Resolved ChipStars vs angry mob

[goatwack]

Guys, please don't argue amongst yourselves. This will mean Bojan's already won

 

[bamberfishcake]

Where is Bojo when you need him?

 

[justdoit]

this guy try another UK forum he even offer free bonus money but got refused and ban from forum

 

[maxd]

FWIW we've heard from the ChipStars people and they claim that there is a non-trivial amount of misinformation being given by @dmr here. Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. Tomorrow I'll work through the issue with @ChipStars Casino and we'll see what we see.

 

[perunamies]

this guy try another UK forum he even offer free bonus money but got refused and ban from forum
View attachment 169185
View attachment 169186

Who wouldn't trust a guy named bojan851? I would trust him with my first born. If I had a first born that is.

 

[LadyJelena]

I'd just ask everybody to keep "jokes" related to the name, nickname and country origins of the rep or any other member in this thread, for yourself
The ones above are not cool.

 

[Casinomeister]

Well this thread turned into a shit show - @dmr cool it on badgering casino reps. That is uncool and creates a bad vibe here - and it is not good forum behavior.

@Casinomeister @maxd Is it now acceptable to take on board casinos openly offering illegal gambling to members here?

As you know, Max deals with complaints. So he desn't concern himself with that. As for taking on casinos that openly offer illegal gambling to our members? Well, this is not within our scope to figure out what is "illegal gambling" or not. Loads of sites have +18 logos on them, yet the legal age for many jurisdictions is 21. Most if not all sites state which jurisdictions are prohibited, and that should be the the defining truth, but there is no way to figure out if they are allowing French, or German, or UK residents to play without the specific licenses. This is strictly between the player and operator, not us. We are not here to figure out what is legal or not for each casino. That is not our job, and it would be a serious instance of whack-a-mole.

Just because you click a casino link, doesn't mean you are permitted to sign up at a casino. And unfortunelaty, this is a mind set of many UK players who believe that this is true. It is absolutely frustrating. This has a lot to do with the coddling and nanny statism they are in.

you can report to UKGC they will deal with it

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

As if anyone there cares. The UKGC is just another political dog and pony show. I wouldn't waste my time.

As most of you know, I am pretty much old school. I feel that one takes full responsibility of ones actions when it comes to online activities. If you screw up - it's on you and don't blame others for your mistakes (being deceived is not you screwing up btw). If you are in the UK and the casino does not have a UKGC license, then move on to another. Don't whinge and moan because they accepted your bets.

 

[goatwack]

Sheesh.....we only wanted to know if they're lawbreakers. What's so wrong with that?

 

[pinnit2014]

To be fair, both the rep and the chat convo posted seemed to fly in the face of the UKGC stuff.

But we've heard so much on CM here about 'if they accept UK and no licence: then bad' (not that i would always agree with that) so it does seems odd to promote a casino that flys against that (regardless of Dmr's whining)

 

[perunamies]

This is what happens when the rep doesn't actually answer any questions. It turns into a joke thread. Human nature.

 

[pinnit2014]

All the rep had to say was yay or nay: he didn't (for obvious reasons, maybe) so don't think it's on the posters.

 

[dunover]

Well this thread turned into a shit show - @dmr cool it on badgering casino reps. That is uncool and creates a bad vibe here - and it is not good forum behavior.


As you know, Max deals with complaints. So he desn't concern himself with that. As for taking on casinos that openly offer illegal gambling to our members? Well, this is not within our scope to figure out what is "illegal gambling" or not. Loads of sites have +18 logos on them, yet the legal age for many jurisdictions is 21. Most if not all sites state which jurisdictions are prohibited, and that should be the the defining truth, but there is no way to figure out if they are allowing French, or German, or UK residents to play without the specific licenses. This is strictly between the player and operator, not us. We are not here to figure out what is legal or not for each casino. That is not our job, and it would be a serious instance of whack-a-mole.

Just because you click a casino link, doesn't mean you are permitted to sign up at a casino. And unfortunelaty, this is a mind set of many UK players who believe that this is true. It is absolutely frustrating. This has a lot to do with the coddling and nanny statism they are in.

As if anyone there cares. The UKGC is just another political dog and pony show. I wouldn't waste my time.

As most of you know, I am pretty much old school. I feel that one takes full responsibility of ones actions when it comes to online activities. If you screw up - it's on you and don't blame others for your mistakes (being deceived is not you screwing up btw). If you are in the UK and the casino does not have a UKGC license, then move on to another. Don't whinge and moan because they accepted your bets.

Wow. The rep had but one simple question to answer about their casino accepting ex-jurisdictional players. Silence is deafening.

So it seems that unethical behaviour and tax evasion is suddenly acceptable?

The modern-day equivalent of 'Home taping is killing music' The playing field is no longer level for the casinos that abide by the the rules and regulations.

I guess we might as well allow cheap car windscreens that don't have safely glass so the car's occupants can all be lacerated to death in the event of an accident as 'it's their responsibility'. Remove railings from balconies in high buildings as it's not your fault if people fall off them.

Alas not everyone has extensive knowledge of what they buy, or are thinking about buying - if they all did, caveat emptor would apply and there would be no need for any consumer rights legislation or other regulation.

Most if not all sites state which jurisdictions are prohibited, and that should be the the defining truth, but there is no way to figure out if they are allowing French, or German, or UK residents to play without the specific licenses. This is strictly between the player and operator, not us. We are not here to figure out what is legal or not for each casino. That is not our job, and it would be a serious instance of whack-a-mole.

I strongly disagree with this. In most countries, certainly here, the advertiser bears some responsibility for the goods - I cannot say what goes in the USA, Germany or Netherlands but I guess it would be along the lines of this:

Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.

Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.

The way I see this is that the bar has been lowered lately in respect of new casinos. Sorry, but it has.

P.S. Yeah, I get it - move with the times, crapto-casinos are the new novelty but it's fraught with dangers, as is any entity that can freely move payment across borders any bypass legal checks and balances. So shit like this is sadly inevitable.

 

[pinnit2014]

Not an affiliate, nor linked, but pretty much agree with the above - seems like CM is lowering the bar in what is (tacitly, at least) acceptable: you can't go from ragging on casinos who (potentially) breach UKGC regulations to suddenly adopting a 'meh' approach and getting into semantics of it being between 'player and operator'

 

[maxd]

FWIW Bryan and I are on the same page on this, except I (of course) have footnotes.

IMHO this business about "illegal bets" is a bit rubbish. It's not illegal if the casino is based and licensed outside the UK regardless of what the UKGC may say. It can certainly be said to be unethical since the UKGC clearly wants everyone everywhere in the world to respect their jurisdiction over UK players but UK laws are not universal and neither is the UKGC.

To the best of my knowledge no offshore casino has ever been taken to court and successfully charged with accepting UK players. There's a good reason for that: UK laws end at UK borders, unless the UK and whichever other country is involved agree otherwise. So what we're really talking about here is ethics and yes, I'd say we generally do believe that good casinos will respect the UKGC's jurisdiction and not chase UK players. But as Bryan said, not our job to police that.

That gets your knickers in a twist? C'est la vie I guess, but take a moment and look around the world at countless other industries that have "special" licensing jurisdictions so they can operate in an environment more to their liking, and effectively avoid the laws of other countries. No one seriously rails against the oil industry for doing it, or offshore manufacturing, or farming or whatever else. Hell, half the reason the UK left the EU was so they could make their own decisions (meaning laws) about stuff they said they cared deeply about. So I'd say putting it in perspective is probably worthwhile here.

@dmr , IMO the rep avoided answering your question(s) because he had better things to do than school you on ... well, on pretty much what I've just done. Take it or leave it but your "illegal bets" argument is pretty thin grounds for harassing the casino. If you'd brought that to me as a PAB I would have told you what I tell anyone who brings that argument to me: "sure, I'll take it to them but not as a case of breaking laws that have no jurisdiction over them but as a case of failing to do the right thing". Very, VERY different circumstances. And you can imagine how many casinos say "ooops, our bad" and change the way they do things re UK players. Some do, especially if they suddenly discover they have something to lose if they don't, but not many.

 

[dmr]

Is there any chance of chipstars.bet answering the original questions as they very simple.
Do the have a UK Gambling License YES/NO
Do they accept UK customers YES/NO.

It would take two words to end this whole thread, or are they too busy?

They are on this thread at the moment so can't be that busy.

 

[goatwack]

It was more of a hello to Chipstars casino without so much as a hello back, bar a couple of cordial statements. I think regardless of the ethical permutations and arguments to be had about that, all that was required was a couple of pointers straight from the horse's mouth!

We're constantly told that reps are a protected species that should be treated with kid gloves, but it's a two-way street, and if they opt to blank basic queries, then conjecture, misinformation and suspicion will mount, not to mention wariness of their motives

They may well be respected among their peers, and those in the industry might be privy to their workings, but to your average punter this looks a tad evasive on their part. Much like they'd completely ignore potential PABs, because the UK player wouldn't have a leg to stand on, as "Thems the rules!"

 

[perunamies]

And yet all these "knickers in a twist" could've been avoided by the rep just answering the burning question.

I mean isn't it a give and take? They get free publicity here and in return they sometimes have to answer difficult questions. Instead it looks like the rep just ran to mommy and daddy because they couldn't stand the heat.

 

[dmr]

It was more of a hello to Chipstars casino without so much as a hello back, bar a couple of cordial statements. I think regardless of the ethical permutations and arguments to be had about that, all that was required was a couple of pointers straight from the horse's mouth!

We're constantly told that reps are a protected species that should be treated with kid gloves, but it's a two-way street, and if they opt to blank basic queries, then conjecture, misinformation and suspicion will mount, not to mention wariness of their motives

They may well be respected among their peers, and those in the industry might be privy to their workings, but to your average punter this looks a tad evasive on their part. Much like they'd completely ignore potential PABs, because the UK player wouldn't have a leg to stand on, as "Thems the rules!"

the rep was quick enough to come onto the thread on Friday and post the below

"Over the past few days, some people have made incorrect statements about Chipstars on this forum which we expressly reject.
Chipstars obeys all applicable laws and its terms and conditions and has its customer support center available to all its players in line with the foregoing."

However when asked what these "so-called incorrect statements were, he remaining silent with no further postings.

I would hardly call that "harassing" the casino but then again who knows what is considered harassment these days.

I would also like to advise that the only recent contact I have had with chipstars.bet is a threatening email titled "NOTICE TO CEASE AND DESIST". This was to attempt to "bully" me into not posting anymore about them on ANY forum. Once again when I asked them what "so-called" false claims and statements I had posted they went silent and couldn't tell me. Are these the actions of a genuine company with nothing to hide?

 

[paul7388]

Guess with Crypto payments and the like the face of online casinos is changing.

But looking at this forum off late. It seems just about any new casino can get a review and a Rep on here no matter how bad they may be.
Okay it can be pointed out they are not going for accredited but are Grey area casinos and if it turns out they are bad they will be moved to Rogue or not recommended. Fair enough but many people would look at this forum and just see a new Casino with an active Rep and go oh if they are on here must be okay. Without checking reviews. Then if they turn out to be crap the player has no chance of money and little help to them if casino is then rogued. Surely there should be a process where before reviewing any casino and adding a Rep there should be some research given to casino, maybe only casinos that have been around a certain length of time with some sort of positive history online would be a good place to start.

Just does not seem right that for instance all bookies sites are not recommended on here and made out to be bad places, for the reason they will not work with the forum even tho from a UK players perspective are the safest places by far. Yet unlicenced casinos that will take players from countries they should not and use anonymous crypto payment methods are praised and allowed a presence on here knowing full well that if they decide to screw a player nothing can be done.

Just does not seem right.

 

[perunamies]

the rep was quick enough to come onto the thread on Friday and post the below

"Over the past few days, some people have made incorrect statements about Chipstars on this forum which we expressly reject.
Chipstars obeys all applicable laws and its terms and conditions and has its customer support center available to all its players in line with the foregoing."

However when asked what these "so-called incorrect statements were, he remaining silent with no further postings.

I would hardly call that "harassing" the casino but then again who knows what is considered harassment these days.

I would also like to advise that the only recent contact I have had with chipstars.bet is a threatening email titled "NOTICE TO CEASE AND DESIST". This was to attempt to "bully" me into not posting anymore about them on ANY forum. Once again when I asked them what "so-called" false claims and statements I had posted they went silent and couldn't tell me. Are these the actions of a genuine company with nothing to hide?

Lol, you've clearly hit a nerve if you get "NOTICE TO CEASE AND DESIST" mail over this. They're running scared.

 

[dmr]

To the best of my knowledge no offshore casino has ever been taken to court and successfully charged with accepting UK players.

The reason for that is probably because the majority of offshore casinos hide behind a web of illegal companies/addresses so their true identity/owners are never known. It is impossible to serve legal documents from the UK on a company if you aren't in possession of their full details. I have asked chipstars.bet to provide me with the correct details of who owns them but obviously they are never going to supply them.
FWIW I'm not talking about the fictitious company Games & More B.V. they hide behind at a PO Box address registered in Curacao. That is precisely the reason they have carte blanche to treat UK customers however this wish safe in the knowledge that there will be no consequences.

 

[dmr]

Lol, you've clearly hit a nerve if you get "NOTICE TO CEASE AND DESIST" mail over this. They're running scared.

I did tell them if they wanted me to take their cease and desist notice seriously then it would have to have both our full names and full addresses on it. Strangely they never replied.

 

[justdoit]

avoiding to pay tax in UK will make casino another 15% profit, all black market casinos they stealing British tax money
I dont think any British tax payer will agree to give 15% to some casinos they never know where they operating from,

 

[justdoit]

The reason for that is probably because the majority of offshore casinos hide behind a web of illegal companies/addresses so their true identity/owners are never known. It is impossible to serve legal documents from the UK on a company if you aren't in possession of their full details. I have asked chipstars.bet to provide me with the correct details of who owns them but obviously they are never going to supply them.
FWIW I'm not talking about the fictitious company Games & More B.V. they hide behind at a PO Box address registered in Curacao. That is precisely the reason they have carte blanche to treat UK customers however this wish safe in the knowledge that there will be no consequences.

well if Australia can find this casinos way cant UK do the same

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

 

[maxd]

If anyone cares to notice I think you'll see that I have supported neither party in this. All I've said is that banging the "illegal bets" drum is pretty weak stuff for the reasons given.

Also, arguing that all a rep needs to do is "run to mommy and daddy" and, I assume the implication is supposed to be, get special treatment is just BS. No special treatment has been given to either party thus far. So can the moaning SVP.

When I see the evidence the casino people have against the player then maybe a decision to support one or the other party will be appropriate. Until then I wait, just like the rest of you.