Cabaret Club changes the amount of my withdrawal manually, what do you think?

[Mouche12]

I won $250 after playing free spins at Cabaret Club and withdrew $100 on 5 March (max cashout according to their rules). I left the remaining balance in my account and left the casino.

On 7 March I received an email telling me that I had breached the promotional terms and that the remainder will be confiscated, which leaves me with $100. This strikes me as odd, because I never cashed out $250.

I then checked my transaction history and it shows that on 7 March a withdrawal has been made of $250 - and this is my problem: someone at the casino has manually changed my $100 withdrawal to a $250 withdrawal, hence the email referred to above...

I spent quite some time at Live Chat explaining that someone must have had access to my account in order to change my withdrawal. They ignore my question and play stupid, referring to the bonus terms. They try to get someone from the financial dept., but again refer to the bonus terms. The problem is of course NOt the $100 max cashout, I am familiar with the rules. What troubles me is that my $100 withdrawal on 5 March was manually changed to $250 on 7 March.

What do you guys think? Honestly, I think it's a bit frightening. I have a copy of the live chat (mostly in Dutch) and a screenshot from the transaction history.

 

[maphesto]

Please check with Palace Groups rep here! They are accredited here and the best way to sort things out is to contact the rep first.

 

[Nifty29]

The free spins have a $100 max withdraw yes?

If so, what's your issue?

The casino has the right to adjust your account in appropriate circumstances, such as removing excess winnings.

Are you out of pocket? Were you planning to generate some comp points with the rest?

Honestly, I don't see how this constitutes a reasonable complaint.

 

[Mouche12]

The free spins have a $100 max withdraw yes?

If so, what's your issue?

The casino has the right to adjust your account in appropriate circumstances, such as removing excess winnings.

Are you out of pocket? Were you planning to generate some comp points with the rest?

Honestly, I don't see how this constitutes a reasonable complaint.

But that's not the crux: I withdrew $100 on 5 March - and my transaction history shows that I withdrew $250 on 7 March (which I did not). This is not a removal of excess funds, this is about changing the amount of my withdrawal at a later date... And it seems not to be a serious complaint, but when you also get an email telling you that you've breached the casino's terms... I think it is all a bit odd.

Yes, I will contact the rep.

 

[just play]

But that's not the crux: I withdrew $100 on 5 March - and my transaction history shows that I withdrew $250 on 7 March (which I did not). This is not a removal of excess funds, this is about changing the amount of my withdrawal at a later date... And it seems not to be a serious complaint, but when you also get an email telling you that you've breached the casino's terms... I think it is all a bit odd.

Yes, I will contact the rep.

I thought this was normal practice? If there is a max withdrawal, it doesn't matter what you type in for a withdrawal you only get the max.

I think what happened to you is (I could of course be wrong) they didn't want you making comps on the extra money you left in your account? Don't some casinos have this rule? So they changed the withdrawal to $250 instead of $100. (even tho your only getting $100) It wasn't a player, or your account wasn't highjacked, it was the financial department or whomever deals with withdrawals.

You are getting your withdrawal of $100 correct? How quickly does this casino pay? Isn't 2 days a long time for anyone not in USA? That's the only thing I would be concerned about.

On 7 March I received an email telling me that I had breached the promotional terms and that the remainder will be confiscated, which leaves me with $100.

This part does confuse me...you can only cashout $100, and they say you breached the promotional terms but left the $100 in your account?

 

[Mouche12]

I thought this was normal practice? If there is a max withdrawal, it doesn't matter what you type in for a withdrawal you only get the max.

I think what happened to you is (I could of course be wrong) they didn't want you making comps on the extra money you left in your account? Don't some casinos have this rule? So they changed the withdrawal to $250 instead of $100. (even tho your only getting $100) It wasn't a player, or your account wasn't highjacked, it was the financial department or whomever deals with withdrawals.

You are getting your withdrawal of $100 correct? How quickly does this casino pay? Isn't 2 days a long time for anyone not in USA? That's the only thing I would be concerned about.



This part does confuse me...you can only cashout $100, and they say you breached the promotional terms but left the $100 in your account?

Thanks for your response just play. I would think that removing the excess balance in itself is fine, but they changed the withdrawal amount instead - yeah, finance dept. did, but they refused to admit this, they kept beating around the bush. Also, the email they sent told me that I had breached the terms - whilst I had withdrawn $100 and THEY had changed the amount.

Withdrawal times: well, I won't be depositing here (I deposited several times a few years back): it can take up to 7 business days to receive the money in my Neteller account. I thought this timeframe only applied to bank accounts, but according to live chat it can also take that long for e-wallets.

Not so impressive for an accredited casino heh?

 

[vinylweatherman]

The problem is the accusation that the player breached the rules - he didn't. He requested the max allowed. The casino should simply have made the necessary adjustment, rather than start an argument about breaking the terms.

The terms said max withdrawal 100, and that's what the player requested. The details of how they deal with the excess is up to them, it's not something the player should have to worry about. They should have explained to the player that altering the withdrawal to 250 was just their way of dealing with the clear up. By being evasive and hitting back with an accusation, they have made the player believe something dodgy was going on, in this case a CS operative being able to enter the account and alter the activity logs and change the players' request.

It's an issue of attitude and procedure, there is no money outstanding if the player received 100 and the rest was removed.

The casino is making a big deal over nothing. Comp points are a miserly contribution to the player experience compared to welcome bonuses, and even deposit bonuses. 150 will not generate much, and after all, casinos do argue that the "spirit" of these types of promotion are to extend the playing time of players. They can't have it both ways, and this attitude is demonstrating that the "spirit" is for players to make the minimum play necessary to meet WR, after which they are obligated to cease enjoying the games and cash in what they have left. The problem is that players who DO "play to win the bonus" in this manner, rather than play on for entertainment, get accused of withdrawing as soon as they are able, and not "playing for entertainment".

If they are that worried, why not just deny new acounts entry to the comp point program until a deposit has been made. I recall the comp point system being something you had to opt in for, and also something the casino could just not offer if they didn't want to. It meant many players didn't earn points for their first session or two in any case.

 

[Mouche12]

The problem is the accusation that the player breached the rules - he didn't. He requested the max allowed. The casino should simply have made the necessary adjustment, rather than start an argument about breaking the terms.

The terms said max withdrawal 100, and that's what the player requested. The details of how they deal with the excess is up to them, it's not something the player should have to worry about. They should have explained to the player that altering the withdrawal to 250 was just their way of dealing with the clear up. By being evasive and hitting back with an accusation, they have made the player believe something dodgy was going on, in this case a CS operative being able to enter the account and alter the activity logs and change the players' request.

It's an issue of attitude and procedure, there is no money outstanding if the player received 100 and the rest was removed.

The casino is making a big deal over nothing. Comp points are a miserly contribution to the player experience compared to welcome bonuses, and even deposit bonuses. 150 will not generate much, and after all, casinos do argue that the "spirit" of these types of promotion are to extend the playing time of players. They can't have it both ways, and this attitude is demonstrating that the "spirit" is for players to make the minimum play necessary to meet WR, after which they are obligated to cease enjoying the games and cash in what they have left. The problem is that players who DO "play to win the bonus" in this manner, rather than play on for entertainment, get accused of withdrawing as soon as they are able, and not "playing for entertainment".

If they are that worried, why not just deny new acounts entry to the comp point program until a deposit has been made. I recall the comp point system being something you had to opt in for, and also something the casino could just not offer if they didn't want to. It meant many players didn't earn points for their first session or two in any case.

Well said vinylweatherman (as always). Yeah, the casino can pretty do what they want with the excess winnings, as long as they are honest about it - they will send my $100 winnings (so they promised) - account has been verified. But it's their behaviour that worries me. It's only $100, no big deal, it's the principle that matters. I think that an accredited casino should handle all things professionally and not send emails telling the player that he has breached the casino terms whilst he did not (although they will send the payment nevertheless) - it's confusing and leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

 

[Nifty29]

Its a great big hullabaloo over nothing once again.....fuelled by someone who once again claims to know exactly what the casino internal procedures and thinking is.

I think its fairly obvious, unless mouche actually DID break some rules (which VWM says he didn't and he has personal access to everyone's account at every casino so....), that by "broke the terms of the promotion" the CSR actually meant that mouche did not withdraw his full balance, but rather just the $100 max and left $150 there to keep playing (for comps presumably...mouche?). Obviously, this is not the norm, as most players would just play their balance down to the max cashout amount and THEN withdraw.

I really do NOT think that the CSR was saying that mouche was a "fraudster" etc, but rather that his action in leaving cash in his account was "suspicious". A poor choice of words by the CSR methinks....hardly the first time its happened somewhere....which was pounced upon by someone who tends to complain first and think later (sorry mouche but you do), instead of asking the rep to explain FIRST what terms he broke if any. I am 99.9% sure that this wouldn't even be a thread if mouche had done this, and Bryan and Max have stated ad nauseum that it is the PROPER way. It prevents bad PR that is undeserved and stops other self-certified "experts" telling how it all "went down" and how its yet another "evil casino trick".

Bottom line is that the OP is NOT OUT OF POCKET. Nobody has been ripped off/stooged etc. Its a NON issue.

How do I know all this??.....simple logic. If the casino DID think the OP broke the terms he would NOT have been paid anything.

Fwiw re comps. Anyone who thinks its a "tiny/unimportant" consideration for the player may have a point where the average Joe is concerned (APs and pros think otherwise), but from the CASINO POV it is a cost/overhead, and when you multiply these "tiny" amounts by 100,000+ it becomes a serious consideration.

Saying it makes no difference just shows that the person saying it doesn't know as much as they think they know.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Its a great big hullabaloo over nothing once again.....fuelled by someone who once again claims to know exactly what the casino internal procedures and thinking is.

I think its fairly obvious, unless mouche actually DID break some rules (which VWM says he didn't and he has personal access to everyone's account at every casino so....), that by "broke the terms of the promotion" the CSR actually meant that mouche did not withdraw his full balance, but rather just the $100 max and left $150 there to keep playing (for comps presumably...mouche?). Obviously, this is not the norm, as most players would just play their balance down to the max cashout amount and THEN withdraw.

I really do NOT think that the CSR was saying that mouche was a "fraudster" etc, but rather that his action in leaving cash in his account was "suspicious". A poor choice of words by the CSR methinks....hardly the first time its happened somewhere....which was pounced upon by someone who tends to complain first and think later (sorry mouche but you do), instead of asking the rep to explain FIRST what terms he broke if any. I am 99.9% sure that this wouldn't even be a thread if mouche had done this, and Bryan and Max have stated ad nauseum that it is the PROPER way. It prevents bad PR that is undeserved and stops other self-certified "experts" telling how it all "went down" and how its yet another "evil casino trick".

Bottom line is that the OP is NOT OUT OF POCKET. Nobody has been ripped off/stooged etc. Its a NON issue.

How do I know all this??.....simple logic. If the casino DID think the OP broke the terms he would NOT have been paid anything.

Fwiw re comps. Anyone who thinks its a "tiny/unimportant" consideration for the player may have a point where the average Joe is concerned (APs and pros think otherwise), but from the CASINO POV it is a cost/overhead, and when you multiply these "tiny" amounts by 100,000+ it becomes a serious consideration.

Saying it makes no difference just shows that the person saying it doesn't know as much as they think they know.

There is no rule broken. It WOULD surely be just as valid to argue that trying to withdraw $250 knowing that the max allowed is $100 is breaking the rules. I see no problem at all in playing on for entertainment, after all this is what they are selling, and the OP can't play for real cash till the withdrawal is paid out.

If the casino is that worried, why not automate the system so that the excess is removed at the point of withdrawal in the same way that Clearplay removes unconverted bonus funds where early withdrawal is allowed.

I recall having a similar situation with Playtech long ago. I tried to withdraw the WHOLE balance (what the OP should supposedly have done), not leaving the phantom bonus behind, and this was wrong, and I was supposed to just withdraw the withdrawable amount and leave the bonus behind for removal.

There is no standard industry practice, so it is plain wrong to accuse a player who either leaves the extra behind or withdraws the lot of breaking the rules. It is up to the casino to implement a clear system so that players are guided correctly through the process. Some RTG casinos now do things a different way, and a few players end up thinking they have to leave the bonus behind when it has actually been removed in play once WR has been met.

Casinos grossly overestimate the risk of a few comp points getting won if players play on. In any case, the OP could have just played it down from 250 to 100 and withdrawn at that stage. It would be no different to withdrawing 100 and playing the rest away.

Had the casino just got on with it and paid 100 after the manual adjustment, and explained to the player this was why they had to meddle with the account, it would be a non issue. Instead, they took a defensive stance when asked a perfectly legitimate question, and accused the player of breaking the terms. This then gets the player worried, because an accusation of breaking the terms is not a trivial matter, and often results in a withdrawal being voided.

 

[Webzcas]

The problem is the accusation that the player breached the rules - he didn't. He requested the max allowed. The casino should simply have made the necessary adjustment, rather than start an argument about breaking the terms.

The terms said max withdrawal 100, and that's what the player requested. The details of how they deal with the excess is up to them, it's not something the player should have to worry about. They should have explained to the player that altering the withdrawal to 250 was just their way of dealing with the clear up. By being evasive and hitting back with an accusation, they have made the player believe something dodgy was going on, in this case a CS operative being able to enter the account and alter the activity logs and change the players' request.

It's an issue of attitude and procedure, there is no money outstanding if the player received 100 and the rest was removed.

The casino is making a big deal over nothing. Comp points are a miserly contribution to the player experience compared to welcome bonuses, and even deposit bonuses. 150 will not generate much, and after all, casinos do argue that the "spirit" of these types of promotion are to extend the playing time of players. They can't have it both ways, and this attitude is demonstrating that the "spirit" is for players to make the minimum play necessary to meet WR, after which they are obligated to cease enjoying the games and cash in what they have left. The problem is that players who DO "play to win the bonus" in this manner, rather than play on for entertainment, get accused of withdrawing as soon as they are able, and not "playing for entertainment".

If they are that worried, why not just deny new acounts entry to the comp point program until a deposit has been made. I recall the comp point system being something you had to opt in for, and also something the casino could just not offer if they didn't want to. It meant many players didn't earn points for their first session or two in any case.

Excellent post VMW. Nail hit squarely and firmly on the head.

It's an issue of attitude and procedure

This is the Palace Group.....Nuff said.

 

[Nifty29]

The things is....it was NOT the cashier department who gave that explanation....it was a live chat drone. I don't understand why people continue to ask remotely "involved" questions via live chat....it has been proven to be a waste of time at just about every casino around.

The CSR may not even have a good command of English, and, as I said, did not mean they had "broken the terms" but just done something that involved the cashiers manually reversing and re-submitting withdrawals. The CSR probably just looked at the screen, saw the removal of $250 and the cashout of $100 and thought the $100 was your deposit and the rest was confiscated winnings etc. It is obvious they did not know what they were on about, or they would have explained what actually happened.

I just don't see the big hoohah over the distinct possibility that a CSR mis-spoke, especially since the rep has not had a chance to explain here as yet.

The whole comp points issue is a seperate one. If the casino doesn't want people playing on with the funds after a withdrawal then it is their perogative. It is hardly criminal. Just play elsewhere that doesn't do it. Mouche wasn't even complaining about the comp points....just the withdrawal part, of which we are yet to hear the casino's version.

It's not an issue of new players either.....Mouche didn't say he was a new player. I got this impression he isn't, but he can correct that if necessary. So that point is irrelevant. The best way would be to not allow comp points on free spin winnings or ND bonuses. It can't be that hard to implement.

It might only be $150, but the play could well generate quite a few comps if the player gets lucky. If they clocked up $10, and went on to cashout $500 which they could well do, that is another $500 on top of the $100 the casino has already given away free.

 

[SirWegs]

If max payout is $100, and you cash it out. Of course you will lose the rest. Stop nagging and be happy with your $100 free cash you got!

 

[Mouche12]

QTE from Weatherman, again well said:
Instead, they took a defensive stance when asked a perfectly legitimate question, and accused the player of breaking the terms. This then gets the player worried, because an accusation of breaking the terms is not a trivial matter, and often results in a withdrawal being voided. UNQTE

Oh, I am happy with my $100 withdrawal (when I receive it in 3 to 7 days), but that is not what's going on here. This is NOT a non-issue Nifty. The casino has reversed my $100 withdrawal (of 5 March) and replaced it with a $250 withdrawal on 7 March. CS plays stupid, keeps beating around the bush after having sent me an email (in Dutch) that I've breached the terms. The person at Live Chat was Dutch and he understood my question very well, he only prentended not to... and that's not a good thing.

I am a she, and I have deposited in the past. Removing the excess balance from my account would have been fine of course.

I had already contacted the rep, who sent me a PM today that he will look into this and revert to me.

 

[Balthazar]

Removing the excess balance from my account would have been fine of course.

That's exactly what they did, it's just that they went through the withdrawal process to remove the excess funds. The reason why they said that you "breached the promotional terms" is because you tried to keep that extra $150 after making your $100 withdrawal.

Max cashout was $100 and you got $100. Case closed.

 

[Mouche12]

That's exactly what they did, it's just that they went through the withdrawal process to remove the excess funds.

Max cashout was $100 and you got $100. Case closed.

Well, the big thing is that they accuse me of having breached the terms because I cashed out $250 - which I did not, they did! - and CSR refuses to elaborate, their finance dept. also only refers to the bonus terms re $100 max cashout and when I repeat my question about the casino gaining access to my account and reversing my 5 March withdrawal of $100 to a $250 withdrawal on 7 March, CSR continues to play stupid and refers to the bonus terms over and over again.

 

[Balthazar]

Well, the big thing is that they accuse me of having breached the terms because I cashed out $250

No, they accuse you of breaching the terms because you kept money in your account (that's why they had to manually cashout the remaining $150 and then confiscate the excess winnings). Cashing out more than what you're allowed to isn't breaching any term, they just confiscate it. That's what you're supposed to do.

 

[just play]

Well, the big thing is that they accuse me of having breached the terms because I cashed out $250 - which I did not, they did! - and CSR refuses to elaborate, their finance dept. also only refers to the bonus terms re $100 max cashout and when I repeat my question about the casino gaining access to my account and reversing my 5 March withdrawal of $100 to a $250 withdrawal on 7 March, CSR continues to play stupid and refers to the bonus terms over and over again.

What I take from your posts is...your most upset over them accusing you of breaching their terms. (I would be upset as well if I got accused of something I didn't think I did) I think maybe it's just a communication problem, someone isn't understand someone. You are going to get paid the $100 correct? I would let this one go.

Of course the casino can gain access to your account. This isn't something suspicious, they gain access to your account for many reasons...add in a bonus, approve withdrawals, etc...this isn't out of the ordinary.

Once you get paid, don't play there anymore.

 

[SirWegs]

That's exactly what they did, it's just that they went through the withdrawal process to remove the excess funds. The reason why they said that you "breached the promotional terms" is because you tried to keep that extra $150 after making your $100 withdrawal.

Max cashout was $100 and you got $100. Case closed.

Exactly

 

[Mouche12]

No, they accuse you of breaching the terms because you kept money in your account (that's why they had to manually cashout the remaining $150 and then confiscate the excess winnings). Cashing out more than what you're allowed to isn't breaching any term, they just confiscate it. That's what you're supposed to do.

No, they did not accuse me of having kept money in my account (I have the email). And they should have been clear in their communications instead of being evasive and playing stupid.

Anyway, the money that I withdrew on 5 March has hit my Neteller account today (3 business days including 48-hour pending period).

 

[vinylweatherman]

No, they accuse you of breaching the terms because you kept money in your account (that's why they had to manually cashout the remaining $150 and then confiscate the excess winnings). Cashing out more than what you're allowed to isn't breaching any term, they just confiscate it. That's what you're supposed to do.

However, players are not told this. For a player, this is a very simple issue. You read the terms and it says "max cashout $100", so you request $100 and expect a PROFESSIONAL level of service. It being a "CS drone that doesn't know what they are talking about" is the CASINO's problem, they employed said "CS drone". If the "drone" fails to explain things properly, and comes across sounding suspicious and accusative, again it's the casino's problem that they cut corners on the interface between company and customer. Perhaps they don't see the potential bad PR from a "CS drone" screwing up as an important issue, but it IS. At best, it causes the loss of a customer, worse, it can end up creating a negative story that gets airtime over the internet, one that can blow a small issue into a bigger one.

Palace group is a BIG operator, not some shoestring budget clip joint, I would expect much better of how they deal with customers.


The mentality of casinos sweating over an extra $10 of comps because it just might lead to a $500 cashout is making them look as though they don't really understand the maths behind what they are offering. It is the same mentality that lead to the wrecking of the free spins idea because casinos were so scared that a lucky player might hit a line jackpot on one of the promotional free spins that we had the infamous "100 free spins, 1 line, at 1c" offering, and many like it. A big hit is just as likely with $10 from a deposit bonus, or just a straight deposit, but here there is no question of having a max cashout.

In reality, it does not matter WHICH $10 a player is playing on when they hit big, It could be $10 from comps, but it could be $10 from their next deposit.

The bigger picture is that comps represent a return of about 0.1% to the player, a tiny addition considering the 5% house advantage on slots. Comps simply make a 5% house edge into a 4.9% one.

Cases like this make the free spins promo even less attractive. I would prefer a deposit related offer with no max cashout rather than miss out on a decent hit just because I didn't add some of my own money to a promotional session.

 

[Mouche12]

However, players are not told this. For a player, this is a very simple issue. You read the terms and it says "max cashout $100", so you request $100 and expect a PROFESSIONAL level of service. It being a "CS drone that doesn't know what they are talking about" is the CASINO's problem, they employed said "CS drone". If the "drone" fails to explain things properly, and comes across sounding suspicious and accusative, again it's the casino's problem that they cut corners on the interface between company and customer. Perhaps they don't see the potential bad PR from a "CS drone" screwing up as an important issue, but it IS. At best, it causes the loss of a customer, worse, it can end up creating a negative story that gets airtime over the internet, one that can blow a small issue into a bigger one.

Palace group is a BIG operator, not some shoestring budget clip joint, I would expect much better of how they deal with customers.


The mentality of casinos sweating over an extra $10 of comps because it just might lead to a $500 cashout is making them look as though they don't really understand the maths behind what they are offering. It is the same mentality that lead to the wrecking of the free spins idea because casinos were so scared that a lucky player might hit a line jackpot on one of the promotional free spins that we had the infamous "100 free spins, 1 line, at 1c" offering, and many like it. A big hit is just as likely with $10 from a deposit bonus, or just a straight deposit, but here there is no question of having a max cashout.

In reality, it does not matter WHICH $10 a player is playing on when they hit big, It could be $10 from comps, but it could be $10 from their next deposit.

The bigger picture is that comps represent a return of about 0.1% to the player, a tiny addition considering the 5% house advantage on slots. Comps simply make a 5% house edge into a 4.9% one.

Cases like this make the free spins promo even less attractive. I would prefer a deposit related offer with no max cashout rather than miss out on a decent hit just because I didn't add some of my own money to a promotional session.

God, VWM, you are so good! Agree with all you are saying. I don't want to sound like a drewling teenager here, but have you ever considered writing a book on any subject you want to tackle?

 

[vinylweatherman]

God, VWM, you are so good! Agree with all you are saying. I don't want to sound like a drewling teenager here, but have you ever considered writing a book on any subject you want to tackle?

It would be very boring, and weigh as much as a small planet. I am not known as "typus infinitus" for nothing. I would need someone to cut it down to a manageable size that the average player could get through before they meet their maker

 

[Mouche12]

It would be very boring, and weigh as much as a small planet. I am not known as "typus infinitus" for nothing. I would need someone to cut it down to a manageable size that the average player could get through before they meet their maker

Well, every writer has one or more good editors! I love well-substantiated stories so I would definitely give it a try.

 

[Nifty29]

God, VWM, you are so good! Agree with all you are saying. I don't want to sound like a drewling teenager here, but have you ever considered writing a book on any subject you want to tackle?

Please don't encourage him......

He would need to learn the difference between fact and fiction, unless he was going to write for mills and boon.

 

[Mouche12]

Please don't encourage him......

He would need to learn the difference between fact and fiction, unless he was going to write for mills and boon.

Jealous Nifty?

 

[Nifty29]

Jealous Nifty?

Like you wouldn't believe......

 

[vinylweatherman]

Please don't encourage him......

He would need to learn the difference between fact and fiction, unless he was going to write for mills and boon.

They do romantic fiction, that's "books for sheilas" to you

I could cut it down to the weight of an asteroid if that makes it easier to digest


Vinyl's guide to beating the games - page 46, volume 2,875,285 - The Treasure Ireland method.