<div class="bbWrapper"><blockquote data-attributes="" data-quote="Nifty29" data-source="post: 544713"
class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">
<div class="bbCodeBlock-title">
<a href="/forums/goto/post?id=544713"
class="bbCodeBlock-sourceJump"
rel="nofollow"
data-xf-click="attribution"
data-content-selector="#post-544713">Nifty29 said:</a>
</div>
<div class="bbCodeBlock-content">
<div class="bbCodeBlock-expandContent js-expandContent ">
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.<br />
<br />
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. <br />
<br />
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".<br />
<br />
Bottom line is that the OP is NOT OUT OF POCKET. Nobody has been ripped off/stooged etc. Its a NON issue.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
Saying it makes no difference just shows that the person saying it doesn't know as much as they think they know.
</div>
<div class="bbCodeBlock-expandLink js-expandLink"><a role="button" tabindex="0">Click to expand...</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote><br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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.</div>