This is the casino Plex issue all over again. The OP made a perfectly reasonable request to have the balance reinstated to complete wagering. Damn these ridiculous terms about not attempting a cashout before wagering is complete. It has nothing to do with the incompletion of wagering requirements as its simply a case of telling the player of this and let the remaining wagering run its course. If we are unhappy about the paltry weekly instalment payments of some RTGs though they are written in the terms this is even worse as its a clear seizure of winnings. At least for the former one will get paid ultimately. If one condones one set of terms but insists of adherence of terms for the other its 'double standard' IMVHO.
I agree Chu....the casino SHOULD reinstate the OPs balance and let him finish. A decent operator would do this all day long.
Unfortunately, this one, along with CasinoPlex, is not a decent operator and they have crap terms that are designed to take advantage of careless and sometime ignorant players.
The OP did not read the terms and conditions in any form it seems. Otherwise, they would have been tracking their wagering manually OR using the playtech in-house WR tracking in the cashier.
The irresponsibility of the OP is what caused him to lose $40k.
If he had contacted support first,
OR checked his wagering in the cashier,
OR actually read the terms,
OR not accepted the bonus (a popup confirmation by player is required at PT casinos),
OR checked the accredited list here, this thread would not exist and the OP would most likely be celebrating a nice profit in his bank.
I have no sympathy for people who just blindly go about throwing their money around without doing any kind of due diligence at all, and who flatly refuse to employ any vestige of common sense. I have absolute sympathy for those who do the right thing and use their brains and get ripped off regardless, and my posting history here will support that completely.
My question to others here is this:
If the last bonus he took had a maximum cashout term of 10xDeposit, which is totally crap IMO and is possible but not common, and he didn't read the bonus terms etc, and then posted a complaint here saying he had been "ripped off by $20k", would you support the complaint?
Both scenarios just about everything in common:
1. Crap term
2. Player didn't read terms
3. Player agreed to terms
4. Player loses winnings.
The ONLY difference is the amount involved i.e. he only loses half his winnings instead of all.
Now, I've seen hundreds of scenarios like the second one with max cashouts and nearly everybody, including people here in this thread, have said "Well the terms say max cashout of 10x so that's what you're stuck with. The term sucks but you didn't have to take the bonus....you did, so you're bound by it. Sorry". However, in this and the casinoplex situation, some have said that in the first scenario the terms should not apply.....and I genuinely cannot understand that logic. If someone can enlighten me, I would be grateful and perhaps I will understand better.
I also have to wonder that if the OP deposited $20 and cashed out $200 and lost his winnings, there would be the same number of members getting fired up, or even bothering to read it at all. I mean, it's only $200 right? However, it is the same as a $2000 deposit with winnings of $40000....in fact, to the OP, a $2000 deposit might mean the same as a $20 deposit to someone else (remember he did deposit $5k and $3k previously). So, the only thing I can think of is that it is all about the
amount for those who are slating the casino and calling them rogue i.e. how much you deposit and win dictates whether you should be held to a term or not, so high rollers are exempted from the rules that low rollers have to follow. Now THAT is totally unfair, no?
The casino should be rogue/not recommended for HAVING the term in the first place....NOT for enforcing it upon players who agreed to be bound by it. The two aspects are very different, and members who say that casinos should be rogued for enforcing their own terms should consider not playing anywhere any more because all casinos do it.