Bwin doesn't want to send me my money !

[benj227]

OK... I see what you mean but when entering my account as an ADULT, I totally forgot about the age of birth detail. So I was frauding them without knowing at first... (I wouldn't have risked depositing anything, but would have gone to an other Casino... there are plenty...)

Then, the 700 are not my WINNING MONEY, but a big part of my deposit. My 3rd deposit war 900 and I lost 150-200 euros...

I know it was a fraud, I accept the blocked account and everything... Would have accepted them taking away any winnings... But they STOLE from me part of my deposit made 2-3 days before !!

Those were no winnings but I decided to take a break with Sport Betting so ...

See Related Threads:

• BWIN Rip Me Off
• Bwin.com Banned My Account
• BWIN "Slow" Customer Support
• Cash Out Issues Bwin
• Bwin Closed My Account...

 

[vinylweatherman]

Man! Thats not very good! You shouldn't have defraud them at all as it is seriously against the law and is a very serious crime. You could've end up in prison or a huge fined if the federal agency decides to. I hope they are not coming after you at all. If they did you are in a lot deep trouble. If you were in USA the jail sentence is going to be a very long time to be spent behind bar. Just don't do it again and move on to somewhere other casino with true identify, no more fraud. Most of website have fraud protection like paypal, casino, etc they will be coming after you if you commit the crime of fraud.

By the way casino will not allow you to change detail after you first enter when you join for first time. It is for fraud protection. They are testing everyone to make sure they are not doing anything so stupid like trying to defraud them. At later time when id is asked, casino will compare against the detail being input first time. If the fraud is detected then casino will escalate the action to much more serious consequence you will be getting if you commit a fraud. Changing address is okay as long as match your id, but date of birth and name will not be able to change since it is put in first time as they want to test against you. Its same as paypal etc other website like that. Clearly BWIN returned your original deposit when you were under 18 thats the right thing that BWIN done. But they will NOT return your original deposit after you turn 18 since you lost but they have confiscated your winning money as well. Overall you were defrauding them right from very beginning and BWIN didn't like it so they took a very serious action against you and closed your account. They may or may not have reported it to Federal agency I don't know. I hope you understand very clear that what I said is very serious to me and I hope you will not commit a fraud or a serious crime ever again.

There are different classes of fraud. Giving a false birth year in order to avoid an age related block is not one of the serious ones. In fact, teenagers are doing it all the time to buy fags and alcohol, or sneak into the movies, even a nightclub. If this was regarded as an imprisonable offence, the jails will contain most of the young adult population.

The usual remedy when busted is that the person is told not to come back until they come of age, at which point it is no longer illegal to use the service, buy the item, watch the film etc.

This is not fraud, it is a case of the casino deciding not to accept this players' business even when they have become of age, and it is legal for them to participate. The oddest thing of all is that Bwin did not consider this fraud at all, they left the account open and available to this player when he came of age. They then let what they previously thought was an underage gambler deposit and play a number of times without demanding proof that they had reached the appropriate age.

They would not be liable for money lost by an adult to thye house, nor even for winnings if the player could not prove they were legit. But by saying they no longer want his business because of what he did at 17, but only TELLING him that after he made further deposits, they are taking a considerable legal risk that the player is almost certain to have the legal right to the return of the money lodged with Bwin now that Bwin have said they no longer want his business. If Bwin go further, and say that all bets are void, they will find themselves having to return ALL the money. Bwin would be better off returning the unspent money, and then doing what they should have done to start with, block the account and tell the player he isn't allowed back at any Bwin operation.

It's not Gibraltar Bwin have to worry about, it is the player exercising their consumer rights in their home country, which are bound to contain the right to have all monies paid in advance for a service that the company isn't prepared to deliver returned to them. Additional rights may also exist through the method of payment used. Bwin will be guilty of theft if they simply pocket the money as though they won it, just as a scamming player would be guilty of theft if they tricked the operator into paying out when they shouldn't.

 

[benj227]

I'm searching in their General terms & conditions and CANNO'T find anything that would support what they did.
They just indicate that if you give false information :

"Registration
2. The company reserves the right to exclude users with false particulars from participating in the games offered and to refuse them the payment of any winnings. "

I did not win anything so why don't I get my deposit back...?

Nothing special is said either in that matter in "Protection of children"...

 

[dionysus]

But you aren't a child. And while you did deposit as a child (unbeknownst to them), they refunded that deposit did they not? So what special 'protection of children' clause should there be?
I'd be curious to see the game play. It's ok to say you dropped from 900 to 750, but it's totally within the realm of possibility that you WAGERED your 900 and still have a 750 balance.

 

[benj227]

Well I have no point in lying on this forum. I was at 900, played for maybe 200, had mainly unsuccessful bets and got 50 back... so I had about 750 left when I decided to stop.

I didn't play all of it.

Yes they gave me the 35 back but for the "false info" part part in their Terms&Conditions, they say they don't give any winnings back, but WHERE are my winnings I don't see them. I just see the deposit they took from me. Great.

 

[Nifty29]

Given that the account was initially busted for being that of a minor, how come it was still OPEN

Since when do casinos bust a player for fraud, but then leave the account open for them to enter and play again another time? It looks more like the casino did NOT consider this case fraud at all, but a simple matter of a 17 year old jumping the gun. They decide instead to leave the account intact for when he reaches the correct age, when he would be welcome back. This would be why the account was open, and he was allowed to deposit.

Using the original account is the better approach in terms of the "one account per player" rule, yet the "correct" approach here would seem to have been to sign up afresh as an over 18, and make a clean start.

Given that the latter play was legally OK, to go to the draconian length of seizing deposits seems way over the top. Even true frauds sometimes get their deposits back, even with not a shred of mitigating circumstance in their favour.

Freezing an account is not the same as seizing the contents, which is what Bwin has done in this case. To seize the content, a private business has to sue for damages, and ask to be awarded costs and compensation. If they win, they still have to return funds over the amount the court granted them.

Bwin have the advantage here because they have the money, but by seizing deposits that were not lost to the house, they are on shaky legal ground. The reason many casinos return deposits in disputes is to avoid standing on this shaky legal ground for longer than is necessary.

Since this case is about the return of money deposited that remains in the account, and not the payment of winnings, the regulator may not be the most effective way to pursue this. It may be possible to pursue this under the laws of the players' own country. Gibraltar do not seem to recognise the norms of consumer protection law (they are not the only one either), so tend to allow unfair contract terms to stand. Most countries have extra protection in law for consumers in disputes with businesses. Gibraltar for example, have allowed the vague "spirit of the bonus" rules to be use for the arbitrary confiscation of winnings from players who otherwise broke no bonus rules, nor the general terms, but just played too cleverly for the casino's liking. It's no different to the player demanding their money back because the software seemed to use a biased deck in a single session, which happens quite a bit in Microgaming Blackjack, saying "I didn't like how the dealer kept getting 21s off 5 and 6 ups, so I want my money back".

You might want to go back and read the initial post again.

The casino did not close the account previously because the OP deposited $35 and lost, hence no ID was required. It's why he was able to continue playing.

The account WAS closed when the OP's docs were reviewed after his first cashout I.e. just recently.

So, you're arguments don't apply. As for your legal advice and the stuff about totally irrelevant spirit of the bonus stuff.....well I'll just leave it there.

Just some timely advice for the readership......NEVER rely on legal advice from anyone other than a qualified legal professional. Backyard lawyers often mean well, but are often plain wrong and can lead people to do silly things.

 

[Nifty29]

There are different classes of fraud. Giving a false birth year in order to avoid an age related block is not one of the serious ones. In fact, teenagers are doing it all the time to buy fags and alcohol, or sneak into the movies, even a nightclub. If this was regarded as an imprisonable offence, the jails will contain most of the young adult population.

The usual remedy when busted is that the person is told not to come back until they come of age, at which point it is no longer illegal to use the service, buy the item, watch the film etc.

This is not fraud, it is a case of the casino deciding not to accept this players' business even when they have become of age, and it is legal for them to participate. The oddest thing of all is that Bwin did not consider this fraud at all, they left the account open and available to this player when he came of age. They then let what they previously thought was an underage gambler deposit and play a number of times without demanding proof that they had reached the appropriate age.

They would not be liable for money lost by an adult to thye house, nor even for winnings if the player could not prove they were legit. But by saying they no longer want his business because of what he did at 17, but only TELLING him that after he made further deposits, they are taking a considerable legal risk that the player is almost certain to have the legal right to the return of the money lodged with Bwin now that Bwin have said they no longer want his business. If Bwin go further, and say that all bets are void, they will find themselves having to return ALL the money. Bwin would be better off returning the unspent money, and then doing what they should have done to start with, block the account and tell the player he isn't allowed back at any Bwin operation.

It's not Gibraltar Bwin have to worry about, it is the player exercising their consumer rights in their home country, which are bound to contain the right to have all monies paid in advance for a service that the company isn't prepared to deliver returned to them. Additional rights may also exist through the method of payment used. Bwin will be guilty of theft if they simply pocket the money as though they won it, just as a scamming player would be guilty of theft if they tricked the operator into paying out when they shouldn't.

Again.....there was no "legal" risk because they didn't KNOW he gave a fake DOB until just recently.

I really think you're being unfair to the OP by giving legal advice that you are not qualified to give. Your legal opinion is as valid as mine......and I generally don't give mine because I'm not a lawyer.

If the legal gambling age in his country is 18, and he deliberately provided false details to flout those laws, then it IS almost certainly fraud......that much I DO know. Whether it is serious fraud or whatever makes no difference.

You're really just trying to cloud the issue to make it the casino's fault yet again, when it is actually quite simple. If the casino KNEW he was underage before he made his recent deposits, then I agree it is their problem......but they did NOT.

 

[benj227]

Again, when I had in mind of withdrawing, I first send in my ID details. They checked it and next day sent me the email that everything was verified, accepted, and OK. So I could have deposited more, betted more, and played how I wanted.

But obviously when I asked for withdrawal a day later, they blocked my account. Of course...

 

[Balthazar]

Man! Thats not very good! You shouldn't have defraud them at all as it is seriously against the law and is a very serious crime. You could've end up in prison or a huge fined if the federal agency decides to. I hope they are not coming after you at all. If they did you are in a lot deep trouble. If you were in USA the jail sentence is going to be a very long time to be spent behind bar.

You can't be serious. Please tell me you're not serious. Minors lie about their age ALL the time. They try to buy alcohol, watch porn, gamble, buy cigarettes... and I've yet to hear about one ending up in prison for a very long time for doing it!


Edit: Oops, just noticed that vinylweatherman said almost the exact same thing earlier.

 

[Tirilej]

Feels good to say that I changed my mind after reading through this again

To me everyone is innocent until proven guilty and I couldn't understand why the casino held on to the last deposit since it was his money.
I believe it was Nifty that pointed out that he had actually played and wagered that money.
He can't have lost every bet and must have played through a lot more than just a couple of hundred.
We will never know I suppose, but since he did play, the money no longer belongs to him, and can be considered as winnings, instead of just a deposit.
(Just my opinion of course)

It's a hard and expensive lesson to learn, but as an adult now you actually are responsible for what you did when you were young also, and for what you are doing now.
Havn't we all done stupid things we have had to pay for later?

I have learnt a lot from this thread alone so thanks members for that...again

 

[mattsgame]

Why are people saying they left his account open even though they knew he was fraudulent/wrong D.O.B?

This is not the case, they only found out about the fraud "AFTER" the op sent in is documents so this argument is false.

You can't be serious. Please tell me you're not serious. Minors lie about their age ALL the time. They try to buy alcohol, watch porn, gamble, buy cigarettes... and I've yet to hear about one ending up in prison for a very long time for doing it!


Edit: Oops, just noticed that vinylweatherman said almost the exact same thing earlier.

Whilst a long jail term is far fetched, I do remember reading it is a misdemeanor and you can possible face a jail term, fines, loss of drivers license and or community service.

Think its about time casinos ask for docs before accepting a single deposit, so these issues do not arise.

 

[Balthazar]

Think its about time casinos ask for docs before accepting a single deposit, so these issues do not arise.

This isn't happening anytime soon.

 

[dionysus]

Though it IS smart to submit them yourself and have them approved BEFORE depositing anyway

 

[Balthazar]

Though it IS smart to submit them yourself and have them approved BEFORE depositing anyway

But then what would happen to impulse gambling?
No one wants to wait DAYS before starting to play when they register at a new casino.

I now stick exclusively with casinos that already have my docs. Problem solved.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Why are people saying they left his account open even though they knew he was fraudulent/wrong D.O.B?

This is not the case, they only found out about the fraud "AFTER" the op sent in is documents so this argument is false.


Think its about time casinos ask for docs before accepting a single deposit, so these issues do not arise.

A wrong date of birth is pretty minor, and can often be done by mistake. What is it that has made Bwin feel they can seize deposits as well? Surely, if all bets are void, then ALL the money ever deposited should be returned. Age does not matter, they decline to provide the service, therefore they should return the money to the customer that has been deposited on account.

No private business has any legal right to arbitrarily take a customers' money, yet not provide the goods or service, without a court award of some kind. Those that have tried it have found it to be a very expensive mistake.

To even try it, Bwin need to have a term somewhere that allows them to hold the money, so where is it. All they seem to have are terms to void bets and winnings.


What if a player had a dispute with a dodgy casino, and eventualy got paid their winnings after a great deal of effort, and then due to a cock-up the casino paid twice.
The player then says they will not return the duplicate, but will keep it to "teach the casino a lesson" not to jerk players around like this again. Would he be right to arbitrarily seize the duplicate payment for "damages" without a court award? In this case, the casino may be able to do nothing about it, just as the player in the above case can do little about it. It seems that whoever has the money makes the laws in this game.

This has actually happened to me, and had I not returned the money voluntarily, the casino would never have been able to do anything about it. It happened after 3 days of piss poor CS that resulted in them screwing up in my favour by issuing the refund TWICE for a fouled up transaction. I could have kept it as compensation for the bad service, but I gave it back even though they spent the last two days insisting it was mine, and that they hadn't made a mistake.

 

[dionysus]

But then what would happen to impulse gambling?
No one wants to wait DAYS before starting to play when they register at a new casino.

I now stick exclusively with casinos that already have my docs. Problem solved.

I wouldn't want to wait DAYS to get paid either; so I play elsewhere while my docs are getting approved

 

[Balthazar]

I could have kept it as compensation for the bad service

Nope. That would be theft. But that's exactly the point, it's a good analogy.

Theft definition: theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

 

[Nifty29]

A wrong date of birth is pretty minor, and can often be done by mistake. What is it that has made Bwin feel they can seize deposits as well? Surely, if all bets are void, then ALL the money ever deposited should be returned. Age does not matter, they decline to provide the service, therefore they should return the money to the customer that has been deposited on account.

No private business has any legal right to arbitrarily take a customers' money, yet not provide the goods or service, without a court award of some kind. Those that have tried it have found it to be a very expensive mistake.

To even try it, Bwin need to have a term somewhere that allows them to hold the money, so where is it. All they seem to have are terms to void bets and winnings.


What if a player had a dispute with a dodgy casino, and eventualy got paid their winnings after a great deal of effort, and then due to a cock-up the casino paid twice.
The player then says they will not return the duplicate, but will keep it to "teach the casino a lesson" not to jerk players around like this again. Would he be right to arbitrarily seize the duplicate payment for "damages" without a court award? In this case, the casino may be able to do nothing about it, just as the player in the above case can do little about it. It seems that whoever has the money makes the laws in this game.

This has actually happened to me, and had I not returned the money voluntarily, the casino would never have been able to do anything about it. It happened after 3 days of piss poor CS that resulted in them screwing up in my favour by issuing the refund TWICE for a fouled up transaction. I could have kept it as compensation for the bad service, but I gave it back even though they spent the last two days insisting it was mine, and that they hadn't made a mistake.

You're supporting your opinions with legal arguments, but you are not a lawyer, and hence anyone with some common sense should give them the appropriate weight. You don't know what a court would say any more than I do.

The OP has not provided evidence of how much of his $900 was actually wagered....if it was more than $900, then his balance is winnings from game play (we aren't talking about whether the player "won" overall...that is a different matter) and hence is subject to the confiscation term. If it was less than $900, then $900 - (amount wagered) = The amount the casino should refund.

So what about your argument that the casino should have closed the account earlier? You didn't address the arguments others have put forward.

 

[benj227]

I did not wagger more than 200, once again.
So the deposit I own is at least 700, if not 750.

I decided to quit because I was losing, not winning.

I have no proofe because my account was blocked but I'm saying the truth. I did not wagger the whole amount. Max 200 of it.

 

[Balthazar]

I did not wagger more than 200, once again.
So the deposit I own is at least 700, if not 750.

I decided to quit because I was losing, not winning.

I have no proofe because my account was blocked but I'm saying the truth. I did not wagger the whole amount. Max 200 of it.

You know what bothers me the most with your story? It's the fact that you deposited $900 and then decided to withdraw $750 after wagering only $200. Let's just say that this isn't normal behaviour. You failed to provide a good reason for doing this and should have explained why you did this.

 

[vinylweatherman]

You're supporting your opinions with legal arguments, but you are not a lawyer, and hence anyone with some common sense should give them the appropriate weight. You don't know what a court would say any more than I do.

The OP has not provided evidence of how much of his $900 was actually wagered....if it was more than $900, then his balance is winnings from game play (we aren't talking about whether the player "won" overall...that is a different matter) and hence is subject to the confiscation term. If it was less than $900, then $900 - (amount wagered) = The amount the casino should refund.

So what about your argument that the casino should have closed the account earlier? You didn't address the arguments others have put forward.

That is bullshit, you are claiming that every bet should be resolved as a win for the casino, meaning that if he had played 900 $1 spins, the losing bets stand, and the winners are voided, so the $900 in total belongs to the casino. This is bollocks. Either all bets are void, or none of them. You would NEVER approve of a player making this kind of argument if he claimed a game had malfunctioned, him wanting the losing bets' stake returned, yet the winners to stand.

Bwin would never have paid anyway, therefore the position is all bets are void. Since the player only wants back what remains, and not all deposits, the casino have the advantage, and can take $150 as "damages" as it has been volunteered by the player. It seems they want the whole $900, based not on actual costs of remedying the breach, but because that is what is there. This means the player could have deposited $1 million, and have a balance of around that amount, and Bwin would take the lot as "damages". They can do it, they have the money, but that doesn't make it right.

If a casino attempts to defraud me (Virtual Group for example), and then messes up by paying me too much because some idiot added an extra zero, or they paid twice, would it then be right to keep the money because the casino had attempted to defraud me, but screwed it up.

If we use the same argument, that frauds should always lose the money the other side has hold of, I could keep it, and they would have to learn a lesson the hard way.

A similar analogy is "Is it right to defraud a scammer to get payback?"

 

[benj227]

You know what bothers me the most with your story? It's the fact that you deposited $900 and then decided to withdraw $750 after wagering only $200. Let's just say that this isn't normal behaviour. You failed to provide a good reason for doing this and should have explained why you did this.

OK, well I lost already 400, then an other 400 and deposited a further 900 (impulsive gambling maybe). When I saw that I was losing again I just decided to stop and withdraw my money. Thats all. I have no other reason.
If this wasn't the truth I wouldn't be asking on this forum

I did not try to withdraw any winnings, just the remaining of my non-waggered deposit, because I wanted to stop gambling for a while.

 

[KasinoKing]

This thread is getting tedious & boring.

To those who say the casino is right to keep the money; Can you imagine ANY of CMs Accredited Casinos keeping the players money if they broke one of their T&Cs?
I can't. The norm is to return all deposits (or what is left in the account if the player is not in profit) and ban the player.
(The only exception to this would be cases of fraud where the player had stolen the money from someone else).

KK

 

[dionysus]

Right or wrong, the problem of course is, we're only hearing one side of the story; the casino hasn't said boo. And while the player may well certainly be saying the God's honest truth, it isn't as though this would be the 1st thread (certainly not that I've read here) where critical information has been omitted or twisted

 

[benj227]

What the Casino wrote in the email (copying it) :

"
Dear Mr XXXX,

Thank you for your call.

As previously advised, our records indicate that you had not reached the minimum legal age for placing a bet or participating in games where stakes are wagered when you registered your account. We therefore have been forced to block your account.

We kindly ask you to refer to the relevant part of our Terms and Conditions which can be found under "Help > Legal Matters > General Terms and Conditions > General > General Terms > Liability/data processing" or under the following link:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

**************
6. By placing a bet or participating in games where stakes are wagered, the user agrees that they have reached the minimum legal age for participation as specified by their respective national law. Furthermore, by placing a bet or participating in games where stakes are wagered, the user confirms that they possess the legal capacity to enter into an agreement with the company. Failure to adhere to these conditions will result in the user's account being closed and implementation of all other necessary measures.
**************

Concerning your account balance, we regret to inform you that we will only payout funds deposited into your account whilst you were under the legal age, any further deposits or winnings after this time will not be paid out.

We thank you for your understanding. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any further queries.

Kind regards,

Your bwin customer service team"

So thats what they said.
But in te terms of service it only talks about the WINNINGS not being returned... So this is not right.