Betsson seized my deposit (1100 euro)

[Mr_Zoidberg]

I always thought that Betsson was one of the most reputable casino group. I’ve created my account in november 2007 and I never had any bad experiences with Betsson. I've always trusted them, until now...

It is a very long and complicated story. I'll just give you the bottemline (I have a 7 pages Word document with the full story).

In december 2010 I had some cash that I needed to get in mij Neteller wallet. The easiest way was to buy some Paysafe vouchers, deposit it to a casino and withdraw it to Neteller. I choose to deposit the 1k in Paysafe vouchers and 100e by Neteller at Betsson. I thought it would be fair to generate some action at the casino. To speed things up I used a blackjack bot (I know this is questionable). In the end I've wagered around 2-3k on blackjack and 100 on slots. I had lost 50 euros and cashed out 1.050 euro to Neteller.

Then the problems started. My account was locked and reopened over and over again (phone verification, docs needed they already had, different cash out method). After a month Betsson support called me to tell me that my account was locked again and that I did not get my money because of "fraudulent play", "No discussion", "Decision is final". I could not believe it and I've mailed and called them several times, but with no results.

Back in January I was going to put the whole story including chat transcripts on Casinomeister. But before submitting it, I decided to mail the whole post to Betsson to give them a last chance to solve everything. Finaly they gave me an concrete, although unsatisfying, reply: you have used a bot = fraudulent play -> we keep al your deposited money (1.100e).

I agree that bots can be questionable, especially when there are bonuses involved. However, in my opinion, bots have nothing in common with fraud, nor is it a good reason to seize my deposits.

What do you guys think? Any chance that I will get my money back?

 

[rainmaker]

Hello,

As stated in their T&C

3.1.9.
You shall not be involved in any fraudulent, collusive, fixing or other unlawful activity in relation to Your or third parties’ participation in any of the Games and shall not use any software-assisted methods or techniques or hardware devices for Your participation in any of the Games. BETSSON hereby reserves the right to invalidate or close Your Member Account or invalidate Your participation in a Game in the event of such behaviour;


It is quite clear that they prohibits the use of a boot. They confiscation looks valid.

My personal opinion is that a boot only will help you to lose faster (statistically speaking). But anyway, they don`t want players to use it and that is very understandable.

 

[SlotMonster]

LOL, you broke T&C and still in hope to get your money back!

Forget about it! It's your fault that you didn't read their T&C!

 

[Nifty29]

I always thought that Betsson was one of the most reputable casino group. I’ve created my account in november 2007 and I never had any bad experiences with Betsson. I've always trusted them, until now...

It is a very long and complicated story. I'll just give you the bottemline (I have a 7 pages Word document with the full story).

In december 2010 I had some cash that I needed to get in mij Neteller wallet. The easiest way was to buy some Paysafe vouchers, deposit it to a casino and withdraw it to Neteller. I choose to deposit the 1k in Paysafe vouchers and 100e by Neteller at Betsson. I thought it would be fair to generate some action at the casino. To speed things up I used a blackjack bot (I know this is questionable). In the end I've wagered around 2-3k on blackjack and 100 on slots. I had lost 50 euros and cashed out 1.050 euro to Neteller.

Then the problems started. My account was locked and reopened over and over again (phone verification, docs needed they already had, different cash out method). After a month Betsson support called me to tell me that my account was locked again and that I did not get my money because of "fraudulent play", "No discussion", "Decision is final". I could not believe it and I've mailed and called them several times, but with no results.

Back in January I was going to put the whole story including chat transcripts on Casinomeister. But before submitting it, I decided to mail the whole post to Betsson to give them a last chance to solve everything. Finaly they gave me an concrete, although unsatisfying, reply: you have used a bot = fraudulent play -> we keep al your deposited money (1.100e).

I agree that bots can be questionable, especially when there are bonuses involved. However, in my opinion, bots have nothing in common with fraud, nor is it a good reason to seize my deposits.

What do you guys think? Any chance that I will get my money back?

Using bots is against the rules at every casino I know of.

You KNEW it too - but you 'rolled the dice' anyway and got caught.

If you were only going to wager your deposit a few times, what on earth possessed you to use a BOT? Laziness? Lapse of judgement?

Either way your chances of getting your money back is ZERO (if the terms provide for that).

Personally I'm not comfortable with confiscation of deposits in these cases, only winnings, however you agreed to the terms when you signed up so you can't now decide that you don't.

I think the whole transfer to neteller via casino accounts and vouchers is odd too. Neteller has lots of funding methods so can't see why its necessary.

You could try contacting the rep or using the PAB service.

 

[Mr_Zoidberg]

Thanks for your responses. It seems that I'm in deeper shit than I thought.

I never knew that a casino would confiscate deposits if you break their T&C. That seems very odd to me

 

[rainmaker]

Of course they will confiscate your deposit. Thats not odd at all.

You can not break a T&C without any consequences. That would be pretty pointless. I am sure you are able to imagine why

 

[BingoT]

It's just to bad you never looked at them T&C's
It's a lesson learned for ya sorry to say.
Nothing odd about it at all because if you buy a piece real estate & you break the lenders terms what does that lender do.......Take Your Property because you broke the contract agreement.

Everyone should take 10 minutes of their lives and read this stuff before you start.It's sucks but this is life.
Maybe the casino Rep will help you more for you.
Good Luck with this.
~T~

 

[Mousey]

Hello,

As stated in their T&C

3.1.9.
You shall not be involved in any fraudulent, collusive, fixing or other unlawful activity in relation to Your or third parties’ participation in any of the Games and shall not use any software-assisted methods or techniques or hardware devices for Your participation in any of the Games. BETSSON hereby reserves the right to invalidate or close Your Member Account or invalidate Your participation in a Game in the event of such behaviour;


It is quite clear that they prohibits the use of a boot. They confiscation looks valid.

...

Not that I agree with money laundering or breaking T&C or the OP's poor judgement, BUT.... where does it say DEPOSITS will be confiscated? Elsewhere in the terms perhaps? Unless he's commited fraud, and things are not on the up and up, then they have that right. But, IMHO, playing with a bot is not fraud.


Just my 2 cents.

 

[petro]

Could have already been pointed out but this is from Betsson's general T&C;

Only humans are permitted to play on our site. Artificially-intelligent programs, processes, applications and all other forms of software and hardware - including "Poker Bots" or "Auto Folders" - are prohibited from making game decisions or taking game action on our site, either under their own auspices or under the supervision of a human.

In short they don't allow bots. Seems your out of luck Mr. Zoidberg. Unless this is a new T&C that they are trying to apply retro-activly which I do not believe is the case.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Despite the "no bots" term, this is merely a breach of terms of business, and is in no way FRAUD. There is ONLY a right to void bets and confiscate winnings, NOTHING in the terms gives them any power to confiscate the players' own deposit money.

This is a case of refusal to do business after a breach of terms, in law the monies paid for the service do NOT belong to the provider, since the law ONLY allows the recovery of "reasonable costs in remedying the breach". This would probably only allow them to keep the banking fees they had to pay on receiving the deposit, and processing the refund of the balance.

The player is therefore due back the €1100, less the costs in remedying the breach of the terms of business, which will have to be justified.
This the most likely decision that a court would make.

Of course, all this could have been avoided by not being so damn lazy in the first place, and giving them some proper MANUAL action.

Betsson have also made themselves look bad by all the BULLSHIT they trotted out BEFORE they came up with the bot accusation, which in this case was correct. It makes it look as though they spent all this time stalling with BS excuses whilst they LOOKED for a reason not to pay out, which might have been triggered by their suspicions that this was a scheme to fund Neteller with these gift vouchers, rather than a desire to play with €1,100 in the casino.

They should have used THIS to take action, and paid the €1050 after deduction of charges, closed the account, told the player they are not a BANK, and don't expect to be used in this way.

The OP should try to take this to court, telling Betsson that they have sought legal advice to recover their deposit, and that this advice has been to consider making a claim for recovery through the courts. Betsson have a very WEAK case for arbitrarily taking the lot, and they KNOW it. They will have to JUSTIFY that €1100 is a fair sum to take account of the costs to them of remedying this breach. Hopefully, Betsson will NOT let it get to court, but will try to negotiate a settlement that they believe is fair, and as good as any that a court would award.

 

[cerdikola]

Probably if you try to take legal actions to recover your deposits, they will take legal actions against you for cheating. I think you have no chance to get your money back..

This is Vegas!

 

[Nifty29]

What is illegal ( in the personal opinion/s of other members) is irrelevant.

If you play online with bots at any online casino you are going to have big problems, and anyone who knows about and uses bots KNOWS this fact. The only variations are the different coonsequences in each casinos terms and conditions which must be accepted before an account can be created.

As I said I dont like deposits being confiscated, but if this is in the terms then IMO the casino has the right to do it. You can't pick and choose the ones you like, just as in law. What might be illegal in one country might be quite ok in another and nobody should be relying on legal advice by other members......there is only one person I know at CM who is a lawyer and he never dispenses legal advice. Nobody here is an expert and the best advice is to contact a rep or file a PAB.

 

[rainmaker]

VWM,

I don't agree with you in this case.

According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".

I think that the use of a boot is fraud. I know that most of you might not agree to that. But to use a boot will give the player an advantage in his/hers way of gambling pattern that he/her would not have if playing without the use of a boot. I don't care if the player loses or win with the boot, it is clearly an attempt to get an advantage.

I do understand that it might seen "unfair" that Betsson confiscated his deposit. And you might be correct that Betsson may not have been "awarded" the whole amount in a lawsuit (as compensation). But to give the player his deposit back is like saying to players :

"please try to scam us. Its on the house anyway. If you manage to scam us, then hope you will enjoy your winnings. If you don't , well...here is your deposit back"

I think that it is a good course of dealing to withhold deposits when a player has attempted to scam a casino.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Probably if you try to take legal actions to recover your deposits, they will take legal actions against you for cheating. I think you have no chance to get your money back..

This is Vegas!

They wouldn't, since there are no damages for them to claim. It would be different if the player won loads of money by cheating, and managed to cash it out.

What is illegal ( in the personal opinion/s of other members) is irrelevant.

If you play online with bots at any online casino you are going to have big problems, and anyone who knows about and uses bots KNOWS this fact. The only variations are the different coonsequences in each casinos terms and conditions which must be accepted before an account can be created.

As I said I dont like deposits being confiscated, but if this is in the terms then IMO the casino has the right to do it. You can't pick and choose the ones you like, just as in law. What might be illegal in one country might be quite ok in another and nobody should be relying on legal advice by other members......there is only one person I know at CM who is a lawyer and he never dispenses legal advice. Nobody here is an expert and the best advice is to contact a rep or file a PAB.

Using bots is not ILLEGAL, merely against the terms and conditions. Therefore is has nothing to do with CRIMINAL law, and is NOT fraud. It comes under CIVIL law, where action is taken to recover damages for a breach of contract. There is actually NOTHING in these terms that SAY that deposits can be confisacted, therefore it isn't even WITHIN THE TERMS to do so. Without a term specifying that deposits can be confiscated for using a bot, they have no real case for keeping the deposit.

Since the bot was used on Blackjack, rather than poker, there is no "cheating" involved. Poker bots cheat other players, making things far more complicated, since these other players CANNOT be allowed to lose out, and must be put back in the position they were in before they played against the bot, although if the won in good faith against the bot, they cannot have these WINNINGS removed. This is why in POKER the use of bots is more serious, and the damages much greater.

It is not justice to punish stupidity by taking EVERYTHING, only what is NECESSARY should be taken, that which is needed to counter the effects of said stupidity.

If a casino is "stupid enough" to pay me twice, does this mean I can keep ALL of it, however little it costs me to correct the error?

If a casino is "stupid enough" to make live a game with a +EV bug, does this mean they have to pay by being liable for ALL the money won with the bug?


When CASINOS make a mistake, they DON'T have unlimited liabilty, they often get to say "sorry", and pay only that needed to make good the cost and inconvenience suffered by a player. When a PLAYER makes a mistake, they should have the SAME level of liabilty to put right the casino by paying their costs in putting right the mistake.

The current behaviour of "one lenient law for us, a much harsher one for them" makes players see casinos as DESERVING of being "ripped off" because of their own stupidity, making players far less likely to REPORT a problem, than to milk it for all it's worth whilst they can, so long as the casino is "too daft to notice".

Often it's a case of "my turn now", where a player previously screwed over by a casino spots an opportunity to "get even", perhaps by spotting a bug, or cock-up in the design of an offer. Since the casino ripped them off, and got away with it, they don't see why they too shouldn't have a go to "get even".

If casinos treated players better, they would find players would hold them in much higher regard, and would therefore be less likely to take advantage of an error, and more likely to report it to help the casino not get screwed by others, and therefore unable to provide such good service in future.

 

[Nifty29]

Well as I said, in the absence of expert legal opinion we must rely on the facts as they stand.

The player breached the terms and was dealt with according to those terms.

Rainmaker has an excellent point about the deterrent factor. If scammers think they have nothing to lose they will just try it more often.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Well as I said, in the absence of expert legal opinion we must rely on the facts as they stand.

The player breached the terms and was dealt with according to those terms.

Rainmaker has an excellent point about the deterrent factor. If scammers think they have nothing to lose they will just try it more often.

This is NOT an attempt to SCAM the casino though. Using a bot gives NO advantage, and is NOT cheating. This is MERELY a breach of the terms, nothing more serious than that.

Confiscation of deposits should be reserved for SERIOUS acts, and not used for the more trivial ones - it just makes the casino look greedy and rogue.

Confiscation of WINNINGS is controversial enough, and when those STUDENTS clearly breached the FIRST term at Club World, they DID get their DEPOSITS back, even though their WINNINGS were void. Despite this, that was one HELL of a controversial thread.

 

[Jufo]

VWM,

I don't agree with you in this case.

According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".

I think that the use of a boot is fraud. I know that most of you might not agree to that. But to use a boot will give the player an advantage in his/hers way of gambling pattern that he/her would not have if playing without the use of a boot. I don't care if the player loses or win with the boot, it is clearly an attempt to get an advantage.

I do understand that it might seen "unfair" that Betsson confiscated his deposit. And you might be correct that Betsson may not have been "awarded" the whole amount in a lawsuit (as compensation). But to give the player his deposit back is like saying to players :

"please try to scam us. Its on the house anyway. If you manage to scam us, then hope you will enjoy your winnings. If you don't , well...here is your deposit back"

I think that it is a good course of dealing to withhold deposits when a player has attempted to scam a casino.

Completely disagree. Using bots is far from fraud or scam and many softwares such as Microgaming actually have bots (=autoplay) implemented within the software.

Most casinos say that they support Responsible Gambling. Bots do just that: gamble responsibly as they don't get frustrated and up the bet size. So if a casino truly takes the Resposible Gambling commitment seriously they should allow and encourage the use of bots. Disallowing bots could be seen as a violation of commitment to Responsible Gambling regulations.

 

[rainmaker]

Completely disagree. Using bots is far from fraud or scam and many softwares such as Microgaming actually have bots (=autoplay) implemented within the software.

Most casinos say that they support Responsible Gambling. Bots do just that: gamble responsibly as they don't get frustrated and up the bet size. So if a casino truly takes the Resposible Gambling commitment seriously they should allow and encourage the use of bots. Disallowing bots could be seen as a violation of commitment to Responsible Gambling regulations.

It is not very important to determine whether the use of a bot (in a isolated view) is fraud or not in this case. It gives the player an advantages he most likely would not have, so I think it is an attempted fraud. You disagree and think the use of a bot is not fraud. That's alright.

But, the player did sign up at Betsson. He did accept T&C where bots are clearly forbidden. Despite this, he chose to use a bot. This makes him a fraudster, but not necessarily a bad man.

Do not get blinded by the word "fraudster". It is a common thing

 

[Jufo]

It is not very important to determine whether the use of a bot (in a isolated view) is fraud or not in this case. It gives the player an advantages he most likely would not have, so I think it is an attempted fraud. You disagree and think the use of a bot is not fraud. That's alright.

But, the player did sign up at Betsson. He did accept T&C where bots are clearly forbidden. Despite this, he chose to use a bot. This makes him a fraudster, but not necessarily a bad man.

Do not get blinded by the word "fraudster". It is a common thing

You say that using bots gives the player advantages he wouldn't otherwise have. Remember that with or without bots the player is always playing at mathematical disadvantage. If bots allow the player to reduce the extent of disadvantage they are playing at, then there should be absolutely no problem with that. It is no different than you choosing to play a slot with a very good payout rate instead of a slot with a bad payout rate. No casino can accuse you of fraud if you decide to play in a manner that limits your losses.

Anyway, the bottom line is that while Betsson's T&C disallow bots, the T&C doesn't mention confiscating deposits, so the T&C violation would have to be interpreted so that it only voids the bets made, it does not seem to allow deposit to be taken.

 

[rainmaker]

You say that using bots gives the player advantages he wouldn't otherwise have. Remember that with or without bots the player is always playing at mathematical disadvantage. If bots allow the player to reduce the extent of disadvantage they are playing at, then there should be absolutely no problem with that. It is no different than you choosing to play a slot with a very good payout rate instead of a slot with a bad payout rate. No casino can accuse you of fraud if you decide to play in a manner that limits your losses.

Anyway, the bottom line is that while Betsson's T&C disallow bots, the T&C doesn't mention confiscating deposits, so the T&C violation would have to be interpreted so that it only voids the bets made, it does not seem to allow deposit to be taken.

This is from their T&C:

11. Breaches, penalties and termination

11.1.
If You breach any provision of these T&C or BETSSON has a reasonable ground to suspect that You have breached them, BETSSON reserves the right not to open, suspend, close Your Member Account, withhold any money in your account (including the deposit) and apply such funds on account of any damages due by You.



As an addition:


11.3.
You acknowledge that BETSSON shall be the final decision-maker of whether You have violated Betsson’s rules, terms or conditions in a manner that results in BETSSON’s suspension or permanent barring from participation in our site.

 

[Repro]

I wonder if this is only about the use of a bot...

The OP says there is a 7 page document with the COMPLETE story, so i think there is more to it.

IMO if it's only about the bot and there were no other things - like a bonus - involved, the OP should just get his deposits back. In the long term there is no way a bot can let you make a profit at blackjack, so technically there's no real disadvantage for Betsson here. Sure they can play it by the rules (T&C), but there is no actual harm done.

Not very smart thing to do though when you know you can be in big trouble

 

[Nifty29]

I'm not talking about whether its right or wrong, or legal or illegal, or fraud etc.

I'm saying that BETSSON considers the use of bots to be a form of unacceptable play, and states CLEARLY in their terms that all funds will be confiscated. If the OP had bothered to check the terms he would have his money. He also KNEW it was dodgy to use the bot. It is irrelevant whether bots provide an advantage or not.....they simply just are not allowed.

We can argue about whether its illegal under contract law in Botswana or sueing in the UK and pretend we're all lawyers, but at the end of the day the terms of service were broken and the player AGREED that the casino would be the final arbiter in regards to that breach.

If you don't want to have your deposit confiscated in certain situations then DON'T play at casinos where this is stipulated. Then again, the vast majority of us will never be in that situation because we play the games within the rules and don't try to find any way possible to gain an advantage.

 

[BBKPoker]

I don't really buy that the allegation of "fraud" is necessarily applicable to using bots, regardless of the T&Cs. If it was strictly a botting matter, I think that a fair ruling would be that if you had losses they would stand, balance refunded to your deposit method, and if you had winnings/bonuses that they would removed, and you would be refunded to your original deposit method.

On the other hand, there's more to the issues than just using bots. Depositing a large chunk of money with one deposit method to filter it to another deposit method which you've admitted in your post is arguably money laundering and that IS something for which deposits can be confiscated without return if the casino can make a reasonable argument that that is what you are participating in doing.

 

[vinylweatherman]

This is from their T&C:

11. Breaches, penalties and termination

11.1.
If You breach any provision of these T&C or BETSSON has a reasonable ground to suspect that You have breached them, BETSSON reserves the right not to open, suspend, close Your Member Account, withhold any money in your account (including the deposit) and apply such funds on account of any damages due by You.

THIS is the justification for confiscating a deposit, it is a provision ONLY to allow the operator to recover any damages caused by the breach, it is NOT a free pass to take EVERYTHING that happens to be there.

If it were, then PLAYERS would also be within their rights to confiscate ALL overpayments made by casinos as "damages", with them also being "final arbiters" as to the amount due. At present, casinos have to ask players to return the money, and in general players will do this, rather than take advantage. The trust works both ways, and if casinos start taking this kind of advantage of every opportunity presented to them to unilaterally confiscate money on account, just because they can, then PLAYERS are going to start playing "hardball" back, and casinos will find it MUCH harder to get a fair deal from PLAYERS.

Take the US situation, where EVERY amount deposited could be clawed back, but it does NOT happen because players WANT the casinos to carry on taking their business, and know that telling their banks these were illegal gambling transactions would not JUST get them their money back, but would ensure NO casino would take their business ever again, and would hasten the DoJ's success in shutting down the options.

Confiscating DEPOSITS is a SURE way of inviting a chargeback, since this IS something a bank would accept as a valid reason for recovering the "monies paid for the good or service". Casinos generally confiscate WINNINGS, because it is only a DEPOSIT that could ever be charged back, and ONLY where it has not already been returned to the player.
As an addition:


11.3.
You acknowledge that BETSSON shall be the final decision-maker of whether You have violated Betsson’s rules, terms or conditions in a manner that results in BETSSON’s suspension or permanent barring from participation in our site.

I don't really buy that the allegation of "fraud" is necessarily applicable to using bots, regardless of the T&Cs. If it was strictly a botting matter, I think that a fair ruling would be that if you had losses they would stand, balance refunded to your deposit method, and if you had winnings/bonuses that they would removed, and you would be refunded to your original deposit method.

On the other hand, there's more to the issues than just using bots. Depositing a large chunk of money with one deposit method to filter it to another deposit method which you've admitted in your post is arguably money laundering and that IS something for which deposits can be confiscated without return if the casino can make a reasonable argument that that is what you are participating in doing.

This is the REAL problem, forget bots, this DOES cost the casino money, and they are being duped into paying the money movement fees for a COMPETITOR who would benefit from the eventual deposit from Neteller. The really odd thing is that Betsson has NOT considered THIS as a violation of the terms, and took some while to come up with the bot excuse. It looks like it isn't only the PLAYER that is being deceptive here, Betsson are clearly using the bot as an EXCUSE, rather than the REASON, for the actions they have taken.

It looks like they had already decided the player was guilty of something, but had no evidence, so started stalling with bullshit issues whilst they dug around for an excuse not to pay. Unfortunately, the player had given them one, and they found it - thus they were able to make the bot accusation, and it is TRUE (for a change), so they have a relatively minor breach of the terms, far MORE minor a breach than the MOTIVE, which was to fund Neteller for free, leaving Betsson to pick up the bill.

Given that this is a player of some FOUR YEARS, they seem to have gone completely overboard in the action they have taken over something relatively minor. They actually MADE €50 from the player using a bot, and this is PROOF that there is NO "cheating" possible when using a bot against the house, and without a bonus. Had this been an MGS casino, there wouldn't even BE an issue, just set up autoplay to play some Blackjack, withdraw, and unless the casino took exeption to the funding Neteller aspect, there wouldn't be a problem. Even if there WAS, it would only result in the transaction charges being recovered.

Players have to wonder what OTHER minor transgressions Betsson will punish by confiscating the DEPOSITS, because MANY players make the occasional minor mistake, but these are of no consequence, and the casino doesn't make a fuss.

Confisaction of a deposit is the MAXIMUM penalty a casino can EVER apply, and should ONLY be used in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances. It is rare even for outright FRAUD to result in confiscation of a deposit, let alone "irregular play", which is all this is.

 

[Mr_Zoidberg]

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?

 

[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

 

[The Dude]

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.