrease the bet for more than 50% for example- that would be specific and they could confiscate the winnings. So now they can apply this rule to anybody they wish. And I find it very strange that you support such an action of using non-specific terms and conditions. This is an unfair practice. Moreover the casino does not want even to pay me my deposit back. And you support that too? Confiscating my deposit because they did not like the way I played?
I am waiting for your comments!"

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

Tehy replied in 2 weeks:



Dear Pavel,



"We have investigated this with Fortune Room Casino and made the following findings:

· The play behaviour falls within the realms of playing for professional use, as such the deposits, because this play is tantamount to fraud, will not be refunded.
Bearing the above in mind we believe the operator has acted in accordance with their Terms and Conditions and as such I must inform you that we still find your dispute to be invalid."



-----------

They claim my gameplay was professional. And somehow they consider such a play to be a kind of fraud! And because this is a fraud - they can confiscate my deposit as well. Never thought I will get a reply like that. But now I know very well what this Ecogra is all about.

 

[maphesto]

The play behaviour falls within the realms of playing for professional use, as such the deposits, because this play is tantamount to fraud, will not be refunded.
Bearing the above in mind we believe the operator has acted in accordance with their Terms and Conditions and as such I must inform you that we still find your dispute to be invalid."

I almost suggest that eCOGRA should be placed in the rogue pit now. Remember, I wrote almost.

So decreasing you bet from 10$ to 3.18$ when playing with a bonus is comparable to fraud???

Where is this world going?

 

[skiny]

"Placing high value bets with the single intention of increasing your balance, thereafter you substantially decrease your bet size, while reasonably not decreasing your bankroll."

Anyone who believes that playing 10 dollar spins until you have a balance you're happy with and then playing 3 dollar spins until you've cleared the wage requirement is fraudulent activity has no idea what the word fraud means.

I think before people operate casinos or work for a "player protection agency" they should first understand the concept of gambling.

Do these people even understand that we're trying to win?

 

[dizze]

I almost suggest that eCOGRA should be placed in the rogue pit now. Remember, I wrote almost.

So decreasing you bet from 10$ to 3.18$ when playing with a bonus is comparable to fraud???

Where is this world going?

(IAmNAL)This could be construed as Libel/slander, the admins would BAN a user for posting like that about a casino.

Ecogra are accusing a player of fraud, ( not through evidence , but purely playstyle).
They are accusing a player of a CRIME, and just like in real life they must be able to back this up

ECOGRA should be put in the Rogue pit if this is their official stance. I dont see any other option, as no sane regulator/ certifier of fair gambling that makes comments on disputes would say this.

I/ and i hope most of the forum, expect them to make a apology to the player and "retrain" the member off staff that sent this email, if this was not their official position. The mods really need to get stuck into this issue...

 

[ChillBill]

Members can debate the word "substantially" till hell freezes over but unless FL state a word which clearly denotes a % or monitory value of, then this is an ambiguos word. It's weightless, meaningless and gives players no idea what is acceptable and what is not. It's a text-book example of a FU term at play.

Seems to me the industry is going to hell in a handbag. When a regulatory body gives credence to a casino under their watch, to confiscate (errr steal) rightful winnings and not even refund the deposit, instead eCOGRA claim the OP was committing fraud! Not only does the OP not get his winnings or his deposit refunded but is pronounced a criminal...

If this is an example of how an accredited casino is allowed to behave and its regulatory body operates, all I see are dark clouds rolling in and it's time to hoist the umbrella's folks. We're in for stormy weather.

 

[dunover]

As I said all along, the player was AP'ing but this cannot be labelled by ECOGRA as fraud!!
He was trying his luck, not going out to commit a criminal offence for cripes sake!

And for ECOGRA to endorse a casino actually retaining deposits in a case like this is frankly outrageous and above all very worrying for future play as ChillBill said.

If anything, a non-criminal player has (in my opinion) had the criminal act of theft perpetrated on him, via a vague FU clause and then rubber-stamped by ECOGRA.

I frankly am aghast at this, especially when ECOGRA cannot or will not recognize that the term is so unspecific that legally in any other line of reputable business it would never be allowed or enforceable in the event of a dispute.

It just goes to show that at the end of the day, we rely mostly on the goodwill and integrity of the sites we join, which fortunately on here a least, are in plentiful supply.

 

[SkBurner]

It's bat sh*t crazy that eCogra have officially stated advantage play is fraud, wtf? The guy was attempting to take advantage of a bonus that has a poorly written and vague term. Deposit needs to be refunded imo.

 

[aceking123]

im going to have a rethink about all my accounts here now although i havnt played at them for a month or so after reading this & ecorga , this is going to sway me for all account closures period across all microgaming sites (down load content ), this is quite shocking to me ive been playing online for over 15 years on & off

it now looks like the seal is just a load of bullshit

 

[KasinoKing]

It's bat sh*t crazy that eCogra have officially stated advantage play is fraud, wtf? The guy was attempting to take advantage of a bonus that has a poorly written and vague term. Deposit needs to be refunded imo.

I disagree.
Deposits AND winnings need to be refunded.

KK

 

[SkBurner]

I disagree.
Deposits AND winnings need to be refunded.

KK

I do see why you think that KK.

But re-reading what Max wrote earlier makes it clear the guy went through a few of their casino's on the welcome bonus with big bets. He ended up striking lucky and then tried to grind it out by betting as little or as much as he could to escape having the term invoked. That's how I'm reading it anyway.

Is 67% a substantial reduction in bet? I say it is, 67% is substantial (rough %'s btw!).

I do not agree to keeping his deposit and do think the term is not becoming of an Accredited casino here at CM.

 

[skiny]

I do see why you think that KK.

But re-reading what Max wrote earlier makes it clear the guy went through a few of their casino's on the welcome bonus with big bets. He ended up striking lucky and then tried to grind it out by betting as little or as much as he could to escape having the term invoked. That's how I'm reading it anyway.

Is 67% a substantial reduction in bet? I say it is, 67% is substantial (rough %'s btw!).

I do not agree to keeping his deposit and do think the term is not becoming of an Accredited casino here at CM.

3 dollars per spin is too low to satisfy this casino?

I sat through almost 400 spins last night and never hit a bonus feature playing an MGS slot game.

So I bet 10 dollars per spin and win 5 or 600 bucks and then lose it all 400 spins later playing 3 dollar spins but that's not good enough. You were supposed to be broke 200 spins ago.

If you spin ANY slot game long enough you'll go broke. The only problem is the player cashed out before it happened and the casino doesn't like that.

As for eCogra suggesting this is fraudulent activity, that's just a quick way to damage their own reputation. Don't pretend you're looking after player's interests and then label a player a fraudster because of the size of his wagers.

There's a B&M casino about 20 minutes from me. I'm going to head down there, spin five twenty dollar spins and then start spinning quarters. We'll see if security shows up and calls the police.

 

[KasinoKing]

But re-reading what Max wrote earlier makes it clear the guy went through a few of their casino's on the welcome bonus with big bets. He ended up striking lucky and then tried to grind it out by betting as little or as much as he could to escape having the term invoked. That's how I'm reading it anyway.

I don't care if he is an advantage player trying it on at every casino on the net, the point is, he did not break any specific, non-ambiguous terms.
The rule is total bullshit and IMHO has no place being in the T&Cs of a CasinoMeister Accredited casino.
Read my earlier post in this thread about it being a "win-win" situation for the casino.

KK

 

[Dinahnana]

OP is an advantage player in this case but that does not make him a criminal. OP must have been mad as hell when he got the reply back from egora labeling him a fraudster.
As far as the casino goes they have their ambiguous terms to justify the confiscation of funds and according to those terms the OP did break the rules. Nobody likes these terms (except of course the casino) and we are waiting to see if this group will redo them to be more precise and not open to interpretation. If not then they should no longer be accredited.

The OP does deserve his deposit back. OP did not commit fraud so there is no legal reason for casino to keep his deposit.

I think the best thing the casino should have done in this case was to pay OP in full and then close his account as they have identified him as an AP which is their right. They chose to go this route which has brought them a fair amount of bad press I should say.

On a side note does anybody know the stats on how often egora rules in favour of player as opposed to casino. I guess I am trying to ask is egora nothing more than a rubber stamp for casinos?

 

[SkBurner]

I can see the ill feeling on this one. From a search of this site and Google, FL has some history with vague terms and how they invoke them.

But at the end of the day the player signed up and accepted the terms. It was there when he signed up and it still remains now. If there was any doubt what 'substantial' means he should have checked with support and obtained written confirmation.

I've said in quite a few of my posts the term either needs to be re-written or go completely imo. I do not agree with it and from Bryan and Max's posts neither do they.

I would appeal to Bryan to resolve this ASAP with regards the vague term as I'm pretty sure 100% of the posters on this thread agree it should be altered and ultimately does not meet Accreditation standards.

 

[Casinomeister]

I don't care if he is an advantage player trying it on at every casino on the net, the point is, he did not break any specific, non-ambiguous terms.
The rule is total bullshit and IMHO has no place being in the T&Cs of a CasinoMeister Accredited casino.
Read my earlier post in this thread about it being a "win-win" situation for the casino.

KK

But he did break the casino's terms and conditions - terms that he agreed to when he signed up.

He had opened accounts at a number of Digimedia casinos, and did the same thing. If he lost, he didn't return and moved on to the next. Those accounts are locked, why isn't he complaining about them? If he was a player playing for entertainment's sake, you'd think he'd bitch and moan about those. But I'm speculating there.

The term that is being enforced is the following:

1.3.1. We may refuse to register you as a Player or elect to deregister and exclude you or suspend you as a Player from the Casino at any time if we deem that your participation at the Casino is, shall be or has been previously, in any way not for personal entertainment [i.e. professional], fraudulent, illegal or that your participation is or has been abusive, collusive or irregular in any way.”

I agree that the term is wide-sweeping, but it is clear on a few things specifically fraudulent, illegal, or collusive activity. What is subjective are terms like irregular, abusive (unless of course it's verbal abuse) and "personal entertainment". In my opinion, the 1.3.1 term should be rephrased to alleviate any question on what is disallowed activity. I've been informed by the Fortune Lounge rep that these are being revised.

They conclude that he was not a casual player because of the activity at all the other accounts. Therefore he was booted and his winnings were confiscated.

Where the fraud is concerned, I'm not fully certain, but we were informed that the player is from a syndicate based in the Czech Republic so this may be the "fraud" that eCogra is referring to - I'm not sure. There may be other details that I haven't looked into yet. If there is fraud involved, then the player is SOL on his deposits.

 

[Casinomeister]

Again, I think a number of people are jumping to conclusions when you don't have all the facts. I would recommend not doing so.

The real issue in my opinion is the removal of terms that accredited casinos shouldn't have.

 

[lnspin]

I want to ask a question…

Who gambles for entertainment.. When I gamble i Play to win..

If i want to be entertained i would play my x box, hell of a lot cheaper, even if i buy a new game a day

 

[incrediblestuff]

I want to ask a question…

Who gambles for entertainment.. When I gamble i Play to win..

If i want to be entertained i would play my x box, hell of a lot cheaper, even if i buy a new game a day

Well it's more or less the same thing really, the "entertainment" is precisely the fact that you can win more then you are putting in on each bet..the rest is all make up, i.e., the slots graphics, themes, sounds and original bonuses and in a way the max hit potential are what make them more or less entertaining depending on the players preferences.

I also would like to add, that Casinos bloody well know that ALL gamblers are looking for a win, even if only virtual*, just for kicks, and the fact that they put their money on the line, to get those kicks should make it obvious, since as a rule, no one really likes to throw away their money for a few virtual bells, lights and whistles, so to speak. (there are exceptions to every "rule" but i bet that not one Casino out there could make a decent living if they only wanted that handful of customers)

Of course if this is someone that is part of such an AP or worse, fraudulent money launderers ring, i could totally understand the Casino point of view, but this needs to be proven, before they could even think of confiscating any deposit, so i am curious to see how this pans out.

But i also would like very much to see those vague rules disappear, as i think people always are looking for transparency.
How hard can it be, with so any professionals for all these years, no one has yet made some "universal" ruleset which can be used by all honest Casinos?

I personally am sick of threads and stories where it's Player vs. Casino over unclear Terms and Conditions
Maybe we should start a thread where a few or better many of us could generate such a set of rules?



*referring to the more recent trend where people actually put in real money to buy play money which cannot be turned into real money again, like those FB JPP slots for instance.

 

[skiny]

Personally, I don't really understand collusion.

If ten of us here decide to take a welcome bonus, play within the terms and conditions and keep are winnings the casino is happy.

If we do the same thing and split our winnings the casino is not?

Am I missing something?

How does this change the TRTP?

How does this change what the casino took in and paid out?

I'm talking about solely playing slot games.

If 10 people walked into a B&M and did the same thing would the casino give them the boot?

 

[SkBurner]

Personally, I don't really understand collusion.

If ten of us here decide to take a welcome bonus, play within the terms and conditions and keep are winnings the casino is happy.

If we do the same thing and split our winnings the casino is not?

Am I missing something?

How does this change the TRTP?

How does this change what the casino took in and paid out?

I'm talking about solely playing slot games.

If 10 people walked into a B&M and did the same thing would the casino give them the boot?

From my understanding collusion only seems to occur when a bonus is on offer? They are effectively attempting to make it +EV.

Also fraud where they are playing with stolen funds or money laundering.

 

[skiny]

From my understanding collusion only seems to occur when a bonus is on offer? They are effectively attempting to make it +EV.

Also fraud where they are playing with stolen funds or money laundering.

I still don't understand how it helps if 10 of us make deposits and take bonuses and then split the profit.

Even if you've created a bonus system that can be beaten if the player follows a specific betting pattern, 10 people doing it and keeping their winnings and 10 people doing it and splitting their winnings still changes nothing.

There's nothing the player can do to change the TRTP of a slot game.

If I bet high for 20 spins and then low for 200 and then high for 20 and low for 200 I'm not having any effect on the TRTP of the slot. I'm just hoping to hell I hit something on one of those 20 spins and after a few million spins it's all supposed to average out. That's the way casinos are supposed to make money. The games are designed to return 3, 4 or 5% back to the casino over the long term.

If a few players figure out a way to beat your welcome bonus, you pay them and create a better welcome bonus. That means % of deposit and wage requirements.

How many times do you see these 100% slots only deposit bonuses with a 30xD+B WR? If I deposit 100 and you give me 100 that's 6k I have to wager. With a 97% RTP after 6000 $1 spins I have about 20 bucks left.

Sure it's possible I could hit something huge and cash out. That's why we do it. If that possibility didn't exist the casino wouldn't have any players. But over the long term with a TRTP of 97% this bonus should earn the casino money regardless of how many people split their profits.

If anyone can explain to me how 10 people taking a bonus and splitting their winnings or 10 people taking bonuses and keeping their winnings is any different for the casino, I'd love to hear it. Mathematically it just doesn't seem to make any difference to me.

 

[ChillBill]

A hasty post without reading CM's above. I've sinced edited out some thoughts.

The guy was attempting to take advantage of a bonus

This term AP is to casinos, what snake oil is to grifters.
Worse, the player community has adopted (errr swallowed this tripe, hook, line and sinker) and readily flags players as AP. As skiny states below:

I think before people operate casinos or work for a "player protection agency" they should first understand the concept of gambling...... Do these people even understand that we're trying to win?

I think FL get it for sure, that's why they have this FU term in place!

If the 30x wagering, excluding games and whatever else a casino can devise to hobble player withdrawals on comps/bonuses doesn't succeed, then these ambiguos FU clauses, give casinos an Ace up their sleeve, to void winnings.

Additional Add

• A player using a stolen credit card, misappropriated funds etc etc is fraud.
• Supplying false information, with the objective to opening multiple accounts, to receive multiple bonuses (could be deemed fraud).
• Depositing money into a casino, taking a bonus and winning is gambling - Big f-ing difference and is most certainly not fraud.

If a casino has ambiguos terms, they pay the player, then fix up their T&C issue. They don't do what FL is doing now and btw, reading back over threads, it's not the 1'st time FL have pulled this stunt. Makes me wonder (and hopefully you too), WHY this FU term, has not been fixed???

Also imo it's all too simple, easy, convenient for casinos to go the sydicate path, especially when a player comes from a known hot spot. Not every in Russia is a spammer and not everyone in hot-spots are crooks!