1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dismiss Notice
  3. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
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!

CasinoRoom won't pay 57,000 Pounds Super Hidden Rule

Discussion in 'Casino Complaints - Bonus Issues' started by GamblerD, Jan 20, 2015.

    Jan 20, 2015
  1. GamblerD

    GamblerD Dormant account PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    Alternative Medicine
    Location:
    London
    The rule was missing in bonus terms
    The rule was missing in terms of use
    The rule was missing in full terms and condition

    There was a rule of max 30% of balance bet not bonus but balance which is an impossible rule - it was there in a sublink of a sublink inside the full terms and condition which is a sublink of the terms of use there was another link that show this impossible rule.

    They added the rule to the bonus terms right after I let them know about it.

    Anyway to make the long story short, they confiscated 57,000 Pounds for over betting the bonus.
     
  2. Jan 20, 2015
  3. Casinomeister

    Casinomeister Forum Cheermeister Staff Member

    Occupation:
    Homemaker
    Location:
    Bierland
  4. Jan 20, 2015
  5. dunover

    dunover Unofficial T&C's Editor Staff Member CAG PABnononaccred PABnonaccred PABinit mm3 webmeister

    Occupation:
    International Money Launderer
    Location:
    the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
    I agree it's badly worded:

    •The welcome bonus is restricted in the following countries, Turkey, Denmark and the USA.
    •Unless otherwise stated, all bonuses have a 30 day validity from the date of issue.
    •All wagering requirements must be met on all match bonuses/freespins including your Bonus in order to cash out. We do not allow minimal risk wagering, or placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of your $$$$ total balance (including any given bonus) until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met. Any players we deem to have used minimal risk wagering tactics to redeem their bonuses or cash prizes risk having their bonuses, cash prizes and any subsequent winnings voided and removed.


    What this actually means in practical terms is that your maximum bet is restricted to 30% of your initial starting balance (if say you get 100% bonus, and deposit £100) of £200 which includes both your cash and bonus, i.e. the max bet is £60. This would remain at £60 until you cleared your 45xB wagering requirement and all your balance reverts to cash.

    I have never seen a site have a term which means your 30% amount is dynamic and varies with the balance after each game. This would be, as you say unworkable. I believe the meaning and intent of the term is as I've stated, and the word 'initial' or similar is missing, and should be added where I have inserted the red $$$$ signs above.

    I also note that if you were playing slots then a 30% limit (in this case £60) wold be a staggeringly high bet; surely this refers to table games.

    You are also correct in the other 2 statements you make:
    "The rule was missing in terms of use"
    "The rule was missing in full terms and condition"

    I looked too.

    The term you fell victim to IS very poorly worded and for once I agree with a new poster complaining - BUT to get 57,000 you have clearly bet large and ever-increasing amounts while under WR. Common-sense tells me that is never going to be allowed, however if you read their terms literally it could be!

    The terms clearly need rewording and to an inexperienced player are misleading. They also have no cross-reference by being repeated in the general terms either. or terms of use.
     
    5 people like this.
  6. Jan 20, 2015
  7. CasinoRoom

    CasinoRoom Official Rep for Casinoroom

    Occupation:
    Customer Support
    Location:
    San Jose
    irregular play

    Hi

    It is common practice at online casinos to have restrictions on the maximum amounts you can bet when you have a bonus. In fact you can find this same rule at other operators. The rule is included under "Gaming restrictions and jurisdictional issues" which can be found in our full terms of service.

    We are aware that information must be available to users in the best possible way and that's why we also included this information in the bonus page, but for questions and support we have FAQ and live chat available at all times. This information is also available there.

    Customer satisfaction is extremely important to us, but this decision was not arbitrary. This account shows irregular play and this is the main issue here; if it had been a mistake or simply confusion then perhaps the situation would have been handled in a different way, but we must act according to the facts.

    We are waiting for a valid government issued ID in order to complete the due diligence process in this account.

    Best regards

    Omar
    Casino Room
     
  8. Jan 20, 2015
  9. aceking123

    aceking123 Ueber Meister CAG PABnononaccred MM

    Occupation:
    chippy
    Location:
    uk
    The welcome bonus is restricted in the following countries, Turkey, Denmark and the USA.
    Unless otherwise stated, all bonuses have a 30 day validity from the date of issue.
    All wagering requirements must be met on all match bonuses/freespins including your Bonus in order to cash out. We do not allow minimal risk wagering, or placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of your total balance (including any given bonus) until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met. Any players we deem to have used minimal risk wagering tactics to redeem their bonuses or cash prizes risk having their bonuses, cash prizes and any subsequent winnings voided and removed.

    same as dunover by the looks

    i found this just by popping over on there site , seems that states no more than 30% of balance & bonus so if i made a deposit of 500 with a 500 bonus i can spend £299 per spin only i few spins but you never know , seems its a 45x £500 promo on deposit funds maybe im reading it wrong doesn't seem to be any problems from what ive seen ?
     
  10. Jan 20, 2015
  11. aceking123

    aceking123 Ueber Meister CAG PABnononaccred MM

    Occupation:
    chippy
    Location:
    uk
    hi i doubt very much they shall be forwarding this government id , when they've just had 57k wiped from your site
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. Jan 20, 2015
  13. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    On the face of it, this seems more generous that other sites where it's xx% of the bonus amount credited, rather than of the whole balance.

    The problem here is that when a player is so far ahead (57K here), what was once seen as a suicidal wager seems pretty small compared to the balance they now have. A £60 slot spin would seem "insane" from a deposit of £100 even with a £100 bonus, but if you had £57,000 a £60 slot spin would be seen as pretty "tame". I've bet this big and more after having had a very good run, usually just a few spins this high per slot in the hope of catching a big bonus round.

    The best idea for the OP would be to PAB as this casino clearly has an active rep here, and this can get to the finer detail of how this 57K win came about, and whether it was a clear breach of the terms, and if so, whether it was "a mistake" after having gotten carried away on a good run, or a clear strategy from the outset where the player got careless and broke the terms.

    30% of total starting balance seems pretty reasonable, as players tend to bet in accordance with the amount they have deposited, and this would only fund THREE losing spins on a slot, which would see the session over in a couple of seconds with another deposit needed. This would certainly look "irregular" compared to what most players look to get from their deposit - enough wagers to offer a reasonable chance of hitting something decent before having to deposit again.
     
    6 people like this.
  14. Jan 20, 2015
  15. GamblerD

    GamblerD Dormant account PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    Alternative Medicine
    Location:
    London
    The 30% was applied as dynamic rule, my initial balance was 500 deposit plus 500 bonus. If you take the 1000 then I didn't over bet

    I won big playing dead or a live and there was nothing irregular and this is the first time they mention irregular play.

    They were black listed at Gambling Grumble website, they also didn't mention to Steve Russo anything about irregular play.

    The Rep mentioned the term is in the bonus terms and condition I have an email confirming it was not there but added only after I played, I can show this email if needed
     
    1 person likes this.
  16. Jan 20, 2015
  17. The Viking

    The Viking Ueber Meister MM

    Occupation:
    chef
    Location:
    Faroe Islands
    well then like the the man said PAB and see were it takes you, i suddenly would for 57k if i thought i did nothing wrong :)
     
    2 people like this.
  18. Jan 20, 2015
  19. CasinoRoom

    CasinoRoom Official Rep for Casinoroom

    Occupation:
    Customer Support
    Location:
    San Jose
    KYC

    This happened last October, we have taken this decision after careful review of the session history, it is by no means an arbitrary decision, we have the game logs showing there was irregular play.
     
  20. Jan 20, 2015
  21. aceking123

    aceking123 Ueber Meister CAG PABnononaccred MM

    Occupation:
    chippy
    Location:
    uk
    im with you guys on this you really really should PAB .
     
  22. Jan 20, 2015
  23. GamblerD

    GamblerD Dormant account PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    Alternative Medicine
    Location:
    London
    Can you explain what is irregular play ? the deposit was of 500 the bonus was of 500.

    The big win came from dead or alive 18 a spin.

    The smaller win came from other slots I played it may have been thief or jack hammer, the bet was higher there but it was within the 30% of initial starting balance and not over it.
     
  24. Jan 20, 2015
  25. Tirilej

    Tirilej Still a Lady CAG

    Occupation:
    Breathing
    Location:
    Sweden
    Please stop posting and read this. http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/faq.php?faq=cmfaq_pab
     
    5 people like this.
  26. Jan 20, 2015
  27. Captain Chaos

    Captain Chaos Senior Member webby

    Occupation:
    Train Guard
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    OP, stop posting and PAB. As there is an active rep here it will be your best chance of achieving a fair result.
     
  28. Jan 20, 2015
  29. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom

    Definitely PAB. It seems the 30% rule is a red herring, and this is more of a "spirit of the bonus" case. For a 1000 balance, the 30% rule would cover bets right up to (but possibly not including) 300.

    There would also be no need to carefully review a session in order to determine whether a bet greater than the specified maximum was made. KYC also has nothing to do with it either, as this is about determining who the customer is in order to ensure they are not laundering "dirty" money through the casino.

    What was the largest bet you made at any point, regardless of whether it won or lost - this is how such a term would be looked at. A losing bet in breach of the limit is just as much a violation of the rules as a winning one. A winning bet below the limit does NOT violate the rule, even if in hindsight the casino would rather it had due to the amount won.

    If 57K is too high a risk for the casino, then they should set the limits on the DoA slot much lower. Many operators set low limits on certain slots like this that can produce very high multiple of stake payouts. The Rival slot Scary Rich is SO scary for some operators that the max possible bet on it can be as low as $2. Even Microgaming operators will set a conservative 6.00 max on Immortal Romance, yet have a 75.00 (or even 150.00) max on a low variance slot like Munchkins. They are not looking at the stake, but the maximum win potential from the one favourable "jackpot" reel position that could lumber them with a huge liability if they accepted too high a bet.
     
    4 people like this.
  30. Jan 20, 2015
  31. dunover

    dunover Unofficial T&C's Editor Staff Member CAG PABnononaccred PABnonaccred PABinit mm3 webmeister

    Occupation:
    International Money Launderer
    Location:
    the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
    Vinyl - read the terms I copied into my first post. They are totally misleading when read literally. As the OP said there is no cross-reference in other areas. Whether the OP 'irregularly played' is a different kettle of fish. Even the rep has used this term and not the fact he exceeded the bet limits.

    Whatever the outcome here, those terms need editing!

    IF he hasn't exceeded the max bet, then is this an 'FU' interpretation of play with a bonus?

    Anyway, no point in speculating the OP should PAB. If this issue dates back a few months, has the OP attempted any other mediation prior to CM?
     
    1 person likes this.
  32. Jan 20, 2015
  33. dunover

    dunover Unofficial T&C's Editor Staff Member CAG PABnononaccred PABnonaccred PABinit mm3 webmeister

    Occupation:
    International Money Launderer
    Location:
    the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
    I can't be party to what's occurred previously between you and the OP, but what I can say is that the terms I've pasted in from your site are unclear and vague, unless you seriously expect your players to be allowed to bet 30% of their deposit and balance (in this case say £300 on one spin from 1K) then if it wins and the balance reached say 3k, they could then bet £900 on the next spin?
    Please commit yourself (this has no bearing on the OP) to either admitting I have it correct in that bet max is 30% of the combined deposit/bonus and STAYS at that amount until WR is met or I am wrong and you have a batsh*t-crazy system whereby the player has to recalculate their 30% maximum bet after every game result, therefore racking up some potential for serious financial damage to your casino?
    :confused::confused:
     
    1 person likes this.
  34. Jan 20, 2015
  35. Batman

    Batman The Dark Knight MM

    Occupation:
    Nothing much
    Location:
    PokieLand
    Poor management imho. They just lost a customer willing to deposit 500+
    It would've all been covered with just 12 deposits of that magnitude...
    As much as I understand the casino's pov, I'll side with the op on this one, pab...
    I like betting on the underdog.
    The casino'll take the winnings and run :D
     
    1 person likes this.
  36. Jan 20, 2015
  37. Balthazar

    Balthazar The Governor

    Occupation:
    Leader
    Location:
    Woodbury
    Any casino mentioning the words "irregular play" for slot players should burn for eternity in the rogue pit.

    That's my opinion.
     
    28 people like this.
  38. Jan 20, 2015
  39. Gaz237

    Gaz237 Senior Member MM

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    chelmsford UK
    ???

    Not sure how it would of been covered with 12 deposits.

    The win was £57,000 not £5700
     

Share This Page