Betsson seized my deposit (1100 euro)

[Nifty29]

Sorry for my late reply. I had no internet this weekend.

Thanks for all your help and replies. Espacially vinylweatherman, I think you are right in this matter.

My deposit minus fees minus investigation costs back, seems reasonable (more reasonable than nothing) to me.

What do you think is the best to resolve this issue? Pitch a Bitch? Mail Betsson again?

1. Contact betsson rep via pm ( see I-gaming forum reps link above)

2. PAB if unsuccessful.

I think you're wasting your time......but since it is your time and not mine, then go ahead.

 

[rainmaker]

1. Contact betsson rep via pm ( see I-gaming forum reps link above)

2. PAB if unsuccessful.

I think you're wasting your time......but since it is your time and not mine, then go ahead.

Agree. PAB is unnecessary.

I did not find a rep from Betsson, anybody knows where he/she is hiding ?

 

[KasinoKing]

1. Contact betsson rep via pm ( see I-gaming forum reps link above)

2. PAB if unsuccessful.

I think you're wasting your time......but since it is your time and not mine, then go ahead.

I have to totally agree.
The OP admitted, not only using a Bot (against their T&Cs), but also trying to "launder" money through Betsson - (presumably against their T&Cs) and so the casino has the right to invoke the punishment which is clearly stated in their terms.
Personally I don't think he has a leg to stand on.

KK

 

[Casinomeister]

Actually, to nip this in the bud - this complaint isn't going anywhere. The OP has broken the terms and conditions - obviously. He was fully aware of them and he knew by using a bot the casino had the right to confiscate his winnings and deposits.

I can ask the casino to look into the matter of the reasons why the deposit was confiscated, but my guess is to recoup the expenses of dealing with a player who has seven pages of "the full story".

I'll check on this, but Max won't be dealing with a PAB. I hope you understand where I'm coming from

 

[vinylweatherman]

Actually, to nip this in the bud - this complaint isn't going anywhere. The OP has broken the terms and conditions - obviously. He was fully aware of them and he knew by using a bot the casino had the right to confiscate his winnings and deposits.

I can ask the casino to look into the matter of the reasons why the deposit was confiscated, but my guess is to recoup the expenses of dealing with a player who has seven pages of "the full story".

I'll check on this, but Max won't be dealing with a PAB. I hope you understand where I'm coming from

It may be that the deposit IS a fair sum to charge for the costs of remedying the breach, as allowed for in the terms.

Whilst the terms allow confiscation of the deposit, it is qualified by stating that this is ONLY done where it is necessary to recover the costs down to a breach.

One aspect is that not only did the OP foolishly use a bot, he "just happened to have one lying around" on his PC, making it the "lazy option".

This suggests that the OP may be a "habitual bot user", and has often used this ruse to fund Neteller via Betsson, and it is not JUST this incident that is being "punished", but that after some past instances, the casinos finally said "enough is enough", and acted pretty firmly.

Many casinos have a similar term, but it is VERY RARE for a DEPOSIT to be confiscated, so there must be something pretty exceptional about this case, as opposed to the usual "used a bot once because I was lazy" scenario.

Confiscating deposits without a VERY good reason is also bad PR for any casino, since it is "scary" enough that some casinos will confiscate winnings for "unclear" reasons, and a casino that readily confiscates deposits for relatively minor breaches is going to scare away players.

Given that this was bot play WITHOUT a bonus, this is a very MINOR breach, yet it is the reason given for confiscating the deposit. I can't see how they can justify confiscating €1100 for using a bot without a bonus, losing €50 in the process, and withdrawing the rest. Whilst the "laundering" aspect might be the real reason, the fact is they did NOT say this was so, they said the €1050 is the "fine" for using the bot, which is the proverbial "sledgehammer to crack a nut".

 

[Nifty29]

Vinyl, I'm surprised you're kinda standing up for this guy still.

For all we know, this player may have done all this before at bettson and been warned. After all, the ' full story' is 7 pages long and, no doubt, full of the OPs version of the truth. Considering he then condensed this into one post, I'm sure he only, once again, gave his OWN version of his OWN version which is probably even further from the truth.

It is down to twits like this that there are so many damn terms for players to wade through......if players just deposited and played without trying to pull stunts all the time, half the threads here about payout disputes wouldn't exist.

Honest players should be ANGRY at players like the OP and be supporting casinos when they take a tough stand.

 

[Gret]

Vinyl, I'm surprised you're kinda standing up for this guy still.

For all we know, this player may have done all this before at bettson and been warned. After all, the ' full story' is 7 pages long and, no doubt, full of the OPs version of the truth. Considering he then condensed this into one post, I'm sure he only, once again, gave his OWN version of his OWN version which is probably even further from the truth.

It is down to twits like this that there are so many damn terms for players to wade through......if players just deposited and played without trying to pull stunts all the time, half the threads here about payout disputes wouldn't exist.

Honest players should be ANGRY at players like the OP and be supporting casinos when they take a tough stand.

You can say that again!

What the heck is the matter with people. The T&C said what would happen if he did something, he did it, it happened, and now the casino is not playing by the rules? Come on....

 

[kangamick]

I must admit i'm guilty of something similar. I once made a $800 deposit to Full tilt poker via moneybookers so i could withdraw via neteller.

I wanted my money in neteller because I have a neteller card and would be able to withdraw from a ATM machine instantly.

After giving a little action, FT cancelled my withdraw and sent an email saying if i do this again they would close my account and take all fees out that they had incurred and return whats left of my deposit. This to me seems fair and thank god they didn't keep all of my deposit and gave me a second chance.

 

[Mr_Zoidberg]

Actually, to nip this in the bud - this complaint isn't going anywhere. The OP has broken the terms and conditions - obviously. He was fully aware of them and he knew by using a bot the casino had the right to confiscate his winnings and deposits.

I can ask the casino to look into the matter of the reasons why the deposit was confiscated, but my guess is to recoup the expenses of dealing with a player who has seven pages of "the full story".

I'll check on this, but Max won't be dealing with a PAB. I hope you understand where I'm coming from

Thanks for looking into this. The "full story" is about all the effort it took to get an decent reply/reason from Betsson for confiscating my deposit. It includes many email and livechat conversation. In the full story you can see how Betsson played with me. So the full story does not bring new facts it just give you a picture of how rude Betsson treated me...

@Nifty29: Please stop making false accusations. Betsson never warned me, they've just took my deposit.

@vinylweatherman: I made 2 deposits of 500e with paysafe before (and lost approx 150e).

 

[vinylweatherman]

Vinyl, I'm surprised you're kinda standing up for this guy still.

For all we know, this player may have done all this before at bettson and been warned. After all, the ' full story' is 7 pages long and, no doubt, full of the OPs version of the truth. Considering he then condensed this into one post, I'm sure he only, once again, gave his OWN version of his OWN version which is probably even further from the truth.

It is down to twits like this that there are so many damn terms for players to wade through......if players just deposited and played without trying to pull stunts all the time, half the threads here about payout disputes wouldn't exist.

Honest players should be ANGRY at players like the OP and be supporting casinos when they take a tough stand.

There is no proof of FRAUD, and confiscating the ENTIRE deposit is NOT actually allowed for in the terms and conditions in any case. The term only refers to "recovery of costs", so in order to justify taking "costs" of €1050 from the withdrawal, they need to provide some kind of invoice of charges.

The player was NEVER charged with the more SERIOUS offence of using the account merely to transfer money from gift cards to Neteller, but for the TRIVIAL offence of using a bot ONCE through laziness, and since he LOST €50, and no bonus was involved, there are no "costs" to claim back from the DEPOSIT.

NO business is allowed BY LAW to take a customers' money, and THEN decline to provide the service paid for - it's called THEFT, and is THEFT whether the business does it, or whether the CUSTOMER does it (for example, by taking the service, and then charging back the money paid).

If we are going to accept that casinos can simply help themselves to whatever they find in a players account because they broke a term, then we must accept that PLAYERS too have a right to "charge back" monies where the CASINO didn't abide by the rules, and this includes the rules in the PLAYERS' own jurisdiction, not just the ones the CASINO has.

We should NOT be backing casinos who confiscate deposits merely for a "breach of contract", this penalty should ONLY be applied when outright FRAUD has been detected. Softening this to widen the scope of when it is permissible to seize deposits to cover "breach of contract" is the start of a movement in the WRONG direction, and will encourage operators to travel even further down the path, and we will see ever more ridiculous excuses for confiscating deposits and winnings in the future.

Even with outright FRAUD, most casinos STILL return the DEPOSIT to the player before closing their account, and adding their details to whatever "blacklist" they use.

 

[Nifty29]

What's with the law stuff Vinyl?

None of us are lawyers so its pointless using our own interpretations of 'the law' as basis for an argument. I say ' the law' because every country is different especially when it comes to gambling related matters and online commerce in general.

For example, can you quote the relevant Act in the relevant jurisdiction that says Bettsson can't confiscate the funds. It states in their terms, which the OP agreed to, that they CAN keep the money as 'damages' (not COSTS). The amount of these damages is determined by Bettsson, being ' the final decision makers'. If the OP doesn't like that he shouldn't have signed up.

You see, the average player doesn't have to WORRY about these clauses because the average player just wants to deposit and play and occasionally win. Only players who try to pull stunts, like the OP, have to worry....and personally I dont give a toss what happens to them because THEY are the reason we have 30x WR and FBI-style ID checks and pages of rules to follow.

The OP did the wrong thing on several levels - which he has admitted - and now his beef is that Bettsson took too long to reply and weren't very nice when they did. Boo hoo!!

I'm glad Max isnt accepting a PAB as it would be time that could be spent on someone with a LEGITIMATE complaint.

 

[vinylweatherman]

What's with the law stuff Vinyl?

None of us are lawyers so its pointless using our own interpretations of 'the law' as basis for an argument. I say ' the law' because every country is different especially when it comes to gambling related matters and online commerce in general.

For example, can you quote the relevant Act in the relevant jurisdiction that says Bettsson can't confiscate the funds. It states in their terms, which the OP agreed to, that they CAN keep the money as 'damages' (not COSTS). The amount of these damages is determined by Bettsson, being ' the final decision makers'. If the OP doesn't like that he shouldn't have signed up.

You see, the average player doesn't have to WORRY about these clauses because the average player just wants to deposit and play and occasionally win. Only players who try to pull stunts, like the OP, have to worry....and personally I dont give a toss what happens to them because THEY are the reason we have 30x WR and FBI-style ID checks and pages of rules to follow.

The OP did the wrong thing on several levels - which he has admitted - and now his beef is that Bettsson took too long to reply and weren't very nice when they did. Boo hoo!!

I'm glad Max isnt accepting a PAB as it would be time that could be spent on someone with a LEGITIMATE complaint.

Max isn't accepting a PAB because the OP decided to take it to the forum.

I bet you will feel differently when a casino confiscates your deposit for "damages".

The OP could always take this up with the Gift Card company, since they spent the cards, but didn't get the service. HIS law would apply to the gift cards, not the casino's. He could even go back to the bank, and claim that his money was taken by a merchant of the gift card company, and that this was unlawful.

This will hurt Betsson more than just returning the deposit, even though it will probably cause problems for the OP later on.

The law is incredibly versatile, even on the internet. If you can't get one company in the chain, you go for the one before, until you reach one that has to obey the laws of YOUR country.

The claim that using a bot WITHOUT a bonus causes "damage" is a load of bollocks - it just makes the player lose faster.

Casinos shouldn't be confiscating deposits at all, it is bad enough that players face losing their winnings at the whim of management, often due to vague clauses and breaching various "spirits".

As for transferring money through the casino to Neteller (which they did NOT cite as a breach) does NOT cost "damages" to the tune of 100% of the deposit.

 

[Nifty29]

Max isn't accepting a PAB because the OP decided to take it to the forum.

I bet you will feel differently when a casino confiscates your deposit for "damages".

The OP could always take this up with the Gift Card company, since they spent the cards, but didn't get the service. HIS law would apply to the gift cards, not the casino's. He could even go back to the bank, and claim that his money was taken by a merchant of the gift card company, and that this was unlawful.

This will hurt Betsson more than just returning the deposit, even though it will probably cause problems for the OP later on.

The law is incredibly versatile, even on the internet. If you can't get one company in the chain, you go for the one before, until you reach one that has to obey the laws of YOUR country.

The claim that using a bot WITHOUT a bonus causes "damage" is a load of bollocks - it just makes the player lose faster.

Casinos shouldn't be confiscating deposits at all, it is bad enough that players face losing their winnings at the whim of management, often due to vague clauses and breaching various "spirits".

As for transferring money through the casino to Neteller (which they did NOT cite as a breach) does NOT cost "damages" to the tune of 100% of the deposit.

Well we just don't agree on this one mate. No biggie

Just one thing though. The PAB was scuttled by Bryan before it began based solely on the OP admitting he broke several terms. It was not a case of the OP choosing to go public as a PAB was never going to be entertained anyway.

 

[rainmaker]

VWM quote "NO business is allowed BY LAW to take a customers' money"

I must agree with Nifty about this. It is really no point to use "the law" as reference when not talking about a concrete law in a specific juristriction.

 

[jod5413]

Thanks for looking into this. The "full story" is about all the effort it took to get an decent reply/reason from Betsson for confiscating my deposit. It includes many email and livechat conversation. In the full story you can see how Betsson played with me. So the full story does not bring new facts it just give you a picture of how rude Betsson treated me...

@Nifty29: Please stop making false accusations. Betsson never warned me, they've just took my deposit.

@vinylweatherman: I made 2 deposits of 500e with paysafe before (and lost approx 150e).

This entire thread is ridiculous. Mr. Z broke the terms by using a bot. For that alone he should lose his winnings and his account.

He also laundered money, which he knew was wrong. I think he deserves to lose everything.

Maybe that's harsh, but it is really getting old to see casinos screw players over and being chastised by the membership here and then a casino gets tarred and feathered for actually standing up for themselves. If it is good for the goose,it is good for the gander.

Money laundering.

Using a bot, which is specifically NOT allowed.

WTH

 

[vinylweatherman]

This entire thread is ridiculous. Mr. Z broke the terms by using a bot. For that alone he should lose his winnings and his account.

He also laundered money, which he knew was wrong. I think he deserves to lose everything.

Maybe that's harsh, but it is really getting old to see casinos screw players over and being chastised by the membership here and then a casino gets tarred and feathered for actually standing up for themselves. If it is good for the goose,it is good for the gander.

Money laundering.

Using a bot, which is specifically NOT allowed.

WTH

This is the "wild west mentality", with the justification for doing something being "because I can".

What about when the roles of Goose and Gander are reversed, and a rogue player screws over a casino "because they can". The casino does NOT like this one bit, and will often go to great lengths to "get revenge".

If operators want to get players out of the "wild west" mindset of getting away with stuff just because they think they can, they too must resist the temptation to use the fact that the internet makes it very hard to enforce any laws.

This is not really "money laundering", since this is not "dirty" money at all, it is simply the players' own money that he wants to move from one of his accounts to another, and just as any good business would do, he looks for the CHEAPEST way to achieve this. The BANKS do this to us all the time, starting with the bogus 3-4 days it takes to "clear a payment" from one account to another in this age of instant electronic transactions, since this allows them to lodge OUR money on short term deposit and steal OUR interest payments due over those 4 days for their OWN benefit. They only get away with this "because they can", and not because we are OK with it.

The bot use is nothing more than a breach of the terms, nothing that would warrant the "nuclear option" of reactions used in this case.

This kind of action could make matters WORSE for the industry, as it provides an easy moral excuse for countries to ban online operations BECAUSE they are out of the reach of the law, and will even confiscate a players DEPOSIT for whatever infringement they like, and know they can get away with it.

The US had to drum up a number of "excuses" to justify their vendetta against online gambling, and the behaviour of some elements of the industry validated many of these excuses, and made it easier to push the ban through without having to reveal the REAL reasons behind it in a form that was "on the record".

Now players have even MORE to worry about than mere confiscation of winnings.

 

[Nifty29]

This is the "wild west mentality", with the justification for doing something being "because I can".

What about when the roles of Goose and Gander are reversed, and a rogue player screws over a casino "because they can". The casino does NOT like this one bit, and will often go to great lengths to "get revenge".

If operators want to get players out of the "wild west" mindset of getting away with stuff just because they think they can, they too must resist the temptation to use the fact that the internet makes it very hard to enforce any laws.

This is not really "money laundering", since this is not "dirty" money at all, it is simply the players' own money that he wants to move from one of his accounts to another, and just as any good business would do, he looks for the CHEAPEST way to achieve this. The BANKS do this to us all the time, starting with the bogus 3-4 days it takes to "clear a payment" from one account to another in this age of instant electronic transactions, since this allows them to lodge OUR money on short term deposit and steal OUR interest payments due over those 4 days for their OWN benefit. They only get away with this "because they can", and not because we are OK with it.

The bot use is nothing more than a breach of the terms, nothing that would warrant the "nuclear option" of reactions used in this case.

This kind of action could make matters WORSE for the industry, as it provides an easy moral excuse for countries to ban online operations BECAUSE they are out of the reach of the law, and will even confiscate a players DEPOSIT for whatever infringement they like, and know they can get away with it.

The US had to drum up a number of "excuses" to justify their vendetta against online gambling, and the behaviour of some elements of the industry validated many of these excuses, and made it easier to push the ban through without having to reveal the REAL reasons behind it in a form that was "on the record".

Now players have even MORE to worry about than mere confiscation of winnings.

Sorry Vinyl. You've lost me.

If the player had NOT broken any SPECIFIC terms i.e if it was a spirit of the bonus situatiob, then I could understand your stance.

However, they DID clearly breach the terms and were dealt with according to those terms. Whether a bot is a losing proposition for the player is irrelevant - it is just simply NOT ALLOWED.

The case is SO clear cut that Bryan has stated he won't even accept a PAB......and that is something he RARELY does. Speaks volumes IMO.

I'm still astounded that you can see the player as a victim in this case. You have generalized the issue and basically said that "all players are now in danger of confiscation".....the ONLY people that need be concerned about confiscation are those that DELIBERATELY break the rules. The average player has NOTHING to fear. It's been 12 years for me with NO confiscation/denials of winnings.....and yet some people just seem to run into issues all the time. If you continually skate on thin ice you will eventually fall through.

 

[rainmaker]

That is true Nifty. It is strange that some people "always" has an ongoing issue where funds has been denied/confiscated or whatever.

I have been gambling every single month for 10 years without any problems related to my funds (actually a few more years, I used my father's credit card when I was under 18. Do not tell anyone ). Not a single problem related to my funds!

 

[jod5413]

VWM'

I "know" he was not really laundering money (if I believe the player), he knew he shouldn't do that kind of thing, if no other reason that the casino might see it as money laundering.

I "also know" bots do not really give a player an advantage but, they ARE against the casino's rules.

It is that simple to me. I am not talking about any other situation, only this one. And the player screwed up. And the casino has the absolute right to take care of him as they did.

 

[vinylweatherman]

VWM'

I "know" he was not really laundering money (if I believe the player), he knew he shouldn't do that kind of thing, if no other reason that the casino might see it as money laundering.

I "also know" bots do not really give a player an advantage but, they ARE against the casino's rules.

It is that simple to me. I am not talking about any other situation, only this one. And the player screwed up. And the casino has the absolute right to take care of him as they did.

..but confiscating the DEPOSIT!!!!

This has to be a FIRST, as normally it is WINNINGS that end up getting confiscated, account closed, and deposit returned. This even happens in FAR WORSE situations, where there has REALLY been an attempt to screw a casino.

What about the students at Club World, they CLEARLY broke the terms, and that thread was controversial enough, even though it was WINNINGS that were confiscated. Had Club World confiscated the DEPOSITS of these students, I am sure there would have been an outcry.

Cassava have stated that players who continue to open accouts at other casinos using their software after having been banned from one for "bonus abuse" will have their DEPOSITS confiscated, yet this was NOT OK by any means, yet somehow IS OK in THIS case.

This is what I am getting at. There are MANY cases where players violate various terms, and often they end up getting their winnings confiscated as a result, but we almost never hear of a DEPOSIT getting confiscated except in the very WORST cases, usually where criminal fraud has been attempted.

This is sanctioning deposit confiscation for a run-of-the-mill violation of terms and conditions, with nothing fraudulent intended. It sets a boundary that other operators will no doubt try to push even further, and justify even more deposit confiscations for minor breaches of the terms.

This casino seems to think it a minor matter to help themselves to €1100 simply because the player played under 200 hands of Blackjack with a bot, yet they would have a fit were a player to charge back their losses just because THEY deemed the casino to be in breach of something relatively minor, such as rude or unresponsive CS, blaming the loss on wrong information supplied by CS - all complaints previously seen on the forum, and where some players HAVE threatened to deal with the casino through making a chargeback, rather than trying to reach an agreement.

It may be a simple solution for the casino in this case, but they have chipped away further the trust players have gambling over the internet, and I bet we will see MORE players playing "hardball" with casinos when the CASINO gets it wrong, and LESS patience in coming to an agreement. From some posts, this already seems to be happening, with a few players not giving the casino ANY chance to put things right before they fire at them with both barrels on the forums, and threaten (even implement) chargebacks almost as routine.

This lack of patience shows that trust is much lower than in the past, and these players think they have already been screwed, and that any attempt by the casino to sort the issue out is nothing more than them "stalling for time".

If this is the culmination of a number of incidents, how come this player was not ALREADY locked out, well BEFORE this last incident.

Any member who supports the casino in this case should not complain if they too have their deposits confiscated for breaching a term.

 

[jod5413]

VWM

This is sanctioning deposit confiscation for a run-of-the-mill violation of terms and conditions, with nothing fraudulent intended

Once again, I am not speaking about any other circumstance. This situation only.

And no, I do not think that it sets a precedent for other casinos to "screw over the players" about other minor "misunderstandings".

It is plain to me that if a casino screws up, crucify them. If a player screws up, he should not have to pay for any or all consequences.

Can not have it both ways.

JMO

 

[Nifty29]

Vinyl, I agree with you in regards to not confiscating the deposit in most cases, except as you stated for criminal fraud etc.

However, whether we think its a good idea or not, the terms clearly provide for the casino to deduct ANY money from the account that they see fit as costs AND 'damages'. It may nobe an acceptable term, but the player DID accept it when setting up his account. It doesnt matter about what countries laws make it illegal to make customers accept such terms - and I know that some do - as this case will never see a courtroom even if it could be determined WHICH courtroom to bring it to.

We need to be aware that the OP is NOT an average player who accidentally played the wrong game with a bonus or something. He admitted to using a bot which is a big no-no st every casino I know......and unless the OP was born yesterday he would have KNOWN that. Don't confuse this guy with the average punter like yourself or jod or I. We don't have to worry about such terms because we play by the rules. I'll bet London to a brick that it isn't the first time the OP has run into problems with a casino.

As I stated earlier, if you are going to play 'on the edge' all the time then you shouldn't expect sympathy when you fall off.

I can see that the casino may have sent a message by keeping the deposit.....I'll bet nobody would try pulling a stunt there after reading this thread so from a deterrent point of view it is a smart move. Why should scammers etc get a 'free shot' by always having their money refunded when their scheme goes pear shaped? It's almost an invitation to try a different scam, if not there then somewhere else.

 

[ksech]

I've been following this thread daily (or trying to with the forum updates ). I can see where VWM is coming from, BUT I think in this isolated case, the OP knew exactly what he was doing (he even admits to using a bot... which is forbidden. And he admits to, IMO, "small time money laundering".) Instead of stereotyping what CAN happen, presume that this casino is making this player an example of what will happen when you knowingly break the rules.

It would be different if the T&Cs had "cleverly" hidden these terms, but they didn't. The OP accepted and acknowledged he knew he was breaking terms. Do I think the OP should receive ANY money back? NO. Do I think the OP has tried this at other casinos and gotten away with it, so he tried this casino? YES. I think he is a scammer of the worst kind, which makes it more and more difficult for the average player. Players, such as the OP, are why we have mega-paged T&Cs to wallow through, high WR on bonuses, and casinos who make you jump through hoops to get verified.

Go back and peruse 2 and 3 year old threads. There isn't nearly as many piss and moan threads about casinos who confiscate winnings over stupid shit. And look how many newbies have filed or have attempted to file PABS in the last 6 months. Obviously, the "elders" of CM may be more cautious, more knoweldgeable, or something. Look at how many of the CM members who have been here 4 or more years who have NEVER filed a PAB. To me this says something. So, IMO, the casino did the right thing in THIS instance.

 

[Gret]

I've been following this thread daily (or trying to with the forum updates ). I can see where VWM is coming from, BUT I think in this isolated case, the OP knew exactly what he was doing (he even admits to using a bot... which is forbidden. And he admits to, IMO, "small time money laundering".) Instead of stereotyping what CAN happen, presume that this casino is making this player an example of what will happen when you knowingly break the rules.

It would be different if the T&Cs had "cleverly" hidden these terms, but they didn't. The OP accepted and acknowledged he knew he was breaking terms. Do I think the OP should receive ANY money back? NO. Do I think the OP has tried this at other casinos and gotten away with it, so he tried this casino? YES. I think he is a scammer of the worst kind, which makes it more and more difficult for the average player. Players, such as the OP, are why we have mega-paged T&Cs to wallow through, high WR on bonuses, and casinos who make you jump through hoops to get verified.

Go back and peruse 2 and 3 year old threads. There isn't nearly as many piss and moan threads about casinos who confiscate winnings over stupid shit. And look how many newbies have filed or have attempted to file PABS in the last 6 months. Obviously, the "elders" of CM may be more cautious, more knoweldgeable, or something. Look at how many of the CM members who have been here 4 or more years who have NEVER filed a PAB. To me this says something. So, IMO, the casino did the right thing in THIS instance.

You rang the bell...plus hit a home run! There is absolutely nothing left to be said about the matter, except....

If you want to run with the big horses, you have to p^%$ with them too. Their is no crying foul when you try to cheat, get caught, and lose.

 

[Przecinek]

Interesting thread. From a theroretical point of view since the case itself seems more or less clear.

I would side with VWM when it comes to the fact that you can't really say that all this discussion relates only to this one particular case.
Very often matters aren't as obvious, however resolution is similar (winnings void, in rare cases along with the deposit).
What happens if a casino decides to simply accuse player of using a bot without any proof, and then take his or her deposit?
We know there had been such cases here @ CM. Not too many (in comparison with bogus pabs and real bot users that didn't want to confess) but still.
We know this can and does happen. Casino Support is not omniscient and can make mistakes.
I'm guessing VWM speaks for those players (that can be unfairly accused with little proof).

To me it looks like Betsson thinks Zoidberg was doing real money laundering (with "dirty" money) rather than converting his own money from one type of wallet to another.
This could mean that either we don't know the full side of the story, or Betsson has quickly jumped to the conclusion that this is the case, and decided to take the most radical approach.

Having said that...it's hard not to notice that Zoidbergr didn't have any winnings (actually a -150€ loss) so casino didn't many options left, when it comes to punishing player for breaking t&c.