Bonus Complaint 'Cassava' Group Stole My £2,000 Winnings

[nannyjilly]

Hey, I signed up here a while ago and forgot about it. I am on holiday at the moment and my son just suggested here might be able to help me!

I signed up to 888 casino (who can argue with Shane Warne?) and lost some money just before xmas, then after that I kept on getting emails/popups to sign up at other casinos with the promise of bonuses for my first deposit!

The first one was SpinWin, I played the games I was allowed to play, finished their 'rollover' and I won about £1000 I think, so I thought that was great obviously, just before xmas too!

Whilst waiting for my winnings to be paid to me, another offer came up for Eurocity, after being massively up I got brave and started to bet big, and managed to get my balance up to around just under €2k!! I had to finish their 'rollover' thing again, but when I went to sign in the next day my account was blocked!

After loads of emails/calls and advice from my friend who works for a lawyers, (who said they have no right to take my winnings if I followed their rules) I was told that as I have signed up to casinos in the same group, they will not be paying me any of my winnings! Even though they bombarded me with emails/popups telling me to sign up!

Surely this is bordering on criminal? They quoted me this term;

In the event that the Company believes a user of the Service is abusing or attempting to abuse a bonus or other promotion, or is likely to benefit through abuse or lack of good faith from a gambling policy adopted by the Company, then the Company may, at its sole discretion, deny, withhold or withdraw from any user any bonus or promotion, or rescind any policy with respect to that user, either temporarily or permanently, or terminate that user's access to the Services and/or block that user's account.

So that was my Christmas ruined. I stupidly lost money at another site not even considering I wouldn't be paid.

Has anyone sued this company before? In British law you cannot enforce ambiguous terms like this that are unfair.
Shane has let me down big time.

 

[maxd]

Strongly suggest you have a look at our Pitch a Bitch service: see the Pitch-A-Bitch FAQ for important information and advice on the PAB process.

Once you fill out the Pitch-A-Bitch form I will have the details I need to send a formal complaint to them.

Another good reason to do this is that 888 are currently being evaluated for Accreditation on this site, which means were keen to hear about any player issues they may be having. Although yours isn't directly related to 888 they are obviously connected to the other casinos.

The Pitch-A-Bitch service is free of charge to all Casinomeister.com members. I hope you will find it suitable to your needs.

Regards,
Max Drayman
Casinomeister.com, Player Grievance Manager

 

[Rachel888]

Hi Nannyjilly,

can you please pm me or email me all your details and I will look into this for you.

Username, First name, Last name, location and email address you registered with.

Kind Regards,
Rachel

 

[maxd]

Or you can contact Rachel first and she if she can help you out. That's the best route, and likely to be the quickest, by far.

 

[nannyjilly]

Wow, wasn't expecting such a quick reply!
Looks like I posted this just at the right time, thanks Max.

Ok Rachel I will PM you now.

Once again, thanks Max.

 

[nannyjilly]

Well the rep has got back to me and unfortunately she can't do anything - I broke no terms, they just don't want to pay me.

So it seems the Cassava (888) group like to throw ambiguous terms at you if you happen to win.

This seems to contravene the Casinomeister terms for a casino to be accredited, (Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.) so it looks like they will not be.

On the bright side at least I have found this site, and the casinos that will pay me if I happen to win, which is more that what I had a few weeks ago.

 

[rainmaker]

After loads of emails/calls and advice from my friend who works for a lawyers, (who said they have no right to take my winnings if I followed their rules) I was told that as I have signed up to casinos in the same group, they will not be paying me any of my winnings! Even though they bombarded me with emails/popups telling me to sign up!

I can`t understand why there should be a problem to sign up at differents casinos in the same group. Sometimes the casino group will encourage this.

For example, I use Betsson. Betsson operates casinos like CasinoEuro, CherryCasino, Norgesautomaten (Norwegian casino) and some more. It has never been a problem for me to be a customer in both Betsson and CasinoEuro.

If the reason for holding back your winning, is "because you have signed up to casinos in the same group". Then it sounds a bit rougish to me. Unless its stated in their T&C

 

[chayton]

Usually you can have accounts at multiple casinos in one group, but some have rules about only being able to get one signup bonus per group.

 

[me_and_ed]

Well the rep has got back to me and unfortunately she can't do anything - I broke no terms, they just don't want to pay me.

So it seems the Cassava (888) group like to throw ambiguous terms at you if you happen to win.

This seems to contravene the Casinomeister terms for a casino to be accredited, (Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.) so it looks like they will not be.

On the bright side at least I have found this site, and the casinos that will pay me if I happen to win, which is more that what I had a few weeks ago.

Now I would PAB

 

[Marie2473]

If the rep cant help you and u have broken no terms, PAB and see where that goes!

 

[nannyjilly]

Ah ok yes I will do that, let's see what happens!

Well I haven't read any term about not being able to have more than 1 account in the same group. I didn't even know they were in the same group before I signed up, I just stupidly clicked on an email or popup if I recall correctly.

 

[KasinoKing]

Ah ok yes I will do that, let's see what happens!

Well I haven't read any term about not being able to have more than 1 account in the same group. I didn't even know they were in the same group before I signed up, I just stupidly clicked on an email or popup if I recall correctly.

Unfortunately it is in their MASSIVE terms here:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

(I assume the same terms are on all their sites).

Two extracts from this huge page (9,477 words! ):

Introduction:
The Company offers gambling services via its in-house brands such as i) 888, (ii) Casino-on-Net, (iii) Pacific Poker, (iv) 888sport, (v) 888ladies, (vi) 888games, (vii) 888casino, (viii) 888poker, and (ix) Reef Club Casino (each an "In-House Brand") and via third parties' brands as part of so called "white labels" such as (i) RileysPoker, (ii) Tower Torneos, (iii) LuckyAce, (iv) Littlewoods, (v) Racing Post and (vi) Harrah's (each a "White Label Brand").

Section 10 - Bonuses:
All users of the Services shall be entitled only to one welcome bonus. Members who make their first deposit with the Company or any of its white label partners and who have or previously had an account with any of the Sites owned or operated by the Company, including both In-House Brands and White Label Brands, shall not be entitled to an additional welcome bonus, unless the Company decides otherwise at its absolute discretion.

However, if they wish to become fully Casinomeister accredited there are certain criteria to be met and in my honest opinion, by bombarding existing players with e-mails and/or pop-ups encouraging them to sign-up & claim bonuses at their sister brands, they are clearly breaching these CM requirements:

* Must have a clean history of fairness towards their customers.
* Must not use false, misleading or deceptive advertising.
* Must not spam, and must take appropriate actions against any affiliates or any third parties who do spam.
* Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.
* No player shall be involuntarily placed into a situation which breaches the terms and conditions during the course of play.

If not done so already, I would definitely take up Max's suggestion to Pitch-A-Bitch.

KK

 

[rainmaker]

Thanks for looking it up KK

The on thing that may "save" nannyjilly is:

"shall not be entitled to an additional welcome bonus, unless the Company decides otherwise at its discretion. "

If he register at one casino in the group, and starts getting "sign-up-bonus" offerings in the mail (because of the signup) from other casinos in the group then I assume that "the Company has decided otherwise", or they would not give him the offers.

 

[Simmo!]

Yes definitely PAB if they induced you to sign up at and take a bonus at their other casinos.

 

[GrandMaster]

Unfortunately it is in their MASSIVE terms here:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

(I assume the same terms are on all their sites).

Of course, this does not give a full and up-to-date list of white labels. The proper way to deal with this issue would be to present the player with the list of sister casinos and white labels and make him confirm that he has no account at any of them before awarding him the sign-up bonus.

 

[BBKPoker]

Hi Nannyjilly,

can you please pm me or email me all your details and I will look into this for you.

Username, First name, Last name, location and email address you registered with.

Kind Regards,
Rachel

Absurdity. You routinely market your sites to many customers (including myself) to signup at the 12308911232342 white label skins you put up then use people having accounts at more than one skin as an excuse to not pay.

I was extremely disappointed to see 888 or any of its skins get any consideration for Accreditation since this is a tactic they've used for a long time. If you don't want people to sign up at multiple skins, then don't market them using your customer base, and if your customers follow the terms of the bonus rules you should pay promptly rather than making excuses about betting styles or patterns.

 

[BBKPoker]

Of course, this does not give a full and up-to-date list of white labels. The proper way to deal with this issue would be to present the player with the list of sister casinos and white labels and make him confirm that he has no account at any of them before awarding him the sign-up bonus.

And probably also not to obviously market every single new skin that comes out to every customer in their marketing database so they can then steal their winnings if they decide they don't like their play.

 

[nannyjilly]

Yes exactly - "unless the Company decides otherwise at its discretion." Seems quite clear to me they used discretion when they kept on advertising other sites, and most importantly - Actually GIVING me the bonus

Very very dirty trick they have tried to play on me here. Anyway, thanks for your help/support guys. (Especially u KK for finding that term!)

 

[deucebag]

Unfortunately it is in their MASSIVE terms here:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

(I assume the same terms are on all their sites).

KK

Don't assume. Those terms are not on SpinWin's site as far as I can see.

 

[Webzcas]

I've just spoken to Rachel the 888 rep and she is liaising with Max on this as this issue is still being looked into.

 

[maxd]

Yes, I am in touch with Rachel and discussing things but until there is a PAB this is all just talk. At this point I would say that the OP needs to step up and do the PAB.

 

[nannyjilly]

Yes, I am in touch with Rachel and discussing things but until there is a PAB this is all just talk. At this point I would say that the OP needs to step up and do the PAB.

???
I already have

 

[maxd]

Ah, came through a couple hours ago, just saw it.

 

[Rachel888]

Hey Guys,

Just to make things clear, and so you know I am not completely writing off this situation. The issue here does not stem from 888casino, it is from one of the Cassava white labels. Anything outside of 888casino and Reef Club Casino is out of my jurisdiction. I am working with Max to find a solution and I am also going to try and see how we can bring on a rep to help out with all the white labels.

I am more than willing to help with any situation, especially having to do with 888casino or Reef Club Casino, but again there is only so much I can do when it involves a white label.

Thanks
Rachel

 

[rainmaker]

I think we should be thankful that Rachel is trying to help even if it is not in her juristiction.

 

[maxd]

Ok, I think the path forward should be clear now that I have the OP's PAB and Rachel has made it clear here that the OP's issue stems from a Cassava property that is not 888 nor Reef Club, in other words not Rachel's direct responsibility.

As to who's responsibility it is there is no good answer just yet. That, as they say, is a work in progress but the OP's PAB is an excellent opportunity to push ahead and solve exactly that problem.

 

[Mousey]

Hey Guys,

..... there is only so much I can do when it involves a white label.

Thanks
Rachel

There's those pesky little 'white label' casinos again.... Regardless of the software, I feel they all should be laid to rest. Actually, I don't think they should ever have been allowed to breed in the first place.

pardon the derail.

/rant

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hey Guys,

Just to make things clear, and so you know I am not completely writing off this situation. The issue here does not stem from 888casino, it is from one of the Cassava white labels. Anything outside of 888casino and Reef Club Casino is out of my jurisdiction. I am working with Max to find a solution and I am also going to try and see how we can bring on a rep to help out with all the white labels.

I am more than willing to help with any situation, especially having to do with 888casino or Reef Club Casino, but again there is only so much I can do when it involves a white label.

Thanks
Rachel

What about the MARKETING though. It is clear that SPAMMING is still an issue. Players are deliberately being targeted with offers when the sender KNOWS FULL WELL they are sending them to an ineligible player BECAUSE the lead has come from a previous sign-up at another Cassava property.

Yoiu can't control the white labels, but you CAUSED this situation by SHARING the player's personal information WITH all the white labels so that they could spam the offers. This is something you CAN control through having a policy of NOT sharing ANY details gained from players at 888 and Reef Club with the white label casinos. Further, you can impose a requirement on white labels that they do NOT cross market BECAUSE the terms do not allow ANY player to actually ACT on the offers being sent.

White label casinos ALWAYS seem to bring down the main brand, and this is because they can pretty much do what they like, and the brand owner seems unable to do anything about it.

Look what happened to Rival when they failed to control their white label operations, they were collectively placed in the "not recommended" list.

Perhaps the SAME should be done with all the Cassava white labels, and ONLY 888 and Reef club remaining accredited, with the distinction being made clear.

The Cassava white labels also act in a rogue manner, since they often LIE about who they consider themselves "connected to", making it impossible for players to know whether or not this term even applies to them.

 

[Nifty29]

The player received signup offers from other cassava properties AS A DIRECT RESULT of signing up at 888.com....even though they KNOW their rules expressly forbid it.

IMO this is a clear case of entrapment.

Any result other than paying the player their full winnings is the behaviour of a rogue operator.

 

[takethemoney]

The player received signup offers from other cassava properties AS A DIRECT RESULT of signing up at 888.com....even though they KNOW their rules expressly forbid it.

IMO this is a clear case of entrapment.

Any result other than paying the player their full winnings is the behaviour of a rogue operator.

I agree. Don't accredit this casino until they get this right.

 

[vinylweatherman]

This is SPECIFICALLY against the standards for accreditation, and it looks like they have been caught "red handed" in this respect.

Since this was INDISCRIMINATE sending of mailers based on getting hold of the players details, rather than a SPECIFIC assessment of an individual players' circumstances in order to grant them a personal invite as specified in the rules, it fully meets the definition for SPAM.

Given that the details came directly from 888 themselves, it can be said that 888 did the spamming, rather than some unknown rogue affiliate who got the details by independent means.

888 can't win this argument, because if this was NOT "spam", it must have been a PERSONAL INVITE from the other casino based on a proper evaluation of the player, and this is actually ALLOWED in the terms and conditions.


The term:-

Section 10 - Bonuses:
All users of the Services shall be entitled only to one welcome bonus. Members who make their first deposit with the Company or any of its white label partners and who have or previously had an account with any of the Sites owned or operated by the Company, including both In-House Brands and White Label Brands, shall not be entitled to an additional welcome bonus, unless the Company decides otherwise at its absolute discretion.

If this was NOT spam, the player has NOT broken section 10, as the clause "unless the Company decides otherwise at its absolute discretion" comes into effect, since the company has decided in it's absolute discretion to invite this player to take up another welcome bonus".

If the player was NOT eligible, then 888 are guilty of spamming, or at the very least, providing players' personal information TO the spammers, which just happens to contravene ANOTHER standard for accreditation.

888 may well INTEND to "clean up their act", but clearly this has not happened YET, so entry to "baptism by fire" is premature.

I can see ABSOLUTELY NO GENUINE JUSTIFICATION for 888 to be passing players' details over for the marketing of other properties, since this is AGAINST THE RULES, and NO recipient is actually ELIGIBLE for any offer they are sent, so it is nothing short of entrapment, as it plays on the trust of the player to believe that because they have been sent the offers on the back of signing up with one casino, they are fully eligible to take them up.

Casino Rewards pulled the SAME stunt on ME in 2004, and I will NEVER forget it, it was downright rogue behaviour, and Kahnawake seemed to agree.

It was NOT one of their usual spammy mailers, it was an actual "hand typed" invite from one of their hosts, which is what made it so ROGUE in my view.

888 need to apply the concept of "what happens at 888 stays at 888", and NO details whatsoever should be forwarded to the marketing arm for ANY players who have an account at ANY Cassava property, so that "accidents" like this are not so likely to happen again.

Spam needs to look like spam, and passing on players' details allows spammers to make their spam look legit, which either gets it past most filters, or causes LEGIT mailers to get snared in more aggressive filters, which results in players not receiving even the offers they are eligible for.

 

[Rachel888]

Update

Hi Everyone!

I have some good news! I have talked to Cassava, and there will be a rep from Cassava coming on board to represent the white labels.

As I mentioned before we are really trying hard to work with our players and all feedback is welcome good or bad and we do take what everyone here says into consideration.

As soon as the rep has come on board I will update further. Things are changing and for the good, and all your opinions really help us towards a greater good!

So thank you all again for the insight!

Rachel

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi Everyone!

I have some good news! I have talked to Cassava, and there will be a rep from Cassava coming on board to represent the white labels.

As I mentioned before we are really trying hard to work with our players and all feedback is welcome good or bad and we do take what everyone here says into consideration.

As soon as the rep has come on board I will update further. Things are changing and for the good, and all your opinions really help us towards a greater good!

So thank you all again for the insight!

Rachel

It would have been better to have put this in place BEFORE exposing Cassava to the harsh glare of a spell in "baptism by fire".

The only way out is to PAY THE PLAYER, because you DID use their details to send them a sign-up offer at one of the white labels, and the terms ALLOW this, since it IS a direct invite based on details held by Cassava, rather than them finding this other casino through an internet browse, and just signing up off their own bat.

If you argue that this was NOT a personal invite, then it was both SPAM, and a player "screwed over" because of a marketing deception made possible by a lax attitude on who their information is shared with.

This is NOT the first time Cassava have been caught "red handed" over this, we have instances of "black hat SEO", misuse of player information, deliberate entrapment (remember the "join our sister Reef Club" exit pop-up when leaving the 888 website, and it's opposite when leaving the Reef Club site, which caused players who actually took up the offer to have their winnings voided because they had accounts at both - 888 also LIED when asked, and claimed the two casinos were not related, which was quickly debunked by a bit of research).
We then had the big "Lucky Ace" incident, and then things quietened down a little.

When I saw Cassava had entered the baptism, this is the LAST thing I expected to see, yet ANOTHER incident of "old skool" rogue entrapment marketing by another of the Cassava brands.

888 lost the right to say "nothing to do with us" when they shared this player's details from their registration at 888 with the other white labels, and allowed such information to be used for cross marketing which term 10 specifically PROHIBITS, so it CANNOT be anything other than an attempt at entrapment to send an invite to a player who already has a Cassava account.

What we need is a proper list of ALL the white label casinos that are covered by this clause 10, so that players can know for sure whether they are allowed the welcome offers, and marketers can know whether they should be marketing to existing Cassava account holders.

Remember also, that in 3 weeks the UK regulations on advertising extend to cover the internet, and this WILL affect Cassava since they advertise in the UK media and on TV. Breaking ASA standards on the internet could lead to the company concerned being "named & shamed", or even fined - this could result in the main media refusing to remain associated with the company, except perhaps SKY - who are just in it for the money

 

[Scooter7]

888 lost the right to say "nothing to do with us" when they shared this player's details from their registration at 888 with the other white labels, and allowed such information to be used for cross marketing which term 10 specifically PROHIBITS, so it CANNOT be anything other than an attempt at entrapment to send an invite to a player who already has a Cassava account.

I stripped out the rest of VWM's writing from this post. He's accurate and eloquent (as usual), but the section above is the only one that he actually needed to write.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I stripped out the rest of VWM's writing from this post. He's accurate and eloquent (as usual), but the section above is the only one that he actually needed to write.

It seems something that Cassava have failed to grasp for YEARS, despite it being pointed out to them on many occasions, along with it being the cause of some MAJOR scandals, like Lucky Ace.

Fortunately, this HAS gotten their attention, and although it will need them to round up the horse first, they WILL be locking the stable door in future

It had better be the LAST time something like this happens, and they had better have a damn good explanation for NOT paying the OP, or just accept responsibility, pay up, and learn the expensive 2K lesson so as not to repeat the mistakes.

 

[BBKPoker]

Hi Everyone!

I have some good news! I have talked to Cassava, and there will be a rep from Cassava coming on board to represent the white labels.

Rachel

This is the best thing that has been posted about Cassava since pretty much ever.

Specifically, the first thing they need to do is address using playing on one Cassava skin to deny a withdrawal at another site AFTER the wagering has been done. No one would have a complaint if Cassava simply just denied the signup, the deposit, or the bonus ahead of time but waiting until a player has won money to confiscate is a completely predatory practice, and doing so after advertising to that player to signup and receive a bonus through direct mail and email advertising is flat out despicable.

I'll be looking forward to seeing 888 and the rest of the Cassava skins correct this practice and either pay players who follow the rules, or exclude them from claiming bonuses in the first place.

 

[Rachel888]

I understand all your concerns and will be discussing them all with the 888 executives in the coming days.

If any of you have specific spamming issues please PM and I will try to take care of them as soon as possible. You can also PM me about any other issues not mentioned here that you would like me to bring up during my discussions.

Thank You All and have a beautiful weekend

Rachel

 

[maxd]

@nannyjilly: We've been trying to contact you via PM and email but have had no response. 888 needs you to forward them those emails so they can track down the source, etc. You need to do this if your concerns are going to be addressed.

Also, you've filed an incomplete PAB which I've also emailed you about. In order for that to proceed you need to get back to me on this as requested.

 

[nannyjilly]

I have just came back from holiday and posted the 2 separate PAB's as requested.

Rachel is asking for details of the ads I received for the other casinos. The thing is, I put all my emails into folders or delete them, so I don't have any copys of them, also, I installed a pop-up blocker so they don't come up anymore.

However, I do receive a message to play at ReefClub casino when I exit the 888 software, but I didn't play at ReefClub. I am sure there was a different casino on this ad before, so I may have clicked that..

 

[questa]

this is ridiculous. whenever you close a cassava casino it invites you to download another cassava casino, from which you can of course never withdraw any winnings.

how they can even be considered for anything other than rogue status is beyond me when they pull this trick.

also 888 have ben emailing me every week inviting me to join reef club. they offer me a large bonus but dont mention that i cannot possibly profit.

 

[BBKPoker]

I don't think a Cassava skin has EVER opened without them sending me a spam email offering a bonus which of course they'll just steal if heaven forbid I ever won anything.

 

[catcat941]

Why do players risk in new casino groups?

I think that players and should give/toss the new casinos in general , a long

cooling period ,before becoming "a depositor real player " . No use in giving a trust to
fairly new born casinos , as the trust that is given to establishments that
earned it over the years . Simple as that . Every now and than we see issues
that players put on furums which are usually involve non trusted groups, new casinos ,etc . I say to stop giving credit to casinos that abuse players . there are enough first and second class casinos to choose from , no need to run for massive bonuses from untrusted places .

 

[vinylweatherman]

UK players should make formal complaints to the ASA about this activity after March 1st. Much of this constitutes misleading advertising, since it is a DIRECT mailing based on a registration at one Cassava site, yet this is NOT mentioned in the advertisement, and it is misleading in the sense that the ONLY people who receive it via this route CANNOT ever take up the offer.

Even if this is a "bulk mailing", it can be misleading if it has been make difficult for the recipient to know whether such terms as exist about more than one account actually apply to the offer they have received.

This could well be upheld since the actual list of casinos covered by the term is "commercial in confidence", and is not available from a central up to date source. Players therefore rely on each white label to be honest about which casinos it considers to be "sister casinos" with regards to this term.

Cassava need to get a grip on this BEFORE the ASA gets it's formal powers covering internet advertising.

The ASA are ALREADY investigating the INTERNET "happy hour" Betfair offer, even though this happened BEFORE they were granted the powers to cover internet advertising. Advertising means ALL types, which INCLUDES emailed offers as well as websites. Betfair have already been told to withdraw a TV ad with immediate effect because it is misleading about commissions on winning bets.

 

[dealer wins]

Reading this thread I cant help thinking just exactly how are players supposed to know that a certain casino out of the 1000s online is part of a certain group of casinos?

 

[KasinoKing]

Reading this thread I cant help thinking just exactly how are players supposed to know that a certain casino out of the 1000s online is part of a certain group of casinos?

a) Check the T&C's
b) Ask here on the CasinoMeister forum!

KK

 

[maxd]

a) Check the T&C's
b) Ask here on the CasinoMeister forum!

To be fair there are many cases where a given group of casinos is by no means forthcoming about who is part of the "family" and who isn't. Although we tend to be fairly well informed about such things there are a few cases where even we have to scratch our heads and make educated guesses.

 

[Rachel888]

I am working on getting an updated list of all the Cassava properties, as soon as I have it I will post it for everyone to know who is who and what is what.

 

[chuchu59]

I am working on getting an updated list of all the Cassava properties, as soon as I have it I will post it for everyone to know who is who and what is what.

posting the info will only satisfy those who grace this forum. there will certainly be many newbies that sign up who will fall into the trap of registering at more than 1 casino within a group. it will be up to the cassava group to alert new registrants of the rule under dispute.

 

[maxd]

posting the info will only satisfy those who grace this forum. ....

Word gets around, no?

FYI, not disagreeing with the need to inform players directly.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Word gets around, no?

FYI, not disagreeing with the need to inform players directly.

Quite, if this information is RELEVANT to the terms and conditions, it MUST also be AVAILABLE in those terms and conditions.

In the past, not only has this information been lacking, the casinos themselves have LIED when asked directly whether a casino is part of the main 888.com family.

This LIE was told to many forum members about Reef Club when it first launched. Exit from 888.com, and a pop-up "join our sister casino Reef Club" appeared. However, when support were asked whether the two were connected, they DENIED there was any such connection. The lie was pretty obvious because it contradicted the text of the pop-up, and this ensured that anything said by Cassava in the future was treated with great suspicion.

The same lies are being told by the white label casinos. When asked whether they are part of a group, many lie and say they are "stand alone". They THEN admit they are part of a group when they confiscate winnings because a player had already signed up at a different Cassava property, but didn't see any problem since they were supposedly independent casinos that just happened to use the same brand of software. It is no different from a player having their winnings confiscated by All Jackpots because last month they also took the welcome bonus at Red Flush. Sounds absolutely ridiculous, unless you replace the names with 888.com and Lucky Ace - where it is a common occurance because of this sneaky term.