Carib Sunshine Casino

I'll be addressing these issues during my presentation at the Affcon, and I'll be paying Chartwell a visit during the GIGSE.

I've also mentioned this on this week's webcast.
Wow, the most amazing thing happened.

Chartwell replied. Yippiie, or not...

Here's what they say:

"Dear Martin

We are in receipt of your email and would like to clarify our position as the software supplier to Caribe Sunshine Casino. Unlike many other software suppliers Chartwell Technology is strictly a software development company and only license the use our products for a variety of online applications. We do not participate in any aspect of the daily operations of our customers business, which includes hosting, customer support, database and money management.

Caribe Sunshine entered into a licensing agreement with Chartwell to use a copy of our software with the intent to operate an online casino. Chartwell's responsibility and obligation to Caribe Sunshine is to support them technically. 100% of their daily operation is the responsibility of Caribe Sunshine. It is unfortunate that their business was not successful and they decided to close their online operation.

In closing, we would like to express our understanding with your frustrations with Caribe Sunshine and will attempt to pass on your email to the contact information we have on file. We cannot make any assurances beyond that with respect to a response or explanation, it is strictly the customers responsibility.


Chartwell Information Services"

Wow, thanks. Will you really send my email to someone. That's great news. More spam mail, yeah baby.
Wre looking forward to reminding the Chartwell people here in Montreal that they have given an undertaking to contact the failed casino owner on your behalf - and they can expect some coverage on their hopelessly out of date policy regarding failed casinos!

How any serious operator can pick a half-assed outfit like this to power a casino mystifies me.
I'll be speaking to them as well, informing them that I can never endorse or recommend any of their casinos until they modify this policy.

I am a firm believer that the software provider has an obligation to the player if their licensees go down the tubes.
By the way Karto,

Was this $600 a deposit? winnings? how was this broken down?

I'll let Chartwell know that they owe you $600.
Well this software provider just blew their own foot off with a high powered "stupid" gun.


If anyone here has a player account at any Chartwell powered casino, I would recommend cashing in those chips as soon as possible. Players, protect yourselves!
Just as a side issue hypothetical here, given the fact that our shared views that the software provider must be resposible, in such cases as above.

What are people's feeling towards affiliates & their responsibility; or is that lack of, towards knowingly promoting dodgy casino's?
I'm glad you brought this up, and maybe this should be moved to a new thread.

I'll be speaking at the Affcon tomorrow and this is going to be one of my main topics.
Only trying to make this a fair playing field for all ( that's players, casino's & affiliates )

How's montreal ?
Bryan and I were discussing this very issue just this morning, and my view is that the affiliate marketing system in this industry being what it is, the affiliate who refers a player to a dud casino where he gets burnt has to take some responsibility - probably expressed by helping the player to resolve the issue.

It seems wrong to me that an affiliate can stand between the casino and the player as it were, profit from the relationship and yet simply shrug off any problems.

There is of course the practical damage of an affiliate that repeatedly sends people to the same bad casino and then pays a price of sorts by losing cred and acquiring a weak professional reputation, but I think that like software providers they cannot simply turn their back on a player they have referred who gets ripped off.
I agree with you Jetset, regarding your views, however how does one clean up this mindset if you will, regarding affiliates who don't give a toss who they promote as long as there is a buck in it for them?
I could be wrong, but I did a bit of research of the various gaming roviders at some point. And i did not go into Chartwell thoroughly, but after looking into it briefly, i came out with the impression that they in fact were solely involved with gaming software while the ongoing "hands-on" aspect of the casino were left to be integrated through other service providers ie customer support, payment processing. Whereas, when i look at microgamming and cryptologic, one knows that they provide all aspects of a gaming sites necessary services. that being the case, they would HAVE TO BE more involved when one of their licensees goes down. I'm not so sure i can objectively say the same for Chartwell. But like i said, i never looked into it thoroughly, so i could be wrong.

Any feedback.
The software provider is inextricably linked to the system here - they get royalties in many cases, but more importantly there has to be some accountability for the probity checks on their licensees and their policing responsibilities in a risky arena that is not formally regulated.

Software providers have the wherewithal to impose good practice where this is lacking, and it is in their interests to do so, because the modern player communicates with others of his or her kind far more effectively through responsible message boards and are thus capable of avoiding casinos that have no interest in their welfare and gambling safety.

The big guns have shown the way by putting in place mechanisms to safeguard players in the event of casino failure and the new eCOGRA will I believe be proposing to members that they join this sort of initiative.

That will put pressure on the more irresponsible elements in the industry who try to take the none of our concern approach, because if eCOGRA takes off in an already tightening market, its seal will be a valuable guide to players that the operation displaying it is cognisant of the need for a saftey net on failing casinos amongst other safeguards.

Now more than ever suppliers need to be conscious of the real value of the consumer and the need to look after his or her interests in a professional and responsible manner.
eCOGRA?? Please explain what this is, first I've heard of it.
Thanks glodge! For those others who were wondering:

The largest gambling software provider, Microgaming, and the largest online casino, Casino-on-net, today have joined forces in founding the eCOGRA. The E-commerce and Online Gaming Regulation and Assurance (eCOGRA) is a new online gambling watchdog that aims to provide online gamblers with "high levels of assurance of fair, honest, and responsible gaming."

The eCOGRA will issue a seal of approval to all online casinos that pass it's rigid and independent audit, including checks for consumer privacy and data protection, and ongoing reviews of all financial and gaming transactions.

The eCOGRA will have six directors: Andrew Beveridge, CEO of the new organization, a representative of Microgaming, a representative of Virtual Holdings Ltd (Casino-on-net), and three independent directors who will have voting control over board decisions to guarantee eCOGRA's autonomy from software providers and operators.
[color=ff0000]I hacked my way into Jetsets labtop and found this report from Montreal:[/color]

"Quick report from Montreal and specifically the discussions held on behalf of players with Chartwell (VP Dave Acorn) and RTG (Marketing Managers Eddy Kleid and Tom Brierley) both of which were visited on their GIGSE exhibition stands.

Chartwell, I was told was ripped off too by the failed Carib Sunshine casino and they are themselves trying to recover the owners who were apparently lawyers(!!!) Acorn said that the company was cognisant of the danger of damage to reputation caused by failing casinos and told me that as a consequence they had significantly tightened their acceptance procedures for potential licensees and were aiming to get more European oriented land-based owners as the preferred clientele.

They will not, however reverse their policy of staying hands off in the event of player-casino hassles. So that one was not what one would call an encouraging conclusion, and they will have to live with the consequences of stubbornly hewing to an outdated policy unpopular with the consumers.. IMO this sort of posture does not auger well for them in this market.

I also took the opportunity to urge them to more closely monitor leading MBs like this one and to respond promptly to emails sent to them.

Real Time Gaming was a pretty similar story. They claim they are tightening up on licensee applicants and existing operators and that they are paying more attention to the message boards and to complaints emailed to them following a lack of resolution at casino level. They claim that delays are not always their fault but sometimes the licensee is slow.

Before some of the older hands here say weve heard that before, yes we have and I made that point. I guess the proof of the pudding will be in the eating where the absolute evidence of improvement will be in far less complaints. Interestingly, I was told that where RTG could not get a licensee to redress a genuine client problem, they referred the complainant to Gambling Grumbles. Eddy K assured me he is receptive to emails about bad situations and if that proves to be the case in the future we will have made some progress there - time will tell.

Bottom line is that players have their own way of indicating displeasure with policies or events, and it is a foolish service supplier who disregards that.

Other than that the Isle of Man delegation were somehat chastened and admitted they had made some mistakes buit were sincere in wanting to get things back on track and welcomed any input. They will have player complaint facilities for their licensees. Alderney likewise.

More later - Im on my way to a briefing on eCOGRA where I hope they are going to be player sensitive."
Karto is on hospital. So I, (Kargos mother) replies,
he deposited 250 and won 350 equalling 600.
jyde - any idea what the isle of mann reps meant when they said they made some mistakes...?

Just curious.
There was a lot of talk of too much bureaucracy and inflexibility and as a new service that is never good news, although there obviously has to be compliance with agreed standards. There were rumblings about this from a couple of the licensees there (who have sinve moved on) a couple of months ago or more. The IOM team emphasised that they had learned a lot and were very open to suggestions in improving their jurisdictional ambitions.

BWT the closing session at GIGSE was really interesting as Ladbrokes, Sportingbet and Victor Chandler top managersw debated cross-border business and regulation. The odd man out was a Danish government guy who was pleading the cause of sovreignty against the free-wheeling and fast moving nature if the internet. The real mnotives of various government monopolies that have taken international betting companies to court and the implications of the Treaty of Rome in the European context led to some heated discussion.

It was very interesting, and it seemed to me that at least in this area these big gambling rivals support one another and the fundamental freedoms of the Internet.
This is ridiculous. If debts are only $2000 where is the problem???

Is that amount to overwhelming to pay?
Jetset - the danish taxguy - was it Peter Loft?

Governments don't gambling - as long as it's taxed.

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings