1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
  2. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by following.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Casino seizes my winnings because I played a game that doesn't count towards rollover

Discussion in 'Casino Complaints - Bonus Issues' started by mathilda, Apr 11, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
    Apr 11, 2007
  1. mathilda

    mathilda Dormant account

    Occupation:
    I work in an art gallery
    Location:
    Canada
    A casino has removed my winnings because I have played a game (roulette) that doesn't count towards the rollover.

    Here is what the terms says : 'Bets placed on Roulette, Baccarat, Craps, Pontoon and Sic Bo do not count toward the wagering requirement.'

    I know that many casinos completely exclude roulette, baccarat, craps from bonus play, but when they do they make it clear and there is no such thing in this casino's terms. I have played with a bonus on games that don't count towards rollover at many places in the past and I never had a problem before.

    The manager is supposed to discuss this with the accounts dept. and come back to me tomorrow, but I am worried, because they have already removed the funds from my account and the manager says that the account dept. believe they are right to do this.

    I have completed the rollover on a game that counts towards it (blackjack) so at least that is not being questioned. The only thing in question is my right to play roulette.

    The manager says he is in between me and the account dept. so that gives me a little hope, but I am worried nevertheless.

    I know this sort of issue has come up before, but I can't find the right keywords to search for it.
     
  2. Apr 11, 2007
  3. mikepipe

    mikepipe Dormant account

    Occupation:
    owner
    Location:
    still progressing
    Hi and welcome to the forum.
    Could you please tell us the name of the casino?

    btw: If it was the manager, with whom you were talking (mailing), its hard to iamgine, how he could be in between ..
    He is teh one who decides, especially in situations like these.
    If the whole story is as you described it, its a total blunder by the casino, not to pay your winnings (as far as you have fulfilled the wager requirements).
     
  4. Apr 11, 2007
  5. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Common

    This is now so common a problem that it is best to consider the term "does not count towards WR" as being the same as "...cannot be played if you have redeemed a bonus".
    It seems a little odd that the casino is taking such a hard line against Roulette, but allowing Blackjack to count.
    One reson may be if you made a huge bet on Roulette, won, and moved to Blackjack to grind out WR. Pretty much every casino sees this as the maek of the bonus hunter, and know that they are unlikely to return after cashing out. They are prepared to lose players who are likely to deposit again by applying the rules to all play.
    Strictly speaking, it is wrong to void winnings where the terms only state the games do not count, unless another term has also been broken.

    All the obvious methods of "bonus abuse" doing the rounds on the internet are well known by the casinos, and they are happy to rid themselves of such negative value players, even by voiding winnings if they can get away with it.

    This thread should have been started in the "complaints - bonus issues" section. If the casino is accredited at Casinomeister, or is a member of eCogra, it is worth submitting a complaint about the T & C not mentioning that play on Roulette will cause winnings to be voided.

    If this fails, you should name the casino, so that other players can see if you have been wise in your choice and have a chance to strike a deal with the management, or whether you have picked a rogue that would have very likely looked for any excuse not to pay.
     
  6. Apr 11, 2007
  7. Vesuvio

    Vesuvio Dormant account

    Location:
    UK
    They're in the wrong, but any casino where the "manager" starts claiming his hands are tied by his "departments" is likely rogue (how many on-line casinos employ more than a handful of people?). It's usually just a cheap excuse for getting out of/delaying payments.
     
  8. Apr 11, 2007
  9. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    What sort of manager is he, if he is not in charge? Next time ask to speak to the organ grinder, not the monkey.
     
  10. Apr 11, 2007
  11. wangpoker

    wangpoker Experienced Member PABnononaccred2 webmeister

    Occupation:
    affiliate marketing
    Location:
    Ontario/Canada
    it is probably one of playtech casinos
     
  12. Apr 17, 2007
  13. mathilda

    mathilda Dormant account

    Occupation:
    I work in an art gallery
    Location:
    Canada
    I apologize for not coming back here sooner, but the manager kept saying he needed to speak with someone who was on sick leave for a few days.

    I'm glad to report that they have agreed to pay me in full. They said they won't pay in a similar situation in the future, but it wasn't clear if they intend to amend the terms, so beware.

    The casino is Betroyal, so no it's not a Playtech.

    On the downside, I'll have to be patient because they are seriously backlogged on payouts. The manager said it's because of the US law, which I find unusual to say the least.
     
    1 person likes this.
  14. Apr 18, 2007
  15. happygobrokey

    happygobrokey Dormant account

    Occupation:
    student of life
    Location:
    canada
    arggghh betroyal would settle with you but not me? i had the same thing where he says accounting refused do do what he, the manager, says. retarded that! i'm still waiting for resolution on my issue. i hope this means maybe they finally have some money to pay me soon...:mad:
     
  16. Apr 18, 2007
  17. Casinomeister

    Casinomeister Forum Cheermeister Staff Member

    Occupation:
    Homemaker
    Location:
    Bierland
    Hi Mathilda,

    Welcome to the forum - glad things worked out between you and Betroyal.

    But before you go any further, please stop what you are doing and read the following:
    http://www.casinomeister.com/casino_pick.php
    http://www.casinomeister.com/casino-research/index-safe-casinos.php
    http://www.casinomeister.com/casino-research/index-casino-bonuses.php
    http://www.casinomeister.com/rogue/not_recommended/virtual.php
    http://www.casinomeister.com/casinos.php

    Following the above guidance you will probably avoid any problems in the future.

    And a word of caution, never ever play any game that is mentioned as "does not count towards wagering requirements" if you are playing with bonus funds. It's too vague and can be read different ways, and many casinos will snatch your winnings if you do so. Always check before-hand and get everything in writing.

    Or just don't play with bonuses. :D
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. Apr 27, 2007
  19. henryVIII

    henryVIII Dormant account

    Occupation:
    teacher
    Location:
    UK
    Personally, I dont think "does not count towards wagering requirements" is vague in the slightest ... quite explicit in fact ... and has only one meaning.

    And even if it was vague ... then that is 100% the casinos fault .. they are their own written terms after all.

    And I think the player did check beforehand and it was in writing. And behaved completely within their terms.

    Any casino trying to "enforce" non-existent terms is fraudulent surely?
     
    1 person likes this.
  20. Apr 27, 2007
  21. XXLClubCasino

    XXLClubCasino Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Casino Manager
    Location:
    Curacao
    I Agree 100% with you! "does not count towards..." does not mean games can't be played before meeting the wagering requirements.

    We write our T&C like this:

    Bets placed in the games Craps, Roulette (all sorts of Roulette), Blackjack (all sorts of blackjack), Video Poker (all sorts of Video Poker), Sic Bo, Poker Three and Baccarat does not fulfil the player's obligations with regard to the minimum wagering requirements.

    The above mentioned restricted games CAN'T be played before fulfilling the wagering requirement or all winnings will be void.

    All casino that mean this should also write it like this. It costs nothing to write it and make it 100% clear to the player.
     
  22. Apr 27, 2007
  23. Itoldyouso

    Itoldyouso Banned User - opted out from the forum, but keeps

    Occupation:
    Accountant
    Location:
    USA
    Why do you even give out bonuses if you are going to restrict the main games that makes up a casino? And then void the winnings if they play any of them. How come you get to control their money along with yours with these restrictions? I mean these terms above are a RIP-OFF!
     
  24. Apr 27, 2007
  25. XXLClubCasino

    XXLClubCasino Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Casino Manager
    Location:
    Curacao
    I don't see any rip-off in those T&C. I agree that from a player view it is unattractive to have restricted games. The problem is simply that due to a 100% match bonus given to players, players can play at absolutely no risk to to them. In the long run the casino would simply go bankrupt as we would loose money months after months not being able to finance the lost incurred by new players with the relatively small base of loyal players. Bonus players will deposit once, that's it!

    With card games giving a house hedge of 0.5-3.0% how should a casino be able to win any $ giving out an 100% bonus? Players are not stupid at all and know exactly the way to play to risk none of their funds by smarting outplaying the bonus. Gambling is "risking" money to be able to win more! Not risking zero to hit the jackpot of 1 Mio!

    The bonus discussion is always an actual subject as not one casino seems to manage to do it right for all type of players. It's a question of taste.

    For my part I prefer to play without any bonuses and be able to withdraw when ever I want and play any games I want without any restriction. This is how I can fully enjoy gambling, gambling is for me a recreation and entertain me.

    Kickback bonuses to loyal players is what make the most sense to me but you wont attract new players with this type of bonuses. New players request to get a 100% or even 300% bonus to play with, this has unfortunately today become a quasi standard.

    Other "professional" players do not want us to change anything in our bonuses as they always find the way to play with profit not only in the short term but also in the long term.

    Anyway at least for our part every player can refuse to get this kind of restrictive bonus and will get a % of it's lost as a kickback.

    We should start a poll and ask who prefer which type of bonus and I'm sure that the wast majority will vote for the 100% match bonus with game restrictions (maybe not in this forum so :rolleyes:).

    What I really can't understand is why some players get so pissed about those clear T&C. Not a single land base casino would offer new players, they never saw before this type of free gift, ask yourself why! Also every player get the choice to refuse a bonus, if you accept it then you have to play by the rules, where do you see a rip-off here, honestly?
     
    1 person likes this.
  26. Apr 30, 2007
  27. Casinomeister

    Casinomeister Forum Cheermeister Staff Member

    Occupation:
    Homemaker
    Location:
    Bierland
    Players should be reminded periodically that bonuses are not obligatory. Many players play without them and have no problem - including me. :D
     
    3 people like this.
  28. May 2, 2007
  29. henryVIII

    henryVIII Dormant account

    Occupation:
    teacher
    Location:
    UK
    I think this may be slightly missing the point.

    Absolutely no one is forcing casinos to give their wager-requiremnt heavy bonuses, etc. But, when they do then the least they can do is meet their own terms.

    Seems like its the casinos and not the players who are having the problems meeting the terms.

    I could recommend playing casinos without bonuses but only for a laugh or to kill time or something for fun stakes. But thats me.
     
    1 person likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page