[CLOSED] Misleading Bellerock terms, DO NOT play there.

scrabble73

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Location
Bubbenhall
Hello.

I had a cashout at Jackpot City for 790 confiscated from Bellerock.

Their promotional terms are listed here:

Gaming Club Casino Review, trusted & updated info - Casinomeister

Their promotional terms do not include a link to their general terms and conditions anywhere. Instead, you'd have to find a tiny link at the bottom center of their page.

Their general terms are here:

They decided they were going to confiscate my winnings for the following reason that appears under the GENERAL terms (It does not appear, nor does any other term that has similar verbiage appear under the PROMOTIONAL terms).

"5.6. The Casino is a member of the Belle Rock Entertainment (BRE) group of online casinos (the Group). You may not claim a sign- up bonus at the Casino if (1) prior to opening an Account at the Casino, you have opened an Account at any other online casino within the Group and claimed a sign- up bonus from such other casino and (2) having claimed such sign- up bonus from the other online casino within the Group, wagered such previously claimed sign- up bonus and initial deposit less than 100 times at the online casino granting you such sign- up bonus. Under no circumstances shall you be eligible for more than one sign- up bonus at the Casino even if you are able to open multiple Accounts thereat (in, for example, different currencies or languages). If your Account at the Casino has been credited with a sign- up bonus for which you (in our sole and unfettered discretion) are ineligible, the Casino shall retrospectively void such sign- up bonus and any winnings received by you after the sign- up bonus has been credited to your relevant Accounts."

I did indeed play at Gaming Club Casino with a signup bonus as well.

If they want to exclude customers from multiple promotions then that is fine, but what is not fine, is not sticking it on their promotions page in plain view so their customers don't make the mistake of signing up and depositing without giving enough play on a different casino. Instead they expect us to somehow find this term which is buried in their general terms with the rest of the legalese, and has no link on their promo page referencing this section. Considering this is a section dealing specifically with promotions, why isn't it on the promotions page?

Furthermore, why are they choosing a method of only confiscating after the wagering is done? What if I had lost my deposit? I certainly wouldn't be hearing from them that I was ineligible to play there and that they would be returning my deposit.

Awhile ago, I made the mistake of signing up and more than one Vegas Partners casino group (I signed up at 777 Dragon, Arthurian and Sun Vegas casinos), and instead of a big mess with them locking my accounts, they simply gave my first account a bonus, and emailed me regarding the other two accounts to explain that because I had received one bonus in their group, I was unable to claim any others.

That is a far less jarring solution if you want customers to claim one bonus per group. It is absolutely unethical to not tell customers plainly on their promotions page not to play at more one site on their group.

I am so positive that the casino is being unfair that I went through a number of other casinos I've played on and generated a list of casinos that restrict their bonuses to one casino per group and DO link this directly on their promotions page in their promotional terms and conditions:

Black Thunder Casino (playshare white label):


"# To be eligible to receive the opening offer (welcome bonus) a player must have NOT received a welcome bonus from any casino operated by Naden Inc. Naden Inc Casino List." (the last part is hyperlinked to a list of their casinos)


Sun Vegas Casino:



"Once a player has claimed the Match Bonus promotion at this casino, he/she in CANNOT claim it at any other Vegas Partner Lounge Casino (Unless Invited)"

English Harbour Casino:


Once a player has claimed the Welcome Bonus at a casino property controlled by the English Harbour Group of Casinos, that player will not be offered the Welcome Bonus a second time if they open an account at another property in the same group: Participating casinos are: English Harbour, SuperSlots, Caribbean Gold, Millionaire Casino, All Poker Casino and Silver Dollar Casino.

Powerbet Casino:

8. Promotional offers are not available to any players who have been locked out of any of our sister casinos including (but not restricted to): Crystal Palace, High Rollers Lounge, Cleopatras-Casino, American Grand, Golden Nile, Lucky Coin, Lucky Pyramid, Royal Circus and Real Vegas Online or Power Bet. In addition, we contribute to and makes use of a shared industry database of promotion abusers. Individuals known from this database to only make use of promotional offers without ever risking their own funds will not be eligible for this promotional offer.

Why is it that all of these casinos post their exclusion rules prominently, or simply exclude players from the first place, while Bellerock thinks it is acceptable to wait and see if a player loses his money first, then, if he actually wins, they can cite a buried rule that has no link on the promotions page as an excuse to steal?

Further making the situation worse is that I had a pretty positive experience and a fun time playing on Gaming Club. I like to use the Casino City website and it lists all the sites owned by Bellerock in one place, so I picked the next place that had a bonus I liked and signed up.

I've already private messaged the rep and given them my details and they are defending the casino's decision to steal.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
This is clearly wrong. That "trap" term is a PROMOTIONAL condition, and should appear in the PROMOTIONAL terms and conditions.

The terms in the general conditions is a very long winded way of excluding players from more than one bonus within the group, but does not directly say so, but uses a very high 100x WR which few players are likely to manage just on their first deposit & bonus.
Membership at one casino causes them to send you mailers for the sign-up bonus in the other three currently accepting new players. King Neptune casino is ALSO part of this group, but is run separately under the general Carmen Media operation, with it being a separate Carmen subsidiary to BelleRock.
Although the term mentions the other casinos, they are not listed. The multiple account part of the terms relates to multiple accounts at a SINGLE CASINO, not SINGLE accounts at each of the four casinos in the group. This makes the term more confusing, as both definitions of "multiple accounts" are used, but are intertwined without clarity as to which type of "multiple account" is being referred to.

This is on top of an avalanche of problems that BelleRock have inflicted on the community, which includes an advert that is unlawful under UK and EU advertising rules regarding misleading statements about their Lucky Nugget offer.
Since this player has had money confiscated for not ferreting out a promotional term buried under general terms, with a hard to find link, I see no reason to pull any punches when the CASINO makes a similar error in failing to make themselves aware of the rules regarding the advertising of consumer offers. The tems ARE there, they are on the government website, it is BelleRock's responsibility to read them before launching misleading advertising copy into the EU and UK market places.
There are ALSO rules governing such advertising contained within the UK Gaming Act, which came into force last September 1st, which cover offers to the UK market, and this would cover ANY OFFER that quotes the UK Pound as a player currency option, since this would CLEARLY be intended for UK consumption.
 

bellerock

Casino Representative
Joined
Dec 1, 2003
Location
South Africa
Hi All,

In the General Terms and Conditions we state that the casino is part of a bigger group, namely Belle Rock, and that you cannot claim a sign up bonus at more than one casino in the group, or at the same casino by opening accounts in different currencies or languages. When a player opens an account at any of our casinos he/she is required to confirm that they have read the GENERAL Terms and Conditions before the sign up process can be completed. By confirming this the player has agreed that they have read the term in question and they are now aware that they cannot claim the sign up bonus again if they already have an account at a casino in the group. This term is neither ambiguous nor hidden; it is in the terms that every player confirms they have read before they can even consider a promotion offer. When claiming a sign up bonus (usually shortly after opening an account) a player does not have to "ferret out" this term as they have already read it.

I trust this clarifies the matter.

Best regards,

Belle Rock
 

winbig

Keep winning this amount.
Joined
Mar 10, 2005
Location
Pennsylvania
Hi All,

In the General Terms and Conditions we state that the casino is part of a bigger group, namely Belle Rock, and that you cannot claim a sign up bonus at more than one casino in the group, or at the same casino by opening accounts in different currencies or languages. When a player opens an account at any of our casinos he/she is required to confirm that they have read the GENERAL Terms and Conditions before the sign up process can be completed. By confirming this the player has agreed that they have read the term in question and they are now aware that they cannot claim the sign up bonus again if they already have an account at a casino in the group. This term is neither ambiguous nor hidden; it is in the terms that every player confirms they have read before they can even consider a promotion offer. When claiming a sign up bonus (usually shortly after opening an account) a player does not have to "ferret out" this term as they have already read it.

I trust this clarifies the matter.

Best regards,

Belle Rock



And it would take how many words to, as a courtesy, actually remind the user (on the promotional page) of this before they make their first deposit and claim the SUB?


Karma goes a looooooooooong ways. Courtesies do as well.

Think about it, would you rather have a CUSTOMER remember your group as the one that seized $x,xxx of winnings, or as a group that went the extra mile and made sure there was no confusion as to whether or not they were entitled to a bonus BEFORE the fact?


Edit: While we're on the subject, if the whole group only allows one SUB per casino (this goes for any group), then why not simply have one login that works at all of the casinos in the group? A lot less confusion there.
 

BBKPoker

halfway to busto
PABrogue3
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Location
Edinburgh, Seattle, Vancouver BC, Auckland
I looked through the promotional page and I've got to say I agree.

There is nothing reference that term anywhere on there.

There is a very valid point that you should be excluding players from promotions from the getgo rather than after they win or lose. Many other Microgamings do this, so why choose a policy that is going to naturally lead to player complaints?
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Hi All,

In the General Terms and Conditions we state that the casino is part of a bigger group, namely Belle Rock, and that you cannot claim a sign up bonus at more than one casino in the group, or at the same casino by opening accounts in different currencies or languages. When a player opens an account at any of our casinos he/she is required to confirm that they have read the GENERAL Terms and Conditions before the sign up process can be completed. By confirming this the player has agreed that they have read the term in question and they are now aware that they cannot claim the sign up bonus again if they already have an account at a casino in the group. This term is neither ambiguous nor hidden; it is in the terms that every player confirms they have read before they can even consider a promotion offer. When claiming a sign up bonus (usually shortly after opening an account) a player does not have to "ferret out" this term as they have already read it.

I trust this clarifies the matter.

Best regards,

Belle Rock

It is well known in the software industry that a significant number of customers do NOT read the terms and conditions properly, but simply tick the "I agree" box just to get the process moving. While customers should not be doing this, a REPUTABLE business should NOT be taking advantage of this well known industry fact, but should be ensuring that EVERY OPPORTUNITY is taken to guide the customer into making the right choice.
The casino broke it's terms by granting the additional bonus in the first place. If the CASINO can't get it right, why should the players be expected to be 100% perfect.
The BelleRock bonus system is a delayed response mechanism and this would allow ample time for a check for other group accounts to be carried out, and the claim for a second bonus returned as refused. Belle Rock software is very good at refusing VALID claims, so there is clear evidence the this player was a victim of this problematic bonus redemption system, which, had it been working correctly, would have prevented any rules from being broken.

There are too many casinos that are prepared to watch in silence as players walk right into the trap because they have done what many do, failed to properly read the terms. Rather than watching, and rubbing one's hands with glee as you wait to pounce, a RESPONSIBLE business would ensure that someone intervenes, and helps the customer to make the correct choice. Don't forget, these are NEW customers, the casino cannot assume they are experienced online players, they may only have just started out, and have followed the SPAM to the casinos, which is going to make it look like they can have bonus after bonus.
One way to combat this problem is to be MORE HONEST with the advertising copy. I myself have received Lucky Nugget spam containing dishonest claims about the latest sign up offer, casino affiliates at some places are totally out of control, and they are interested in getting players to sign up and deposit at all 4 casinos, so as to get 4x the payments, they are not going to include discouraging news in their "marketing" that will lead to their target only bothering with one of the 4 casinos.

Having terms in more than one place, with no crosslinks, is also deceptive. Players may well have read what they see as the terms and conditions, but this may have only been one set. Promotional terms are easily visible when any bonus is claimed, however, GENERAL terms are tucked away "below the fold" of the home page, and are linked to by small, insignificant text, as opposed to the bold text that leads to promotional terms.

I don't believe this is an accident, these sites are desingned by university trained business psychologists, who know how to manipulate the behaviour of customers, and potential customers, by how advertising is both worded, and placed. A similar trick is used by the big supermarkets in order to subconsiously steer shoppers to avoid the low margin groceries in favour of the high margin items. Casinos in general use the same manipulative principles to make their offers look "good" when they are, in fact "crap".
 

winbig

Keep winning this amount.
Joined
Mar 10, 2005
Location
Pennsylvania
Compare this to any coupon given out by a retail B&M or any other Internet business.

If the customer doesn't read the fine print on the coupon, does the business honor it, then go to the customer later and take the goods away?

Not.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Compare this to any coupon given out by a retail B&M or any other Internet business.

If the customer doesn't read the fine print on the coupon, does the business honor it, then go to the customer later and take the goods away?

Not.

This is true also of the internet. Sainsburys online changed the rules on coupon codes, and ENFORCED IT THROUGH THE SOFTWARE, it was a simple process.
Any attempt to use an invalid code was instantly rejected with an error message. It was the same problem as this scenario, there were general rules, but customer specific rules were added that would exclude specific customers from generally advertised offers based on their previous purchace and coupon redemption history. BelleRock use an in-house claims process, they have no excuse for not amending it to reject invalid claims. Had they done this, this player would have had the claim rejected, and would probably have played with the deposit only, and would have kept the winnings. By not rejecting the claim, the player was mislead into believing they were playing a fair game, with a chance to both win or lose, whereas the player was playing an unfair game, where winning was not a possible outcome.
 

anniemac

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
MM
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Location
Texas, USA
Meaning no disrespect here, but I knew that you could only collect a signup bonus at 1 of the BelleRock casinos and I, sad to say, am one of the players that don't read the T & C's like I am suppose to. I've been playing at Riverbelle for years so it's been there a while.

Like it's always said here, read the T & C's and take responsibility.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Meaning no disrespect here, but I knew that you could only collect a signup bonus at 1 of the BelleRock casinos and I, sad to say, am one of the players that don't read the T & C's like I am suppose to. I've been playing at Riverbelle for years so it's been there a while.

Like it's always said here, read the T & C's and take responsibility.

In the past, it was generally the rule that players could claim ALL the sign-up bonuses within the casino group. Casinos were marketed individually, with little reference to the group as a whole. This worked well for the industry, as they could make more money from an individual player if they played several accounts. It is only in the last year or two that the position has changed, and it is now the general rule that you can ONLY have ONE bonus over entire casino groups. Players who have just carried on thinking nothing had changed would find out the hard way. Veteran players should not get caught out by these nasty terms, as they should know such things exist, and go looking for them. Naturally, this makes them harder to attract, as they ignore all the software tricks that try to get you to blindly make that first deposit before the casino has even finished installing itself.
It is players new to the industry, who have been used to downloading Windows update and internet software, and have skipped the terms and conditions either because they are irrelevant to the ordinary user, or they are intending to pirate the software without paying and know they are in breach of the terms without having to read them.
Most Windows users are used to having their hand held by nannying Windows applications, and have the belief that the software will tell them if they have tried something invalid, and enter online gambling with their eyes shut.
Players would be better off starting with the assumption that any new casino is a potential rogue, and then looking for signs that they are, in fact, reputable. Often the assumption is the opposite, and players only find out when it is too late.
Players who do not frequent forums are at a disadvantage, as they receive no guidance on what to look out for. Most players who post here about being shafted by a rogue outfit are new posters, who have done their research only after they got screwed over.
Just reading the forum, it should be clear that this issue (bonuses), and the issue of "wrong currency" are the two chief causes of confiscated winnings, and the casino policy on each should be researched beforehand. Any casino that does not make it easy to find out what is, and is not, allowed should be avoided.
Reputable casinos need to ensure they do not make themselves look like the rogues by sloppy procedures, out of date websites - in particular promotional and general rules, and poor standards of customer service.
If player after player keeps falling foul of the same issue, then it is clear that there is not enough importance given to it on the casino home page, and the operators should be addressing this, or they will find themselves accused of operating a deliberate entrapment policy (and some rogues do indeed deliberately set out to trap players in this manner, pulling some obscure rule out when they want to avoid paying).
 

BBKPoker

halfway to busto
PABrogue3
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Location
Edinburgh, Seattle, Vancouver BC, Auckland
In the past, it was generally the rule that players could claim ALL the sign-up bonuses within the casino group. Casinos were marketed individually, with little reference to the group as a whole. This worked well for the industry, as they could make more money from an individual player if they played several accounts. It is only in the last year or two that the position has changed, and it is now the general rule that you can ONLY have ONE bonus over entire casino groups. Players who have just carried on thinking nothing had changed would find out the hard way. Veteran players should not get caught out by these nasty terms, as they should know such things exist, and go looking for them. Naturally, this makes them harder to attract, as they ignore all the software tricks that try to get you to blindly make that first deposit before the casino has even finished installing itself.
It is players new to the industry, who have been used to downloading Windows update and internet software, and have skipped the terms and conditions either because they are irrelevant to the ordinary user, or they are intending to pirate the software without paying and know they are in breach of the terms without having to read them.
Most Windows users are used to having their hand held by nannying Windows applications, and have the belief that the software will tell them if they have tried something invalid, and enter online gambling with their eyes shut.
Players would be better off starting with the assumption that any new casino is a potential rogue, and then looking for signs that they are, in fact, reputable. Often the assumption is the opposite, and players only find out when it is too late.
Players who do not frequent forums are at a disadvantage, as they receive no guidance on what to look out for. Most players who post here about being shafted by a rogue outfit are new posters, who have done their research only after they got screwed over.
Just reading the forum, it should be clear that this issue (bonuses), and the issue of "wrong currency" are the two chief causes of confiscated winnings, and the casino policy on each should be researched beforehand. Any casino that does not make it easy to find out what is, and is not, allowed should be avoided.
Reputable casinos need to ensure they do not make themselves look like the rogues by sloppy procedures, out of date websites - in particular promotional and general rules, and poor standards of customer service.
If player after player keeps falling foul of the same issue, then it is clear that there is not enough importance given to it on the casino home page, and the operators should be addressing this, or they will find themselves accused of operating a deliberate entrapment policy (and some rogues do indeed deliberately set out to trap players in this manner, pulling some obscure rule out when they want to avoid paying).

Not to mention the fact that many web portals, affiliates, webmasters etc, advertise these sites together. I'd imagine Bellerock themselves have some sort of promotional link that includes more than one Bellerock site and could easily lead to multiple signups.

I'd also wager that Bellerock selectively enforces this T&C and doesn't steal from the people they want to return.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Not to mention the fact that many web portals, affiliates, webmasters etc, advertise these sites together. I'd imagine Bellerock themselves have some sort of promotional link that includes more than one Bellerock site and could easily lead to multiple signups.

I'd also wager that Bellerock selectively enforces this T&C and doesn't steal from the people they want to return.

Indeed BelleRock do just that. They have all four with tabbed browsing access the summary of all 4 bonuses, there is nothing to suggest that there is anything wrong with taking all four. As for the GENERAL terms and conditions, well, they are only accessible "below the fold", and are not any more prominent than the other links at the bottom.

Why are terms and conditions hidden "below the fold" in this manner, why do they not have a prominent link at the top, visible as soon as the browser displays the page. Sometimes it seems they are designing the site such that careless players will miss the terms and conditions unless they are thinking straight and make the effort to bypass the technicolour advert and look for the link.

Two buttons that are VERY prominent are "download now" and "play now", both of which conveniently bypass the GENERAL terms and conditions, with the installer only showing the legalese of the software agreement, and less prominently than the old "wise installer" application that MG casinos used to have.
 

MJackson

Moderated User - posts must be approved
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Location
Miami, I, I mean Montreal
I've always been amused by the stunning contradiction between what the casinos claim is the "spirit of the bonus offer" namely something along the lines of "for entertainment and to prolong the gaming experience" and what by it's very nature it is to read and fully comprehend the promotional and general terms and conditions.

Although Belle Rock does not directly state in it's terms that the purpose of it's bonuses is for entertainment and to prolong the gaming experience thus attracting loyal customers, I am assuming that they would agree with those commonly given reasons as also being their own.

So if the purpose of the bonus offer is for entertainment and prolonging the gaming experience in an effort to attract loyal customers then why would you require of them an excercise that would likely only be entertaining to lawyers and bonus seekers who are "entertained" chiefly by monetary profit?

1.1.7. You hereby authorize us and our designated agents in rem suam, as and when we require, to confirm your identity and your right to use the monies that you wager at the Casino. - From the River Belle General Terms

Rem Suam? I don't know what that means because I'm not fluent in Latin.

I wonder what percentage of customers who checked the "I have read the Terms and Conditions" box comprehended the phrase rem suam at the time they checked it. I would venture to guess the number is close to zero.

That would immediatley put all of those players in violation of term 1.2.1.8 which acknowledges that they player has,

...read and understood these Terms and Conditions.

But even though almost all players freely violate that term it doesn't threaten the validity of the contract because as term 8.3 discusses,

If any part of these Terms and Conditions is deemed unlawful, void or for any reason unenforceable, then that part shall be deemed to be severable from the rest of these Terms and Conditions and shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of these Terms and Conditions. In such cases, the part deemed invalid or unenforceable shall be amended in a manner consistent with applicable law to reflect, as closely as possible, our original intent.

And they intend to enjoy immunity from all liabilites no matter what the cause.

4.2. In no circumstances whatsoever shall the Casino, its directors, officers, employees, shareholders, agents and affiliates, the ultimate parent and parent companies of the Casino and any of its subsidiaries be liable to you in contract, tort, negligence or otherwise, for any loss or damage howsoever arising from any cause whatsoever, whether direct or indirect, or for any amounts whatsoever (even where we have been notified by you of the possibility of such loss or damage).

They also retain the power to,

refuse to register you as a Player or elect to deregister and exclude you or suspend you as a Player from the Casino at any time and for any reason whatsoever.

And then,

1.4.1.1. withhold payment to you of any contested funds whether such contested funds are deposits, refunds, bonuses, free monies, casino credits, payouts or the like.

And if they see fit,

1.4.1.4.2 have forfeited to us any contested funds that may be derived by you from fraudulent, illegal or similar misconduct.

How are the terms "fraudulent", "illegal" and "similar misconduct" defined?

8.10. Applicable Law & Jurisdiction

The validity, construction and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by Gibraltarian law and shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the Gibraltarian superior courts to which the parties hereby submit, except that a Party may seek an interim injunction in any court of competent jurisdiction.

I'm sure most weekend sign ups will find thrilling and challenging the necessary task of aquainting themselves with Gibraltarian law in order to comply with term 1.2.1.8.

On and on it goes with one FU clause bested by the next, leaving the player to fend for themselves in a maze of legalease designed to lose anyone who dares to enter. And for a casino rep to invoke the General Terms and Conditions, particularly ones written in this kind of anti-player rights tone, as a substitute for a properly designed bonus claim system and as an excuse for extra judicial confiscation of money is essentially a non-argument. IMO by resorting to the invocation of the out-of-the-way General Terms and Conditions the player rep is essentially conceding the following:

The only obvious conclusion after having read the unaddressed points by Vinylweatherman and others is that Belle Rock doesn't like a certain class of customers and has decided to design a system by which they can profit in monetary terms from those customer's exclusion from their casinos.

I am stating that I think bell rock conciously and intentionally sat down and designed this system with the goals of

1) Trapping those who abuse bonuses and generating a large edge for the casino by "freerolling" with the the players' funds

2) Attempting to use this tactic to discourage other similar players from taking advantage of their promotions.
 

RobWin

closed account
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Location
A Vault!
And it would take how many words to, as a courtesy, actually remind the user (on the promotional page) of this before they make their first deposit and claim the SUB?


Karma goes a looooooooooong ways. Courtesies do as well.

Think about it, would you rather have a CUSTOMER remember your group as the one that seized $x,xxx of winnings, or as a group that went the extra mile and made sure there was no confusion as to whether or not they were entitled to a bonus BEFORE the fact?


Edit: While we're on the subject, if the whole group only allows one SUB per casino (this goes for any group), then why not simply have one login that works at all of the casinos in the group? A lot less confusion there.


That's what's nice about playing at the Grand Prive Group of casinos...they have had this in place for quite some time now...:thumbsup:
 

RobWin

closed account
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Location
A Vault!
In the past, it was generally the rule that players could claim ALL the sign-up bonuses within the casino group. Casinos were marketed individually, with little reference to the group as a whole. This worked well for the industry, as they could make more money from an individual player if they played several accounts. It is only in the last year or two that the position has changed, and it is now the general rule that you can ONLY have ONE bonus over entire casino groups.

I was around back then and used all the individual bonuses seperately at each casino. Hell back then the casinos would not even admit to being associated with another in the same group and would even go as far as denying any association.

I certainly think that it would be to Bellerocks benefit to pay attention to this thread...
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
I was around back then and used all the individual bonuses seperately at each casino. Hell back then the casinos would not even admit to being associated with another in the same group and would even go as far as denying any association.

I certainly think that it would be to Bellerocks benefit to pay attention to this thread...

When casino-on-net launched Reef Club, it was marketed aggressively by an exit pop-up from the casino-on-net website. Players pretty much had the Reef Club bonus rammed down their throat. Soon, Reef Club starting screwing over some of the players, and then Casino-on-net flatly denied ANY kind of association with Reef Club other than by software. This lie was so very obvious, since NO online casino would aggressively market it's own players to a direct competitor. The fact they thought players would swallow this was an insult to our intelligence. Their reputation has never really recovered, and even being based in Gibraltar doesn't help.

As for "rem suam", I have never seen this one before, and I have seen many examples of "legalese". I would agree that close to ZERO players have fully understood all these terms, (unless they are lawyers).
I have a friend from my schooldays who is a BARRISTER, so perhaps as an exercise I will print of the BelleRock "legalese" and set him the challenge of fully understanding them. If he cannot, then this would be pretty damning, since this would prove that the overwhelming majority of players really DO simply tick "I have read and understood..." based purely on the "trust" they perceive as being in existence between what they believe to be a "reputable" casino company and themselves as ordinary consumers.

These are the player's ONLY means to fight back:-

If any part of these Terms and Conditions is deemed unlawful, void or for any reason unenforceable, then that part shall be deemed to be severable from the rest of these Terms and Conditions and shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of these Terms and Conditions. In such cases, the part deemed invalid or unenforceable shall be amended in a manner consistent with applicable law to reflect, as closely as possible, our original intent.

8.10. Applicable Law & Jurisdiction

The validity, construction and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by Gibraltarian law and shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the Gibraltarian superior courts to which the parties hereby submit, except that a Party may seek an interim injunction in any court of competent jurisdiction.

In particular note:-

except that a Party may seek an interim injunction in any court of competent jurisdiction

This little snippet means that a player can seek an INTERIM court injunction ALMOST ANYWHERE who's national courts are recognised by the international community as of "competent jurisdiction". EU based players would find that EEC law would make it easy to get such an interim injunction locally, before having to go to Gibraltar for a ruling. If taken to Gibraltar's courts, such a player would need to attack those terms that could be challenged as "unlawful" for CONSUMER CONTRACTS under Gibraltean law. These terms would then not apply if ruled unlawful, leaving the unchallenged terms still in place. This would effectively redefine the contract. Once ONE case has been brought on this basis, it will stand as a "legal precedent", and the outcome used to pursue similar cases through the Gibraltean legal system.
Big business is actually VERY WARY of allowing it's terms to come before a court in this manner, as they want to avoid the setting of a disadvantageous "legal precedent". Such a situation has existed here in the UK with Bank and card penalty charges. Someone found a rule relating to consumer contract law, which says that where contracts are breached, only the costs of remedying the breach can be recovered, and that applying any punitive penalty was illegal. The UK banks would take consumers right to the edge on occasion, but would simply never turn up in court, preferring instead to go for the "out of court settlement", which meant the complainant was paid off, but no court ruling was made, thus no legal precedent was set that could be used in future claims. Finally, the regulators forced the issue to a court hearing by using the procedure of "supercomplaint", similar to a class action, but with no actual complainants. This case will establish whether there are grounds for the charges to be challenged as "illegal".

In the case of casinos licenced in well run juristictions, all it needs is a player whose confiscated amount is large enough to make a full pursuit of the issue worthwhile. They would need legal advice from an expert in Gibraltean law, and this could be expensive, with no guarantee of a successful outcome until a legal precedent has been set.
This may catch out the casino, as I would bet that they don't even understand their own terms and conditions. They have probably hired a lawyer to write them, asking for them to be as wide ranging and tight as possible, so that they could pretty much get away with anything if they felt the need. The idea being that for "good quality" players, they would never invoke these nasty terms, but that if they needed to get rid of someone, and not pay them if they felt they had been taken advantage of, they could pretty much act with impunity.
As the industry matures, it is likely that one day one of the casinos will have their "ass kicked" in a court of "competent juristiction", and this would probably act as a catalyst in the industry, since one success would galvanise other aggrieved players to follow suit. I would expect they would quickly redesign their terms so as not to suffer further court rulings against them.
 
Top