Bwin doesn't want to send me my money !

[naththo]

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.

Hi thanks for clearing up I fully understand now what it meant. I have to be thankful that he is quite safe from serious crime at least. I never want to see young people go to jail as it is not nice place though. It just it is totally unacceptable for anyone who see this giving out a bad reaction to it. I apologised my reaction may have been far fetched but really to be honest that never do again is best way and I know you won't do it again pretty much so. Everyone include me learn new things every day.

 

[vinylweatherman]

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.

They quite cleary say that now you are an adult, they can keep ALL the money in your account, no matter how much has been won or lost. They have NOT even called you a fraud, they have said it is because you played whilst under age in the past.

This is unnecessary greed on their part, they have taken THREE deposits from you as an adult, and were happy to take many more, yet you would not only have never been paid the winnings, the deposits were immediately confiscated the second they were made. They are not voiding the bets, but settling every bet in their favour. THEY are the guilty ones, as you are in this position because THEY have lax procedures where they only verify accounts after the first withdrawal.

They are doing this not because it is right, but because they can get away with it because of the nature of the industry. You made a mistake, thinking that because you are now an adult, it is OK for you to play there. Legally, it IS, and legally there is no reason why they can't accept your bets now. They have instead gone for the money grab and kicked you out, rather than settle for you just losing $1000 of the $1700 you have deposited.

Therefore, if Bwin make a mistake that turns out to be in the players' favour, the player can decide they no longer want to do business with Bwin and keep the money, with Bwin not being able to do anything about it because the player is no longer going to deposit money that Bwin could use to take an "offset" from in order to correct the error.

If it is OK for the operators to go for the grab just because they can, it should be OK for players to benefit from the mistakes made by incompetent operators because they can.

Players DO decide to keep extra money after a mistake from an operator, and get away with it simply by ensuring the casino can't grab it back. They are told that although they can legally get away with it, they are morally bound to return it voluntarily. Bwin should therefore voluntarily return the remaining balance, but keep the lost deposits from earlier as these were made and played in good faith, with the player not expecting them back.

It seems players who DO return the money are losing out on some extra bankroll that legally they are not obliged to return unless the casino forces them to (if they can).

I could have walked off with £2000, because the mistake was not even recorded in their records, and as far as they could see, there was no duplicate £2000, I had deposited twice. I could have kept it and never deposited there again, and by the time they discovered the discrepancy in their monthly or annual audit, and traced where it ocurred, the money would be long gone, out of reach of even a Neteller reversal.

If Bwin ever make a mistake that ends up with a player being overpaid, they needn't expect to see me urging the player to do the right thing by offering to give it back. It'll be for him to decide to do the moral thing, or take advantage of the fact that this is a legal grey area, and there is little the casino can do about it.

 

[Nifty29]

They quite cleary say that now you are an adult, they can keep ALL the money in your account, no matter how much has been won or lost. They have NOT even called you a fraud, they have said it is because you played whilst under age in the past.

This is unnecessary greed on their part, they have taken THREE deposits from you as an adult, and were happy to take many more, yet you would not only have never been paid the winnings, the deposits were immediately confiscated the second they were made. They are not voiding the bets, but settling every bet in their favour. THEY are the guilty ones, as you are in this position because THEY have lax procedures where they only verify accounts after the first withdrawal.

They are doing this not because it is right, but because they can get away with it because of the nature of the industry. You made a mistake, thinking that because you are now an adult, it is OK for you to play there. Legally, it IS, and legally there is no reason why they can't accept your bets now. They have instead gone for the money grab and kicked you out, rather than settle for you just losing $1000 of the $1700 you have deposited.

Therefore, if Bwin make a mistake that turns out to be in the players' favour, the player can decide they no longer want to do business with Bwin and keep the money, with Bwin not being able to do anything about it because the player is no longer going to deposit money that Bwin could use to take an "offset" from in order to correct the error.

If it is OK for the operators to go for the grab just because they can, it should be OK for players to benefit from the mistakes made by incompetent operators because they can.

Players DO decide to keep extra money after a mistake from an operator, and get away with it simply by ensuring the casino can't grab it back. They are told that although they can legally get away with it, they are morally bound to return it voluntarily. Bwin should therefore voluntarily return the remaining balance, but keep the lost deposits from earlier as these were made and played in good faith, with the player not expecting them back.

It seems players who DO return the money are losing out on some extra bankroll that legally they are not obliged to return unless the casino forces them to (if they can).

I could have walked off with £2000, because the mistake was not even recorded in their records, and as far as they could see, there was no duplicate £2000, I had deposited twice. I could have kept it and never deposited there again, and by the time they discovered the discrepancy in their monthly or annual audit, and traced where it ocurred, the money would be long gone, out of reach of even a Neteller reversal.

If Bwin ever make a mistake that ends up with a player being overpaid, they needn't expect to see me urging the player to do the right thing by offering to give it back. It'll be for him to decide to do the moral thing, or take advantage of the fact that this is a legal grey area, and there is little the casino can do about it.

What "legal grey area"? Who said anyone is legally obliged to do anything?

Please provide details of the legal opinion you obtained from a lawyer to support your statements.

You also didn't answer my question. I also didn't appreciate you describing my equally valid opinions as "bullshit" and "bollocks"......we may not always agree vinyl, but I thought you were above the childish insults.

 

[Casinomeister]

Since this is beyond the boundaries of normal fraud, the rules may be a little different. No matter how you look at it, providing false information is fraud. But in this case a crime has been committed. Accepting bets from minors is a crime. I'm not sure if the crime is negated from the casino side since the casino was unaware of this transgression, but at this point we have the player admitting to the crime. In this case I would say it's a situation of: "Failure to adhere to these conditions will result in the user's account being closed and implementation of all other necessary measures."

In other words you are SOL. We can debate whether or not you should get any further funds from the casino until the cows come home - a law was broken and you need real legal advice.

Have you contacted the GRA? if not, why not?

 

[benj227]

Please forgive me but what is GRA ?

 

[Casinomeister]

Sorry - I should have explained. The GRA - Gibraltar Regulatory Authority is the licensing agency that oversees Bwin's operations. You can file a complaint with them:

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

Here is information on their complaint process:

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

And their complaint form

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

 

[Jasminebed]

If the player had made all deposits while underage, ALL the deposits would have been returned, as a minor cannot gamble, or at least in Canada enter into legal contracts.

BWin only became aware after the player submitted ID requesting a withdrawal.

The player was placing sports bets, it's quite easy to lose them all (he admits to one $50 win).

I'd think that keeping his lost bets is acceptable, and the remaining balance of $750, or even $700 if you subtract the winning bet, should be paid back to the player.

Since BWin won't participate in the PAB, the OP needs to take it to the regulator.

I do hope you come back and let us know the results.

 

[benj227]

Thanks ! I will fill in the complaint form and see how it goes !

 

[vinylweatherman]

Since this is beyond the boundaries of normal fraud, the rules may be a little different. No matter how you look at it, providing false information is fraud. But in this case a crime has been committed. Accepting bets from minors is a crime. I'm not sure if the crime is negated from the casino side since the casino was unaware of this transgression, but at this point we have the player admitting to the crime. In this case I would say it's a situation of: "Failure to adhere to these conditions will result in the user's account being closed and implementation of all other necessary measures."

In other words you are SOL. We can debate whether or not you should get any further funds from the casino until the cows come home - a law was broken and you need real legal advice.

Have you contacted the GRA? if not, why not?

Exactly, it is not "necessary" for them to grab the remaining funds not lost to the house in valid wagers. It is merely "desirable" for them to keep it as extra profit. They felt it "necessary" to return the original deposit made when under age, and yes, laws were broken THEN. Laws are not being broken NOW though, the current set of wagers are valid, and this is more a case of Bwin exercising their right who they do business with, in which case there is no justification for keeping the account balance once that decision has been made. The other bets were accepted in good faith by Bwin, from an adult, so they have a very good case here for keeping the money lost by the player.

The duff data was a single figure, the date of birth, and done by a minor to deceive the system so that he could play. As an adult, the player did nothing wrong. The wrong date of birth could not be corrected, and the player decided that now he was an adult, he was properly able to play in law, and Bwin were legally allowed to accept the bets.

He didn't even ask for the old deposit back, but took it's loss as a lesson learned as a minor. It may be "only $750", but the principle being applied by Bwin is that they could keep an unlimited amount on these grounds, way beyond what anyone in their right mind would consider reasonable. He could have deposited substantial sums as an adult, and played for a long time, Bwin could have seized tens of thousands in deposits that were not lost to the house, all over an indiscretion over $35 as a teenager.

If a player took such an aggressive advantage of a casino's mistake they would risk ending up in the evil player list. For a player, the right thing to do would be to tell the casino about the overpayment. The legally "necessary" thing to do would be to put aside the overpayment and wait for the casino to "prove the debt" by asking for it's return. If the casino do not make contact for 6 years (here in the UK), the debt can no longer be claimed, and the money legally, if not morally, then becomes the players' property.

Oddly, casinos have the exact same approach to dormant accounts, and often in much less than 6 years they consider the money is legally theirs if the player has not asked for it back.

Casinos should not be allowed to arbitrarily seize funds still sitting in a players' account just because they can. It has nothing to do with bets, it is money on deposit waiting to be wagered or withdrawn. If it's source is legitimate, it should be returned when the business relationship is ended by either party.

The player could have avoided this by being LESS honest, and breaking another term and making a new account as an adult.

By refusing to allow mediation, Bwin put themselves in the situation where the player cannot go about resolving the dispute in a more gentle manner. The GRA are hardly unbiased, they rule in favor of "spirit of" arguments from casinos, whereas a normal court would look strictly at the legal meaning of the terms and conditions, and the relevant laws of the country the player was in.

Taking them to court is more likely to be effective than going to the GRA. In the UK, for such small amounts there is no need to get a lawyer involved, the judge will look at both sides, and then apply consumer vs business law, which levels the playing field rather than allowing big business to use expensive lawyers to bully the customer into admitting defeat.

Betfair tried grabbing money back from players who took advantage of the terms and conditions, and then threatened those players who had moved the money out of reach with court action, only to back down when players said "bring it on" rather than return the money. Betfair even decided to keep DEPOSITS from players in some cases, and the whole mess ended up with them getting away with the cash grab, but ending up in the rogue pit.

If the player decides to try the courts, forget about just getting the balance back, argue that the case put forward by Bwin means that legally all bets, even as an adult, are void because of trying to sneak in under age. Bwin will have a hard job arguing it can pick and choose which bets stand, and which are void, purely to manipulate the player's balance to zero.

If he did take advice, the advice may not necessarily be to take action in Gibraltar in any case. More likely, it will be based on what action he could take on home turf, and based on domestic laws.

In the UK, when something is bought on credit, the bank becomes jointly liable for anything going wrong, and unlike the merchant, the bank is under UK jurisdiction, so could find itself liable even where the merchant argues it is not under it's own laws.

Banks recently fought this principle when it came to cross border transactions, arguing that the law only applied to goods and services bought within the UK. The banks lost the case, and now ALL transactions worldwide are covered.

A UK player in this situation could go down the joint liability route, and if they could show that keeping the money was illegal under UK law, could get the bank to pay up under the principle of joint liability. If this failed, a UK player could get a court judgement against the operator in this country, and then would be allowed to enforce it by any legal means they could find.

Operators know all about this, which is why they are usually keen to refund deposits at the time they make their final decision on a case. Claiming winnings is harder than claiming the return of your own money, and operators know that they can usually get away with confiscating winnings by saying all bets placed are considered void.

 

[inintelligent]

I see no reason for Bwin to not approve the withdrawal, regardless of TS opening the account while being underage. People residing in Switzerland are considered quite wealthy people in general. TS would be a prime customer. What does it really matter if he opened the account when he was underaged? As long as he is of age now, the company is not breaking any laws. Everyone happy?

I see two possiblities here, 1) TS is not telling the full story 2) Bwin has serious cash flow issues. Sorry TS, but I would vote for #1

I opened probably 5-6 accounts with different bookie, poker, casino sites when i was underaged. Those were major companies like unibet, fulltilt, expekt..I had no issues stating "I was not of legal age when I registered. I am now of legal age. Please update my information.". Deposits/Withdrawals were smooth as ever..

 

[vinylweatherman]

I see no reason for Bwin to not approve the withdrawal, regardless of TS opening the account while being underage. People residing in Switzerland are considered quite wealthy people in general. TS would be a prime customer. What does it really matter if he opened the account when he was underaged? As long as he is of age now, the company is not breaking any laws. Everyone happy?

I see two possiblities here, 1) TS is not telling the full story 2) Bwin has serious cash flow issues. Sorry TS, but I would vote for #1

I opened probably 5-6 accounts with different bookie, poker, casino sites when i was underaged. Those were major companies like unibet, fulltilt, expekt..I had no issues stating "I was not of legal age when I registered. I am now of legal age. Please update my information.". Deposits/Withdrawals were smooth as ever..

If anything, this makes the Bwin decision all the more bizarre. I would have expected more than an "OK, forgiven, you can play now" from this many operators. Bwin make this look so serious a matter that they go much further than merely lock the account, they see it so bad that they have to confiscate new money deposited and played quite legally, and will not entertain a "sorry" and update the date of birth.

I would have expected at least some to have told you that they accept the apology and correction, but won't have you back because you deceived them into breaking the law by accepting the bets of a minor.

I wonder if this has something to do with them not having any of your money at the time, so deciding to let you in as an adult so you could lose some.


Since Bwin do not accept mediation, the only way we will get to hear their side is if the GRA get involved, and publish the findings. The OP has free reign to spin this story in their favour without being told to "shut up & PAB now".

Operators that choose to hide behind jurisdictions that are biased in their favour, and not allow true independent mediation of disputes, leave themselves open to the "sob story" approach to resolving a dispute.

 

[benj227]

inintelligent : I did tell the true story and would have no reason not to It's a forum and I'm just seeking help so yes, it's the total truth and I told you guys everything.

Now, I believe Bwin didn't seek mediation because I asked for 100% withdrawal so they probably preferred hiding behind an excuse and blocking my account to keep the money... Maybe...

When they accepted my ID, they didn't block the account or anything... Just when I asked for total withdrawal because I wanted to take a break with gambling... !

 

[Nifty29]

Exactly, it is not "necessary" for them to grab the remaining funds not lost to the house in valid wagers. It is merely "desirable" for them to keep it as extra profit. They felt it "necessary" to return the original deposit made when under age, and yes, laws were broken THEN. Laws are not being broken NOW though, the current set of wagers are valid, and this is more a case of Bwin exercising their right who they do business with, in which case there is no justification for keeping the account balance once that decision has been made. The other bets were accepted in good faith by Bwin, from an adult, so they have a very good case here for keeping the money lost by the player.

The duff data was a single figure, the date of birth, and done by a minor to deceive the system so that he could play. As an adult, the player did nothing wrong. The wrong date of birth could not be corrected, and the player decided that now he was an adult, he was properly able to play in law, and Bwin were legally allowed to accept the bets.

He didn't even ask for the old deposit back, but took it's loss as a lesson learned as a minor. It may be "only $750", but the principle being applied by Bwin is that they could keep an unlimited amount on these grounds, way beyond what anyone in their right mind would consider reasonable. He could have deposited substantial sums as an adult, and played for a long time, Bwin could have seized tens of thousands in deposits that were not lost to the house, all over an indiscretion over $35 as a teenager.

If a player took such an aggressive advantage of a casino's mistake they would risk ending up in the evil player list. For a player, the right thing to do would be to tell the casino about the overpayment. The legally "necessary" thing to do would be to put aside the overpayment and wait for the casino to "prove the debt" by asking for it's return. If the casino do not make contact for 6 years (here in the UK), the debt can no longer be claimed, and the money legally, if not morally, then becomes the players' property.

Oddly, casinos have the exact same approach to dormant accounts, and often in much less than 6 years they consider the money is legally theirs if the player has not asked for it back.

Casinos should not be allowed to arbitrarily seize funds still sitting in a players' account just because they can. It has nothing to do with bets, it is money on deposit waiting to be wagered or withdrawn. If it's source is legitimate, it should be returned when the business relationship is ended by either party.

The player could have avoided this by being LESS honest, and breaking another term and making a new account as an adult.

By refusing to allow mediation, Bwin put themselves in the situation where the player cannot go about resolving the dispute in a more gentle manner. The GRA are hardly unbiased, they rule in favor of "spirit of" arguments from casinos, whereas a normal court would look strictly at the legal meaning of the terms and conditions, and the relevant laws of the country the player was in.

Taking them to court is more likely to be effective than going to the GRA. In the UK, for such small amounts there is no need to get a lawyer involved, the judge will look at both sides, and then apply consumer vs business law, which levels the playing field rather than allowing big business to use expensive lawyers to bully the customer into admitting defeat.

Betfair tried grabbing money back from players who took advantage of the terms and conditions, and then threatened those players who had moved the money out of reach with court action, only to back down when players said "bring it on" rather than return the money. Betfair even decided to keep DEPOSITS from players in some cases, and the whole mess ended up with them getting away with the cash grab, but ending up in the rogue pit.

If the player decides to try the courts, forget about just getting the balance back, argue that the case put forward by Bwin means that legally all bets, even as an adult, are void because of trying to sneak in under age. Bwin will have a hard job arguing it can pick and choose which bets stand, and which are void, purely to manipulate the player's balance to zero.

If he did take advice, the advice may not necessarily be to take action in Gibraltar in any case. More likely, it will be based on what action he could take on home turf, and based on domestic laws.

In the UK, when something is bought on credit, the bank becomes jointly liable for anything going wrong, and unlike the merchant, the bank is under UK jurisdiction, so could find itself liable even where the merchant argues it is not under it's own laws.

Banks recently fought this principle when it came to cross border transactions, arguing that the law only applied to goods and services bought within the UK. The banks lost the case, and now ALL transactions worldwide are covered.

A UK player in this situation could go down the joint liability route, and if they could show that keeping the money was illegal under UK law, could get the bank to pay up under the principle of joint liability. If this failed, a UK player could get a court judgement against the operator in this country, and then would be allowed to enforce it by any legal means they could find.

Operators know all about this, which is why they are usually keen to refund deposits at the time they make their final decision on a case. Claiming winnings is harder than claiming the return of your own money, and operators know that they can usually get away with confiscating winnings by saying all bets placed are considered void.

Again, you're not a lawyer of any description, so all 5000 words are mere conjecture.

@the OP.......Please do what CM said.....there is another GRA too which is far better than anything in this thread:

Get Real Advice

If you want to take the legal route, IGNORE everything you read and see a LAWYER.

 

[Seventh777]

Is it just me that noticed this, or are we seeing an influx of posts from underage gamblers?.

 

[Jasminebed]

Is it just me that noticed this, or are we seeing an influx of posts from underage gamblers?.

Well, two in a few days. A little like hitting the bonus round within a few spins after a dry spell.

One in the States, one in Switzerland, different casinos. I'm voting coincidence.

 

[dionysus]

Lol, I'm sure there's A LOT more than 2

 

[Seventh777]

Well, two in a few days. A little like hitting the bonus round within a few spins after a dry spell.

One in the States, one in Switzerland, different casinos. I'm voting coincidence.

I`m not a strong believer in coincidence hun, now, when I was a young lad I done some pretty stupid things, the last thing I would have done after doing these is bring attention to myself via a world wide audience courtesy of a gambling forum, also, as picked up by Nifty in the other thread, the punctuation/grammar is almost perfect, there are basically two types of children at school, those that break the rules, those that don`t, those that do break the rules would have trouble stringing together a coherent sentence, let alone have the intelligence to search for a gambling forum to express themselves on, those that have the intelligence to write legible sentences would not have got themselves in this predicament in the 1st place.

I have been using this forum for nearly two years, and these are the 1st cases of underage gambling I have seen, both coming within a few days, i`m voting highly suspicious.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I`m not a strong believer in coincidence hun, now, when I was a young lad I done some pretty stupid things, the last thing I would have done after doing these is bring attention to myself via a world wide audience courtesy of a gambling forum, also, as picked up by Nifty in the other thread, the punctuation/grammar is almost perfect, there are basically two types of children at school, those that break the rules, those that don`t, those that do break the rules would have trouble stringing together a coherent sentence, let alone have the intelligence to search for a gambling forum to express themselves on, those that have the intelligence to write legible sentences would not have got themselves in this predicament in the 1st place.

I have been using this forum for nearly two years, and these are the 1st cases of underage gambling I have seen, both coming within a few days, i`m voting highly suspicious.

Well, Bryan can check IP addresses to see if they really do come from different sides of the world.

As for saying "get a lawyer", it's all very well, but they charge a fortune and are not worth it for small amounts, so although not the best, advice from outside the legal profession can be the only realistic option. The time to get a lawyer is when you go to court, even then, many just can't afford the expense, and give it a go themselves.

In many cases, it never gets to court, it's a bluff from a big company that mere customers will be scared off from fighting. In the UK, you can call this bluff for around £60, and get a court date set and a summons sent out. The company then starts negotiating when before it was "talk to the hand". For £60, a lawyer would just about answer the phone.

 

[Nifty29]

Well, Bryan can check IP addresses to see if they really do come from different sides of the world.

As for saying "get a lawyer", it's all very well, but they charge a fortune and are not worth it for small amounts, so although not the best, advice from outside the legal profession can be the only realistic option. The time to get a lawyer is when you go to court, even then, many just can't afford the expense, and give it a go themselves.

In many cases, it never gets to court, it's a bluff from a big company that mere customers will be scared off from fighting. In the UK, you can call this bluff for around £60, and get a court date set and a summons sent out. The company then starts negotiating when before it was "talk to the hand". For £60, a lawyer would just about answer the phone.

There are ways to get free professional legal advice.

The point about getting a lawyer/proper legal advice is so that people don't go off making rash decisions and filing court papers and affidavits etc based on the dubious opinions of backyard lawyers who watch too much Law & Order.

I doubt the casino will be trembling in their boots when they receive summonses involving a plaintiff/applicant representing themselves. An operator might well be willing to spend more than the value of the claim, merely to deter others from taking the same action.

It might well be a huge waste of time and effort, and quite possibly more money for the OP....which brings me back to the initial point of not relying on armchair Perry Masons when making decisions.

Some lawyers will take these cases on a "no win no fee" basis. If they won't, then there's a fair chance it is a dead duck from the off.

 

[benj227]

Okay so I contacted the GRA and sending the complaint today through the post.

I'm not getting a lawyer for that amount, it will cost me more. That will be the last attempt I guess.

I just told the truth in the complaint, same as I I did here. We'll see what they decide.

I also contacted the Swiss gambling regulator.

Concerning the other under aged users that are on this form, no idea what you are talking about I have one account and an admin can check that with the IP

 

[vinylweatherman]

There are ways to get free professional legal advice.

The point about getting a lawyer/proper legal advice is so that people don't go off making rash decisions and filing court papers and affidavits etc based on the dubious opinions of backyard lawyers who watch too much Law & Order.

I doubt the casino will be trembling in their boots when they receive summonses involving a plaintiff/applicant representing themselves. An operator might well be willing to spend more than the value of the claim, merely to deter others from taking the same action.

It might well be a huge waste of time and effort, and quite possibly more money for the OP....which brings me back to the initial point of not relying on armchair Perry Masons when making decisions.

Some lawyers will take these cases on a "no win no fee" basis. If they won't, then there's a fair chance it is a dead duck from the off.

You would be surprised. Often it is down to the company not wanting to lose a case and set a legal precedent. They will often cave in rather than actually risk losing in court. Only where they are 100% certain they can win will they call the bluff and say "see you in court".

The UK banks paid out millions rather than allow a case to set a precedent. In the end they needn't have bothered, when it finally came to court, the banks won in principle.

We have a few advice sites here in the UK that tell us NOT to waste money on lawyers and claims management companies, else we get ripped off. The "no win, no fee" companies take a huge slice of any winning settlement, 30% or more. Some have even found the bill comes to more than the award, even when they thought it was "no win, no fee".

Lawyers like us to be scared of the law, which is how they can drive Bentleys and live in big houses. It's a matter of risk. If you are arguing over a million quid, it probably is worth getting a lawyer when it comes to preparing court papers, but for $750 you are probably better off going it alone, but using all avenues you can find to pursue the case. Often, just being an infernal nuisance gets you paid off on a "goodwill, no liabilty admitted" basis.

 

[benj227]

I also sent a dispute to Ecogra, telling them the exact same thing as I did to the GRA.

 

[Nifty29]

You would be surprised. Often it is down to the company not wanting to lose a case and set a legal precedent. They will often cave in rather than actually risk losing in court. Only where they are 100% certain they can win will they call the bluff and say "see you in court".

The UK banks paid out millions rather than allow a case to set a precedent. In the end they needn't have bothered, when it finally came to court, the banks won in principle.

We have a few advice sites here in the UK that tell us NOT to waste money on lawyers and claims management companies, else we get ripped off. The "no win, no fee" companies take a huge slice of any winning settlement, 30% or more. Some have even found the bill comes to more than the award, even when they thought it was "no win, no fee".

Lawyers like us to be scared of the law, which is how they can drive Bentleys and live in big houses. It's a matter of risk. If you are arguing over a million quid, it probably is worth getting a lawyer when it comes to preparing court papers, but for $750 you are probably better off going it alone, but using all avenues you can find to pursue the case. Often, just being an infernal nuisance gets you paid off on a "goodwill, no liabilty admitted" basis.

Cool.

Have you got the figures there handy to support your "They will often cave in rather than actually risk losing in court" statement, particularly with reference to online casino disputes involving breaches of terms? You obviously have them, or you would not be able to make such a statement. Perhaps your clerk can research them for you

Over here at least, it is illegal for lawyers to claim any payment from a client in a no-win no-fee case, except when it involves certain disbursements.

I also assume the OP would have to go to Gibraltar to submit his claim, since it is the governing law in this case? Or will the UK courts hear it? I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure.

 

[Balthazar]

I also assume the OP would have to go to Gibraltar to submit his claim, since it is the governing law in this case? Or will the UK courts hear it?

That's an interesting question. Usually it's where the crime took place (ie: if someone overseas hacks into the Pentagon, he/she commits a crime in the US and will likely face extradition). In this case, that would be Gibraltar (assuming that the gaming servers are physically there). I'm no lawyer either, though.

 

[vinylweatherman]

The US view is that the location of the play is at the user's PC, not the server. The new UK regulations also stipulate that UK players are gambling at their PC, on British soil.

No win no fee companies just can't charge up front, what they do is if they win, they take a percentage of what they have won for the client. A few have even charged an "administration fee" for looking at the case, but this is frowned upon by the UK regulators.

Since Gibraltar is a UK protectorate, it may be possible to apply to the UK court to have the case heard in the UK. This may not be possible everywhere. Forcing an individual to sue a big company in a foreign country is hardly fair, which is why within the EU there is a provision for the underdog to have the case moved to his location. An application needs to be made to the court for permission. Some UK players did this in the Betfair case.