Club World, still waiting on T&C changes...

[ksech]

It's been over a month since the issue of the "full-time" student was brought forth, but to date, no changes OR clarifications on this term. Any chance of letting the players know when we/they can expect this ambiguous term to be rectified?

Also, will the casino group be clarifying the "area of Markham in Canada" anytime soon? I'm sure there are still players who are "eagerly" awaiting these clarifications so they aren't left in the dark concerning their status...

 

[jod5413]

Good idea to bring this back up to the front page of the forum. All too often, things get shuffled to the "back of the line" and no one "does anything" to rectify the problem.

 

[ksech]

Maybe this thread needs the "rep friendly" thing Maxd suggested...
Would be a good start to "see" how this rep friendly concept could go?

 

[maxd]

@ksech, I have PM'd you with a couple options. Let me know and we'll proceed.

 

[maxd]

Ok, upgraded to Rep Friendly. Please see here for what that means.

 

[ksech]

Bump. Sorry, I think this is too important to let the thread slip to the bottom/ or off the first page.

 

[maxd]

Just a thought, you might want to PM the rep, clubworld, point them to this thread and explain that it will be Rep Friendly.

 

[ksech]

Thanks max! The PM has been sent.

 

[clubworld]

There have been some delays in working with our legal team in clarifying the Student clause in our terms. Getting lawyers to do anything quickly is a challenge, especially over Christmas.

The opinion that we have received so far is that the intent of the term is clear so any changes required would be to cover certain situations that may be covered by the term unintentionally. We cannot cover every single edge case individually and attempting to do so would cause more problems than it would solve.

Our current thinking is to simply apply a maximum age where the student clause could be applied, this way if you are over this age you know for a fact that there is nothing to worry about. Our lawyers need to sign off on this before we post it on our website.

Regarding the excluded town of Markham in Canada, what further clarification do you require? I cannot really discuss too many specifics of our reasons for taking this action, but suffice to say it was in response to a specific problem.

Kind Regards
Tom

 

[ksech]

I believe the area of Markham in Canada was unclear due to the fact that it is considered part of Ontario Canada, which would/could affect ANY Canadian player from that area.

Just a quick question on the student term... wouldn't it just be easier to change the minimum age to 21 then?

And thank you for answering, perhaps other members/ reps will see you are at least willing to take on questions in a "friendly" atmosphere....
I personally think, this interaction is vital to keeping a healthy environment.

 

[maxd]

Thanks to Tom for dropping by.

 

[The Dude]

Regarding the excluded town of Markham in Canada, what further clarification do you require? I cannot really discuss too many specifics of our reasons for taking this action, but suffice to say it was in response to a specific problem.

I think the question refers to the "area"

the area of Markham in Canada

I believe players were confused whether or not this meant city, count, region, whatever. Maybe you could modify the term "the area of Markham in Canada. If you are unsure whether or not this term pertains to you, please contact our customer support."

 

[Webzcas]

Tom, what about having the student clause highlighted during the sign up process. Whereby a player signing up has to confirm they are not in full time education.

This should be a straightforward thing to do and will eliminate any grey areas moving forward and head off the potential for future longest thread of the year contenders. As this term is unique to Club World, I think this would make sense.

This also wouldn't need your legal team to look at it and thus having to wait for their response. Meaning it could be done, pretty much straight away.

 

[clubworld]

Fair comments on the Area of Markham, I have updated the terms as follows:

...does not currently accept any real money wagers from the legal jurisdictions of the Netherlands Antilles, Costa Rica, Israel, France or the Town of Markham in Canada. If you are unsure as to whether these restrictions apply to you please contact support.

I have to say i am not keen about posting individual terms on the registration page as it would diminish the player’s responsibility to visit the terms page. It is also tough to decide which terms to put there – if the student clause is in on the registration page then I should really put the age restriction there, and the geographical restrictions, and the one account per household….

You can see where that would lead us

Kind Regards
Tom

 

[vinylweatherman]

It is terms that are considered unusual that would benefit from being highlighted.

Rather than a load of terms, perhaps a system whereby specific terms are highlighted on sign-up as a declaration, in the form "Tick box to confirm I am not a student in full time education", in the same way that a declaration of age is often made explicitly at sign-up, rather than relying on the under age player reading the terms.

The student and "Town of Markham" terms are unique to Club World, and much of the puzzlement is why it is ONLY Club World that has such a problem with these two categories. There must be other casinos exposed to the "unique problem" caused by the "Town of Markham", yet they don't deal with it by a blanket ban. No-one can really imagine HOW a problem of any description can be unique to a single town, as surely a problem of the same severity could occur from any location.
The application of this term should use the OFFICIAL definition of the "town of Markham", such as used by the postal service, or local authority area of responsibilty. In the UK, a town can be excluded by giving a list of postcodes.
For example, to exclude the city of Reading in Berkshire, a term would exclude "Players covered by the postcode RG1"

The student clause DID have a maximum age, and it was the REMOVAL of this that created much of the confusion around these "edge cases".

I don't believe the intent is clear either, since the LOGICAL intent seems to be to exclude young "undergraduate" students, yet has been used to exclude fully adult "further study" students, and not just undergraduates.

An age of 25 might be the best option, as many companies use 25 as a marker between "young adult" and "responsible adult". There are some clubs and bars that are "25 and over" because they want to avoid the trouble caused by people who have reached the right age, but lack the experience and ability to exercise restraint.

"Full time education" can also be a problem, as there are some practical courses where the definition can be vague. These are courses where there is an element of practical experience using a placement with a company, perhaps even a paid one.

There is also "full time" study that can take place at home using "Computer Based Training", that is the equivalent of a traditional university course.

Maybe the focus should be on whether a player has at least had his/her first taste of a "proper paid job" after completing their education.

If this ends up being too complicated, the responsible gambling aspect could be applied by setting low deposit limits for young players, which to get raied they have to pass further checks to ensure they are fully aware of the negative aspects of gambling, and are NOT using funds they don't have. A ban on credit cards until such extra vetting has taken place should make it harder for inexperienced players to "chase" their losses with borrowed money, even if within the preset deposit limits.

 

[Webzcas]

I have to say i am not keen about posting individual terms on the registration page as it would diminish the player’s responsibility to visit the terms page.

You have to confirm you are of legal age no?

This would be an addition to that and would make sense, seeing as the term is unique to Club World.

I don't see the issue here, seeing as the term caused a lot of unnecessary flak on this forum and it certainly does not open up a pandora's box or set a precedent. As the term is unique to Club World and should be highlighted ( I was not aware of it for example and I am an affiliate ).

 

[maxd]

The student and "Town of Markham" terms are unique to Club World, and much of the puzzlement is why it is ONLY Club World that has such a problem with these two categories.

FWIW I believe I've had PABs with other casinos who had the very same Markham problem. 'Course they hadn't included it in their Terms but that particular issue is not unique to CW. Mucho fraud partly aided by some very particular demographic features of that place. Not saying those features are unique to Markham but the fraudster problem was very much exacerbated by said features.

 

[slotjunkie]

Fair comments on the Area of Markham, I have updated the terms as follows:

...does not currently accept any real money wagers from the legal jurisdictions of the Netherlands Antilles, Costa Rica, Israel, France or the Town of Markham in Canada. If you are unsure as to whether these restrictions apply to you please contact support.

I have to say i am not keen about posting individual terms on the registration page as it would diminish the player’s responsibility to visit the terms page. It is also tough to decide which terms to put there – if the student clause is in on the registration page then I should really put the age restriction there, and the geographical restrictions, and the one account per household….

You can see where that would lead us

Kind Regards
Tom

Is there a way for the system to just block them from further registration if they are under age? And if they lie and put in a a made up birthdate, they would clearly be in violation thus causing any winnings to be void!

 

[jod5413]

I applaud Tom for coming forward to let us prove that Casinomeister members can, in fact, be polite and civilized.

As far as the student rule goes, I really think it should be removed totally and just an age minimum should be required. If you are old enough to protect your country, you should be allowed to play at casinos. Eighteen is the magic number. Some casinos use 18 some use 21. Either way, the student criteria is too restrictive and confusing and should be abandoned completely, IMO.

 

[clubworld]

At the moment there is no minimum age on the registration form, instead the server instantly bans the underage account as it is created in the database preventing them from ever logging into it.

This way if they then create another account but enter an age above the minimum the system can automatically link it to the banned underage account and prevent deposits.

I think that the issue with the student clause is not so much making players aware of it – after all there are many items in our terms of use and players need to be aware of all of them.

In my view the objective is to write the term in such a way that when players do read it they are left in as little doubt as possible as to whether or not it applies to them.

 

[ksech]

In my view the objective is to write the term in such a way that when players do read it they are left in as little doubt as possible as to whether or not it applies to them.

Then, as someone else suggested, can't a sub menu be written in? such as: age -> drop down menu ( are you a STUDENT?) -> if yes, you cannot play

I know of a lot of full time students who are 18-21 years old who are working at least 30 hrs a week (which in my little corner of the world is considered full-time employment).

I'd like to know the difference between an 18 yr old full-time student who works and an 18 yr old person who isn't in school and no job. Wouldn't the latter be more of a problem than the first? Either way, I personally think, either change the age restriction (and student term) BACK to 21 or simply change the minimum age requirement to 21-25, which would ensure the casino isn't encouraging irresponsible "student" gambling. Unless, for some reason beyond my (our) scope of understanding, the casino is more concerned about keeping the 18 - 21 yr old non student player base (which in my mind, is setting up young people to be irresponsible financially by allowing them access to gaming which will encourage them to find ways to fund an account when they aren't financially able to).

I think that the issue with the student clause is not so much making players aware of it – after all there are many items in our terms of use and players need to be aware of all of them.

My last count was 39 "items" between the general and the bonus T&Cs.
And you stated in your earlier post, you didn't want to make the T&Cs so people wouldn't revisit them. Well, some people aren't revisiting them now. They are written in such a way that the layperson can't comprehend the legal mumbo jumbo, frustration at trying to understand will lead them to go back less and less. Find a way to simplify the T&Cs so EVERYONE can understand them without any doubt.

Also would like to add, thank you for making the clarification of the area of Markham in Canada more defined. I'm sure some canadian players have been relieved to know they are NOT violating any area bans.

 

[Webzcas]

I think that the issue with the student clause is not so much making players aware of it – after all there are many items in our terms of use and players need to be aware of all of them.

I disagree Tom

This term as it stands is unique to Club World and as such should be highlighted. By highlighting it when registering at the casino, you are thus ensuring another 50 page thread doesn't happen.

I don't see the problem in doing this.

How many people when doing anything online, whether it be purchasing software or signing up on a casino, go through the T & C's pages?

Yes we all tick the check box that says we adhere to them. But I bet 99% of people don't read them.

Perfect example is installing a software update on my PS3. You have to check that you agree to them. I never read them.
Hence my point being, that any terms which stand out from other operators should really be highlighted.

It is a win win if you do this.

1) You remove the chance of another heated forum exchange here and elsewhere.
2) You are seen to actively and openly support responsible gambling. Which is the reason you have the term in place yes?

 

[Nifty29]

Thanks for taking the time Tom.

I think the fact that just about every poster has a different take or a new question tells me that the term is anything but clear.

The main problem seems to be definition.

E.g.

Enrolled full time student.

What constitutes full time? Hours attended? Hours enrolled? Whether they also work? Whether work hours exceed study hours? If enrollment takes place 8 weeks ahead of classes beginning, are they a student from enrollment date or commencement date?

Just in this example of part of the term there are many legitimate questions I.e. there is a lack of clarity.

Define exactly who is covered by the clause and the problem will be solved.

 

[vinylweatherman]

At the moment there is no minimum age on the registration form, instead the server instantly bans the underage account as it is created in the database preventing them from ever logging into it.

This way if they then create another account but enter an age above the minimum the system can automatically link it to the banned underage account and prevent deposits.

I think that the issue with the student clause is not so much making players aware of it – after all there are many items in our terms of use and players need to be aware of all of them.

In my view the objective is to write the term in such a way that when players do read it they are left in as little doubt as possible as to whether or not it applies to them.

OK,

What was the INTENT behind developing this term in the first place? So far, the debate has been around the meaning of the term, but unless we know what this term sets out to achieve, all suggestions are based on what WE think the term is intended to achieve, and how to put this over more clearly. The case of DanL seemed to fall OUTSIDE the perceived INTENT behind this term, so I am not really sure just what needs to be achieved any longer. It was this DanL case that caused the confusion, as it demonstrated the ban was ABSOLUTE, regardless of age and PRESENT circumstances. This lead to the idea that no matter WHEN you studied during your adult career, you were excluded every time you took another course, even if you had played before. The case even showed that FUTURE plans to study full time could mean you were banned even whilst WAITING to take up your place, and not just when you were actually studying. A different student who was NOT banned whilst waiting to take up a course only confused matters further.

It might be better to ditch the "student" idea altogether, and find an alternative and EXACT criteria that leaves no doubt as to whether it applies. One such criteria is age. You are either 21 or you are not, there are NO "edge cases". Raising the age to 21 across the board gives an exact criteria, and automatically excludes the vast majority of full time students. It ALSO provides the 18-21 age group with protection from the full force of online gambling until they have had 3 years of life experience as an adult. The term can be positively marketed as being a way to protect the most vulnerable from irresponsible gambling. There are other casinos that set a minimum age of 21, even when the player is legally allowed to gamble at 18 as far as their local laws are concerned.



Max has clarified that "Markham" is a truly UNIQUE part of the world, and that this somehow makes it completely unmanageable, so is banned outright. Other casinos seem to deal with the same problem differently. Most seem to ban entire COUNTRIES, rather than individual districts. Perhaps this is why the term seems so odd, because a different operator might simply have blanket banned the entire country of Canada (and this HAS been the case with some operators).

 

[ksech]

*bump*


Tom, Is there any time frame you can supply (i.e. 1 month, 2 months, etc) when this term will be "clarified"? I would certainly NOT want to see another 50+ page student issue thread arise because the casino was lax in rewriting this term. As it stands now, you may be losing players who are adult students and they have stopped playing since they don't want to be in violation of this term (and have their money confiscated IF they should win) as it is currently written.

I sincerely hope, the casino is genuinely working on this...

 

[clubworld]

Hello, yes have been working on this. We have decided on the simple approach of restricting this clause to players aged 25 or under.

1. The Player is at least 18 years of age or has reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction, whichever is greater. Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in a College or University are not permitted to play in the Casino.

This is now live on our terms pages.

 

[ksech]

Tom, Thank you very much! I'm sure many players will be relieved to hear they aren't in violation of any terms. And thank you for the area of Markham rewrite, I'm sure your Canadian players thank you also!

I'm glad Bryan and Maxd implemented this rep friendly title, hopefully, in the future reps won't hesitate to join into friendly debate!

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hello, yes have been working on this. We have decided on the simple approach of restricting this clause to players aged 25 or under.

1. The Player is at least 18 years of age or has reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction, whichever is greater. Full time students aged 25 or under who are enrolled in a College or University are not permitted to play in the Casino.

This is now live on our terms pages.

This is much better, but we still have the problem of how you define "enrollment". It is clearly NOT the same as actually being in attendance at the university and taking a course. It seems to include cases where a student has been accepted for a course to start at some future date, possibly the following year after a "gap year".

There may also be unusual situations where full time, but atypical, courses are being taken. The Open University scheme is one such example. This is a proper university, but the courses are done at home at the students' own pace, and cannot really be defined as "full time" or "part time".

There is still the need therefore to indicate that such problems exist, and advise ANY player who is taking ANY kind of course of study whilst under 25 to contact support with the specifics of their studies for a written ruling.

Perhaps students here at CM with such atypical courses could post here (or PM) to gain some idea of how much of a problem this really is, along with some details of what is likely to happen when this term is applied to such cases.

I'll give an example:-

My niece's husband is 21, and currently out of work. He is currently training to be a plumber on a home learning course. Study is done at home using CBT (Computer Based Training), and marked assignments sent and returned via the internet. There will be a few short "residential" modules.

Since he does not work, this IS in his case a "full time" course, and it leads to formal qualifications that are no different to those gained when attending a "proper" college. He is also formally enrolled in this course, and pays monthly.

Now, does this "student" term apply in this case? (i.e. he can't play until he finishes the course, or reaches 25).

 

[kevfromcanada]

Sorry to revisit a dead thread but i found it odd about the Markham thing... I live about 40 minutes away from it...

This was a newspaper article from Mar 5, 2013.

Just over a month after police broke up an alleged online gambling ring at a Markham Super Bowl party, a slew of raids in Toronto and elsewhere in Ontario Tuesday morning added 18 more arrests to the tally.

“Today, I can say that we have dismantled one of the largest illegal gaming groups in Canada and the previous arrests were one phase of a larger project,” said RCMP Deputy Commissioner, Steve Graham. “Organized crime groups are entirely profit-motivated and this illegal gaming activity generated significant profits.”

Tuesday’s arrests were made after 13 search warrants were executed at financial institutions and residences in Toronto, Barrie, London and York Region.

The search yielded “approximately $1.6-million cash, two handguns, a Taser, numerous computers, cellphones, betting lists, ledgers, bank statements, drafts and documents relating to criminal organizations were seized,” according to York Regional Police Deputy Chief Bruce Herridge.

“Four vehicles were seized as offence-related property, including a Land Rover, Porsche, a Cadillac and a pick-up truck.”

Each of the accused will be charged with numerous offences, including participating or engaging in a criminal organization, bookmaking and conspiracy to commit a criminal offence. Names of the accused and a full list of will be revealed Wednesday.

Related
Betting ring hit with dramatic Super Bowl Sunday raid back up within hours
Four more arrest warrants have been issued and the investigation is ongoing.

The arrests mark another breakthrough in an 18-month investigation into Platinum Sports Book, a group allegedly co-ordinated by members of the Hells Angels and traditional organized crime outlets. The group is accused of running an off-shore website, based in Costa Rica, where many online wagers were allegedly placed.

“Their migration to a new site provided key evidence that will support the charges for criminal organization,” said Supt. Keith Finn, head officer of the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit. “These arrests today have rolled up the rest of the management team and have, in effect disrupted their ability to [operate].”

In February, six people were arrested after a warrant executed during at a Super Bowl party hosted by Platinum Sports Book at Le Parc Dining and Banquet Ltd. in Markham. There were 2,300 people at the party when the festivities were cut short by police.

Six other search warrants were simultaneously executed at the homes of the accused and 10 in total across the GTA. Approximately $2.6-million was retrieved from the banquet hall along with computers, cell phones, business records and a safe. The six men were facing numerous charges, including bookmaking, participating in or contributing to an activity of a criminal organization, keeping a common betting house and conspiracy.

Two of the men arrested at Le Parc were re-arrested in relation to Tuesday’s seizure and face charges of failing to comply with release terms.

Police say they will continue to find means of disrupting the alleged gambling ring.

“We will exercise all lawful means to continue to disrupt their activities, whether that includes technical avenues, arrests and so forth,” said Sup. Finn. “It remains to be seen how well they adapt, but we’re confident by taking the action that we did today is a significant disruption of the organization.”

The Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit enlists the services of the RCMP, OPP, York Regional, Peel Regional, Toronto Police Service and Durham Regional Police.

National Post

Is Club World based in south america too???

 

[Nifty29]

Sorry to revisit a dead thread but i found it odd about the Markham thing... I live about 40 minutes away from it...

This was a newspaper article from Mar 5, 2013.

Just over a month after police broke up an alleged online gambling ring at a Markham Super Bowl party, a slew of raids in Toronto and elsewhere in Ontario Tuesday morning added 18 more arrests to the tally.

“Today, I can say that we have dismantled one of the largest illegal gaming groups in Canada and the previous arrests were one phase of a larger project,” said RCMP Deputy Commissioner, Steve Graham. “Organized crime groups are entirely profit-motivated and this illegal gaming activity generated significant profits.”

Tuesday’s arrests were made after 13 search warrants were executed at financial institutions and residences in Toronto, Barrie, London and York Region.

The search yielded “approximately $1.6-million cash, two handguns, a Taser, numerous computers, cellphones, betting lists, ledgers, bank statements, drafts and documents relating to criminal organizations were seized,” according to York Regional Police Deputy Chief Bruce Herridge.

“Four vehicles were seized as offence-related property, including a Land Rover, Porsche, a Cadillac and a pick-up truck.”

Each of the accused will be charged with numerous offences, including participating or engaging in a criminal organization, bookmaking and conspiracy to commit a criminal offence. Names of the accused and a full list of will be revealed Wednesday.

Related
Betting ring hit with dramatic Super Bowl Sunday raid back up within hours
Four more arrest warrants have been issued and the investigation is ongoing.

The arrests mark another breakthrough in an 18-month investigation into Platinum Sports Book, a group allegedly co-ordinated by members of the Hells Angels and traditional organized crime outlets. The group is accused of running an off-shore website, based in Costa Rica, where many online wagers were allegedly placed.

“Their migration to a new site provided key evidence that will support the charges for criminal organization,” said Supt. Keith Finn, head officer of the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit. “These arrests today have rolled up the rest of the management team and have, in effect disrupted their ability to [operate].”

In February, six people were arrested after a warrant executed during at a Super Bowl party hosted by Platinum Sports Book at Le Parc Dining and Banquet Ltd. in Markham. There were 2,300 people at the party when the festivities were cut short by police.

Six other search warrants were simultaneously executed at the homes of the accused and 10 in total across the GTA. Approximately $2.6-million was retrieved from the banquet hall along with computers, cell phones, business records and a safe. The six men were facing numerous charges, including bookmaking, participating in or contributing to an activity of a criminal organization, keeping a common betting house and conspiracy.

Two of the men arrested at Le Parc were re-arrested in relation to Tuesday’s seizure and face charges of failing to comply with release terms.

Police say they will continue to find means of disrupting the alleged gambling ring.

“We will exercise all lawful means to continue to disrupt their activities, whether that includes technical avenues, arrests and so forth,” said Sup. Finn. “It remains to be seen how well they adapt, but we’re confident by taking the action that we did today is a significant disruption of the organization.”

The Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit enlists the services of the RCMP, OPP, York Regional, Peel Regional, Toronto Police Service and Durham Regional Police.

National Post

Is Club World based in south america too???

No.

Seems CW were right to put the Markham clause in there.

 

[kevfromcanada]

really

No.

Seems CW were right to put the Markham clause in there.

Seems weirder that they put that in years before they got busted lol