Club World USA -- Proof of Full Time Employment?

[Glunn11]

Hey Glunn11 Thanks for that place I will show my son that one.
He goes to Uconn now in his 3rd year.
It has good info on it.
Good Luck to you.
~T~

Glad I could point you in its direction -- it definitely helps answer questions about all aspects of college.

And thanks for the good luck wishes.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Yep, same old.
As long as you lose, you're welcome.

As soon as you win, we'll do everything to 'protect' you.

As far as I know, CWC does phoneverification as soon as you make your your first deposit at one of their casinos.
Would it really be so much trouble to include the question if the new player is a student or not?Especially if the new player appears to be rather young?

Would it really be so much trouble for the CS agent doing the phone verification to hone their literary skills

He PUT "student" down for his occupation when registering. This situation should have been "error trapped" IMMEDIATELY. They didn't need to ask this additional question, they ALREADY KNEW.

Since it is normal for the first deposit to trigger phone verification, I expect this also happened when this student made his first deposit. Clearly, he PASSED that stage, and as far as he was concerned was now "good to go". He certainly WAS "good to go" for the next $5000. Problems ONLY arose when he withdrew, and someone actually bothered to READ the information supplied during registration, and thus realised he was a student, so referred the matter to management for more detailed verification. Whilst Tom says this was NOT simply a matter of summarily voiding all the play, it does NOT explain, nor excuse, why NO-ONE acted upon his declaration of occupation as "student" when he first registered.

This must STILL be happening, with both students and those in this "grey area" of having recently graduated, whilst at the same time still effectively being a "student" as far as this rule is concerned. These cases are ONLY coming to light at the first withdrawal, or an enhanced verification check (as clearly, the normal procedures that take place after the first deposit are NOT catching these cases). Those students who LOSE probably NEVER find out they can have their bets voided and deposits returned.

This clearly works BOTH ways, as Tom says CW cannot accept bets from students, therefore any bets accepted by mistake, win or LOSE.

As well as confiscating winnings from students through voiding all wagers, students who have LOST are equally bound by the same rules, and the SAME sanctions need to be applied, the voiding of all bets. Students' LOSING deposits need to be returned, and their accounts locked, since losing students are an even MORE vulnerable group than students who have been lucky enough to WIN their way out of potential disaster.

The term itself is fair, but the way the system is IMPLEMENTING this rule most certainly is NOT. CW fall far short of doing "all they reasonably can" to prevent the vulnerable from gambling irresponsibly. I don't see it as "unreasonable" for them to check the registration information of EVERY player to ensure that they have not declared "student" as their occupation. This does not even have to be done manually, it can form part of the "security procedures" that verify accounts, and work out these so called "red flags" that cause additional checks to be done.

From what I have read, a good deal of VERY COMPLEX work is undertaken in order to cross check registration details with various internal and external databases, yet the very SIMPLE check of whether "occupation=student" from the registration form is NOT part of this process, and slips right through the net until such students generate their first withdrawal, even if this takes thousands of dollars in deposits.

 

[clubworld]

I think you have your wires crossed, we dont ask for occupation on our signup form nor store this in our database.

Regards
Tom

 

[rockycatt]

it'S going to be quite a relief when glunn 11 gets paid :notworthy

 

[all4greed]

Club World Rep -

What steps do you take to prevent or discourage compulsive gambling? Are accounts actively monitored to look for multiple deposits in a short time? What about repeated losses that stagger up into the thousands?

The student thing is reaching out there a bit. There are plenty of people that go bankrupt every day because of gambling and obviously they can't afford it.

 

[Steve Russo]

For those of you who don't know me, I am the manager of Gambling Grumbles and the person who wrote the report about the player at Aladdin's Gold who was refused his $7000 in winnings on the grounds that he was a student.

I was alerted to this thread by Pinababy69.

When writing the GG reports, I do my best to restrict myself to facts. In this thread, I am going to state both facts and suppositions, but will clearly label each.

Fact: Clubworld has said that the report was posted in a misleading way. His exact words were:

The issue you refer to over at Gambling Grumbles was reported in a misleading manner. The player in question told us he was a student and even supplied his student ID as his proof of ID when verifying his account.

Fact: The report made very clear that he said he was a student and provided his ID. Here is the third paragraph of the report:

He used a student ID card to help prove his identity and when he was asked in Live Chat what his profession is, he replied "Student".

Supposition: Clubworld, being a gentleman, will apologize for making the false allegation that the report was misleading.

Fact: Aladdin Gold's T&Cs prohibit full time students from playing there.

Fact: Aladdin Gold's T&Cs do not prohibit someone from saying he is a full time student if, in fact, he is not.

Fact: The player, Dan L, told us ""I was asked what my occupation was" Dan said. "Since I recently graduated from university, have been a student all my life, and not found a job yet, I said I was a student, and sent my student ID in. They then said that students were not allowed to play at the casino, refunded my deposits, and closed my account.

"I was not a student at any time when I registered, deposited or played at the casino. The student ID I sent it clearly shows it has expired, and even when I said on live chat that I was a student, I think I mentioned that I had already recently graduated (although I'm not 100% sure I did say that). In any case, I went back on live chat to clarify the situation. I explained to them that I was not actually a student at any time when I played there, so I had not breached their terms. They insisted that because in the past I had said I was a student, whatever else I say is basically not relevant."

Fact: Dan L told us he proved he was no longer a student when he played.

"In order to prove that I was not a student when I played there, I sent my university degree certificate (which is dated a month before I signed up at Aladdin's Gold), another certificate for an award I won, and transcripts of my degree results (all also dated a month before I signed up)."

Fact: Tom, the casino's representative, did not dispute any of the above. In fact, he confirmed it: "The events on this account unfold as the player describes."

Supposition: If a player lost $7000 at Aladdin's Gold and then claimed that he was a full-time student when he played and asked for his money back, the casino would not rush to give it to him.

Supposition: If the only proof the player could provide of his student status was a student ID card which had expired before he played there, Aladdin's Gold would have laughed itself silly at his claim.

Supposition: If the casino later discovered his degree certificate, and other documents, proving that he had graduated before playing at the casino it would be screaming "Fraud!"

Supposition: Why did Dan L say that he was a student? He was asked to prove his identity, which his student ID card did, even if it had expired. After all, only his status as a student had ended -- not his name. He had been a student for some 16 years, had recently graduated, and had not yet found his first job. It is not unnatural for someone in his position, when asked, to describe himself as a student.

Fact: Having said he was a student, the burden of proof then fell upon Dan L to show that he was not. He did so.

Fact: Aladdin's Gold chose to ignore that proof.

Fact: Seeking to protect students from losses which they can not afford is an admirable aim.

Fact: Accepting bets from students does not protect them.

Fact: Keeping losses from students does not protect them.

Fact: Refusing to pay students their winnings does not protect them.

Supposition: Keeping Dan L's $7000 in winnings not only did nothing to protect either him or actual students, but it allowed Aladdin's Gold to laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[danl]

Hello,

I am the player affected by the issue which has been so effectively summarised by Steve. I cannot really add anything further to his post, but I have submitted a PAB for Casinomeister's consideration.

I hope that there can be an equitable resolution.

Many thanks to Pinababy69 and vinylweatherman (amongst others) for their comments.


Regards,
Dan

 

[Nate]

Supposition: If a player lost $7000 at Aladdin's Gold and then claimed that he was a full-time student when he played and asked for his money back, the casino would not rush to give it to him.

Supposition: If the only proof the player could provide of his student status was a student ID card which had expired before he played there, Aladdin's Gold would have laughed itself silly at his claim.

Supposition: If the casino later discovered his degree certificate, and other documents, proving that he had graduated before playing at the casino it would be screaming "Fraud!"

Hi Steve,

Excellent Argument. If the 'Facts' are as is, then there should be NO reason for Alladins Gold to withold winnings. I am interested to see the outcome of the PAB or a response from Tom @ Clubworld.

I would also seek evidence that Alladins Gold / Clubworld Casinos have previously refunded 'Students' as proof that it is not only a ONE WAY street for the Casino I.e. A Win / Win situation.

Nate

 

[ksech]

First, I'd like to thank clubworld Tom for taking the time to be put through the inquisition. I know more than 1 or 2 casino reps have been lambasted into hiding here.

I'd like to know what the difference is between an 18 year old full time student, an 18 year old part-time student, and 18 year old non student. There are many 18 year old full time students who work nowadays. Perhaps, casinos should change their age limits to 21 rather than 18, to avoid this kind of grief(?).

Second, is the casino ONLY concerned with an 18 year full time student vs. a person who is of low income, unemployed or living hand-to-mouth day-to-day on disability? How do you discern who can be denied winnings?

Thirdly, IF you do have a student who wins, why not pay the winnings and then close the account? After all, you allowed them to deposit at least once, in all reality it was probably numerous times. Is this "protecting" them by not paying them? It seems like a win/win situation for the casino, a person wins, but you don't pay because of a T&C you claim to be protecting the interests of the person in question.

Lastly, does your financial department weed out the players who make multiple deposits in a day, possibly clasifying them as players with a gambling problem? Or do they allow them to continue with, perhaps, a destructive financial course?

This is not just your group of casinos, it pertains to ALL online casinos. I, personally think, T&Cs should fall under closer scrutiny by ALL players to make sure there isn't any hinky loopholes for the casinos to use. More and more you read about players being shafted when requesting a payout due to some type of loophole which only benefits the casino.

Final question(s)...
How often does the casino review the T&Cs and makes changes to keep current? Or is it casino policy to strictly adhere to T&Cs which can be argued "safe and fair" for the casino only?

 

[colly]

It is unrealistic for us to contact every player who registers an account with us to ask if they are a student before we permit them to deposit and it is perfectly normal for 18 year olds to leave school and get a job.

It is irresponsible for us to encourage people to gamble when they are still dependant on their parents and attending school full time.
Regards
Tom

I agree here on the policy- if indeed a student then I think he should be discouraged- gambling only pays off for a few, the majority lose (hopefully what they can afford) and for some it ruins lives. For a student a loss even a small one could be food or rent.

I do think the other posters have a valid point though- your point about unrealistic to contact is taken but if you really feel that strongly about responsible gambling than perhaps it should be a mandatory policy for the casino to advise a proof requirement" for all persons of an age likely to be dependant fulltime students (18 to 21) before they deposit- surely your player base would not have that many in that age group and it is known from day one.

I think your intentions are good, but you need to apply it and make an assessment before they deposit and play not when they try to cashout- or the responsible gambling fails at the point where its needed- when they risk their money.

Cheers
Colly

 

[Pinababy69]

Hi Steve, thanks for posting that synopsis. When Tom mentioned yesterday that the case had been misrepresented, I wasn't sure if he meant I had misunderstood what I read and perhaps posted something incorrect....or that it had been summarized incorrectly at GG. So rather than a third party (myself) trying to hash it out, I felt the best course of action was to ask you to post directly, insofar as your own knowledge of the facts and the case.

You certainly make a compelling argument, and as Nate posted....if everything you posted as FACT is indeed true, then I see no reason for winnings to be denied, based on the student rule.

Welcome to the forum DanL, and glad to see you read the PAB rules before posting up a storm, lol.

I absolutely trust Bryan and I trust Max, and am looking forward to the final decision results, once your PAB is processed and finalized.

I also believe that Tom and the CW group are good operators, which is probably why this case bugged me so much. Had it been one of the rogue RTG operations, I probably wouldn't have given it much thought beyond a few posts on the thread. But I expect a higher standard from the good guys. While I commend ClubWorld for trying to do the right thing when it comes to responsible gambling, I do believe they dropped the ball on this one. As mentioned numerous times...it's not the rule itself..it's the way it's being applied.

Keeping my fingers crossed that there is a fair and equitable resolution for all parties involved. Steve and GG were instrumental in helping Embalu (the Rushmore player) get paid after two years. Here's hoping that this time it's CM who can get the casino to take a second look at things.

I will personally refrain from posting anything more, until we see the outcome of the PAB. But I do look forward to further debate on the issue "in general" once all is complete.

First, I'd like to thank clubworld Tom for taking the time to be put through the inquisition. I know more than 1 or 2 casino reps have been lambasted into hiding here.

I'd like to know what the difference is between an 18 year old full time student, an 18 year old part-time student, and 18 year old non student. There are many 18 year old full time students who work nowadays. Perhaps, casinos should change their age limits to 21 rather than 18, to avoid this kind of grief(?).

Second, is the casino ONLY concerned with an 18 year full time student vs. a person who is of low income, unemployed or living hand-to-mouth day-to-day on disability? How do you discern who can be denied winnings?

Thirdly, IF you do have a student who wins, why not pay the winnings and then close the account? After all, you allowed them to deposit at least once, in all reality it was probably numerous times. Is this "protecting" them by not paying them? It seems like a win/win situation for the casino, a person wins, but you don't pay because of a T&C you claim to be protecting the interests of the person in question.

Lastly, does your financial department weed out the players who make multiple deposits in a day, possibly clasifying them as players with a gambling problem? Or do they allow them to continue with, perhaps, a destructive financial course?

This is not just your group of casinos, it pertains to ALL online casinos. I, personally think, T&Cs should fall under closer scrutiny by ALL players to make sure there isn't any hinky loopholes for the casinos to use. More and more you read about players being shafted when requesting a payout due to some type of loophole which only benefits the casino.

Final question(s)...
How often does the casino review the T&Cs and makes changes to keep current? Or is it casino policy to strictly adhere to T&Cs which can be argued "safe and fair" for the casino only?

Excellent post and points Ksech!! We could post endless hypothetical scenarios in which JUST being a student isn't really reason enough to void winnings. As Bryan said, there is a big difference between an 18 yr old full time student living at home with mom and dad, and relying on them for support....and a 35 yr old student who perhaps also works, or is financially stable, but has decided to go back to school full time. It's not so much the rule itself I have a problem with, but the application of that rule. How do you apply it fairly?

I agree here on the policy- if indeed a student then I think he should be discouraged- gambling only pays off for a few, the majority lose (hopefully what they can afford) and for some it ruins lives. For a student a loss even a small one could be food or rent.

I do think the other posters have a valid point though- your point about unrealistic to contact is taken but if you really feel that strongly about responsible gambling than perhaps it should be a mandatory policy for the casino to advise a proof requirement" for all persons of an age likely to be dependant fulltime students (18 to 21) before they deposit- surely your player base would not have that many in that age group and it is known from day one.

I think your intentions are good but you need to apply it and make an assessment before they deposit and play not when they try to cashout or the responsible gambling fails at the point where its needed- when they risk there money.

Cheers
Colly

All excellent points as well Colly. I think the key phrase in your post is "dependent full time students". That's really the crux of the issue, when trying to apply the term in a fair manner. And the last paragraph really sums it all up.

 

[clubworld]

DanL told us he was a student and supplied his student ID as proof. When he found out that students are not permitted to play he changed his mind and said that he wasn’t a student. We asked him to supply something that would demonstrate this and he was unable to.

Students are not permitted to play. It clearly states this in the first item in the player representations in the terms and conditions he agreed to when he created his account.

Ksech:
The age at which people are allowed to gamble varies from country to country and we cannot take the responsibility for determining this. Instead we require that the minimum age is 18 (which is the legal age here in the UK) and require the player to ensure they have reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction.

We only deny winnings in cases where there is a clear breach of our terms of use. Our responsible gaming policy may lead to items being included in our terms of use but would never in itself lead to winnings being denied.

We make no stipulations in our terms for account holders on low income or disability benefits.

We are concerned about anyone who is gambling beyond their means and in the rare cases where this does happen it tends to be with people who have relatively good incomes. We cannot audit our player’s personal finances and so we look for other signs that there could be a problem.

Amongst others these things include rapidly increasing deposit sizes in the same sessions, spending an obsessively long time online, becoming abusive with customer services etc.

In these cases we take an individual approach. It is a delicate subject but we have to ensure that the player is aware of the options that are available to them in terms of reducing their betting and depositing limits, a cooling off period or total self-exclusion.

Kind Regards
Tom

EDIT: We don’t just review accounts at the point of withdrawal - these are just the cases that get the exposure as there are winnings involved. Cases where we have refunded player deposits on accounts with a zero balance get far less attention.

 

[Pinababy69]

Fact: Dan L told us he proved he was no longer a student when he played.

"In order to prove that I was not a student when I played there, I sent my university degree certificate (which is dated a month before I signed up at Aladdin's Gold), another certificate for an award I won, and transcripts of my degree results (all also dated a month before I signed up)."

DanL told us he was a student and supplied his student ID as proof. When he found out that students are not permitted to play he changed his mind and said that he wasn’t a student. We asked him to supply something that would demonstrate this and he was unable to.

And this is exactly why trusted third parties are sometimes the only way to go. This is obviously the sticking point of the issue.

Again, looking forward to the result.

 

[colly]

Oh, I didn't "just" turn 18 -- I turned 18 in May.

OK I am seeing a major discrepancy between the comment I've quoted and the proof supplied per the post above - and its bothering me!

If the player only turned 18 in May how do you have completed University transcripts.

Perhaps the system is different from AUstralia but as a general rule here you cant even start a degree at university till you are 18 and you would complete any undergraduate degree till you were 20 or 21.

(My apologies if Dan is one of those genius exceptions that are allowed special early entrance)

Cheers'Colly

 

[Steve Russo]

(My apologies if Dan is one of those genius exceptions that are allowed special early entrance)

Cheers'Colly

Colly, you are getting two different posters confused. Dan is not the one who just turned 18.

 

[Pinababy69]

Maybe I should see if Bryan, Max or Simmo can split the thread and put Dan's issue into a separate thread? It could be confusing.

The OP is Glunn11, who turned 18 in May. Waiting to see if CW is going to accept his "proof of employment" and his claim that he is not a student.

DanL is a previous player at CW (Aladdin's Gold) who had a case mediated by Steve at Gambling Grumbles, and subsequently had 7K Euro of winnings denied. He says he wasn't a student at the time he signed up and played, and claims he has provided proof of that (ie. his university degree). CW/Tom says that he didn't provide sufficient proof. DanL has PAB already.

 

[colly]

Colly, you are getting two different posters confused. Dan is not the one who just turned 18.

True- I meant Glunn - Its 3.30am here and insomniac lapses are started to happen.

The question re the discrepancy still stand though (edit OK Isee the uni student is Dan and the OP is Glen- perhaps its time to go to bed!)

Cheers
Colly zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Pinababy69]

True- I meant Glunn - Its 3.30am here and insomniac lapses are started to happen.

The question re the discrepancy still stand though

Cheers
Colly zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Glunn isn't the one claiming to have university transcripts or a degree Colly, that's DanL. Glunn11 has said that he forwarded an invoice proving some employment to CW.

 

[danl]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your post and I hope that it is OK to respond to you on this thread. I do not want to interfere with the PAB process, but since you have posted about my particular issue on the forum I would like to respond, though I'll only comment on the quoted statement.

We asked him to supply something that would demonstrate this and he was unable to.

This isn't the case, as I provided a dated degree certificate, results transcript and an award that I received for being the best graduating student on my course, which demonstrate that I had already graduated (and therefore no longer a student) at the time when I registered, deposited and played at Aladdin's Gold Casino. My provision of documentation was confirmed in my action filed with Gambling Grumbles.


Kind regards,
Dan

 

[vinylweatherman]

DanL told us he was a student and supplied his student ID as proof. When he found out that students are not permitted to play he changed his mind and said that he wasn’t a student. We asked him to supply something that would demonstrate this and he was unable to.

Students are not permitted to play. It clearly states this in the first item in the player representations in the terms and conditions he agreed to when he created his account.

Ksech:
The age at which people are allowed to gamble varies from country to country and we cannot take the responsibility for determining this. Instead we require that the minimum age is 18 (which is the legal age here in the UK) and require the player to ensure they have reached the legal age of maturity in his/her jurisdiction.

We only deny winnings in cases where there is a clear breach of our terms of use. Our responsible gaming policy may lead to items being included in our terms of use but would never in itself lead to winnings being denied.

We make no stipulations in our terms for account holders on low income or disability benefits.

We are concerned about anyone who is gambling beyond their means and in the rare cases where this does happen it tends to be with people who have relatively good incomes. We cannot audit our player’s personal finances and so we look for other signs that there could be a problem.

Amongst others these things include rapidly increasing deposit sizes in the same sessions, spending an obsessively long time online, becoming abusive with customer services etc.

In these cases we take an individual approach. It is a delicate subject but we have to ensure that the player is aware of the options that are available to them in terms of reducing their betting and depositing limits, a cooling off period or total self-exclusion.

Kind Regards
Tom

EDIT: We don’t just review accounts at the point of withdrawal - these are just the cases that get the exposure as there are winnings involved. Cases where we have refunded player deposits on accounts with a zero balance get far less attention.

So, CW do NOT believe he has graduated after all, but has just said this after finding out he can't be paid if he was still studying at the time.

The player said he DID provide extensive proof that he had graduated prior to playing, and thus did NOT breach the term.

He WAS asked his occupation, but by an agent after providing his student ID (expired) to prove his identity. Well, WHAT THE HELL ELSE is a young UK player expected to do. The request for "photo ID" was a trap, he ONLY had a student ID, so this was the ONLY thing he was able to offer, and did so. This lead to the agent asking what his occupation was. Well, he DIDN'T HAVE ONE, so he simply said "student", most likely this was "force of habit" rather than a well thought out answer. A single word answer is quick and simple, to fully explain his situation would have taken a paragraph, not something you do when "texting" in a chat session.

If the registration form does not ask for occupation, an opportunity is lost to PROTECT students at the point of registration. Why not have a "tick box" at the end to make this particular term more explicit, rather than being bundled in with "I accept the terms and conditions".

It could be, "tick here to confirm that you are NOT a student currently studying full time at a university or college. No tick - no play. If a student DOES tick this box, they have made an EXPLICIT false declaration, impossible for them to later claim they "didn't see that".

If this player KNEW he would not get paid because he was a student, surely the LAST thing he would do would be to submit a student ID card, and answer the question about what he did with the unqualified reply of "student".

CW have at least clarified their position. he was not paid because he was not able to PROVE that he was no longer a student when he registered. It could also be the case that CW were WRONG to reject perfectly valid proof of graduation. A third party (Max?) would need to see these proofs, and be told why CW rejected them.

This is an important GENERAL point, since other young players are going to be "accused of being a student" and face the burden of proving they are no longer students. Proving a negative is not easy.

The reluctance of CW to increase the minimum age to 21 is NOT shared among others in the industry. There are many other casinos that set 21, rather than 18, as the minimum age, and this is regardless of any local laws that allow gambling from the age of 18. Such casinos offer BETTER protection to 18 to 21 year old students than CW do, since they cannot even REGISTER, let alone "slip through the net" if they don't set off any other "responsible gambling" flags during their play.

This player deposited $5000, so clearly had the "means" whether or not he was a student at the time. His manner of play also meant that CW's systems did NOT flag his $5000 worth of deposits as a sign of an "irresponsible gambling" risk.
What happened when he was first contacted, which we know is POLICY at CW to phone players to "verify their accounts" after the first couple of deposits, let alone $5000 worth. He must have slipped through the net again at this point.

We make no stipulations in our terms for account holders on low income or disability benefits.

So, such player do NOT need the degree of protection granted to students, but are dealt with through other means, including..

In these cases we take an individual approach. It is a delicate subject but we have to ensure that the player is aware of the options that are available to them in terms of reducing their betting and depositing limits, a cooling off period or total self-exclusion.

....but if you are a student, the ONLY "option" is to have your winnings confiscated, even though OTHER "clear breaches of the terms and conditions" can be dealt with in a way that does NOT result in any winnings being confiscated.

Even "bonus abuse" is dealt with by the player getting paid, and THEN being told that FUTURE activity will be without bonuses.

Students who slip through the net needn't have their winnings confiscated, but their accounts put "on ice" with balances intact until they can prove that they have graduated. This would do far more to protect such players:-

1) Keeping the balance "on ice" prevents a student from gambling it elsewhere, but does NOT propel him FURTHER into a possible financial mess caused by the initial deposits having come from borrowing rather than "means".

2) CW keep up it's reputation for "never voiding winnings after having accepted the bets".

3) Students eventually get "means", and can then gamble responsibly.

4) After a period "on ice", they get their money back, and HOPEFULLY will use it to pay off their debts, which they will come to appreciate once they have started work, and realise that all this "free money" they got as a student was not so "free" after all.


My belief that the REASON this particular term was added was NOT about "protecting students", but was driven by the need to "protect the casino FROM students". Other groups are equally vulnerable to irresponsible gambling, but unlike students, they do NOT pose a threat, as a group, to the casino - hence no "policy" regarding their registration & play.

When called to account, the term can be explained by trotting the line "we care about students' financial vulnerability, so don't want to encourage them to gamble".

One only has to look at casinos that DO allow students to play. They squeal like "stuck pigs" because "student syndicates" are taking them to the cleaners. That doesn't sound like it is the STUDENTS that need protection. These other casinos try to have a "one account per college" policy built into the terms about "shared environments", rather than going for an outright ban on students.

 

[colly]

deleted

 

[Glunn11]

This issue has been resolved between Club World USA and me. Thank you, Tom.

 

[anniemac]

Glad this has been resolved, hopefully to the delight of all involved.

 

[Pinababy69]

This issue has been resolved between Club World USA and me. Thank you, Tom.

Excellent news Glunn!!!

Glad this has been resolved, hopefully to the delight of all involved.

Ditto here Annie. Now just one more to go.

 

[Steve Russo]

DanL told us he was a student and supplied his student ID as proof. When he found out that students are not permitted to play he changed his mind and said that he wasn’t a student. We asked him to supply something that would demonstrate this and he was unable to.

Dan L informed Gambling Grumbles that he provided the documentation, When GG told this to the casino, it did not deny it. In fact, it confirmed everything that Dan L. said. Still, because he had originally said he was a student it refused to pay him.

Tom, tell me honestly -- if tomorrow, Player X who lost $7000 at Aladdin's Gold, were to ask for it back, saying that he is a student, but the only "proof" he could provide is a student ID that expired before he played, would Aladdin's give him his money?

If that ID would not be sufficient to determine that Player X is still a student, why is it sufficient in Dan L's case?

If you were to come across documents showing that Player X had, in fact, graduated before playing, would you still give him the $7000? Or would you cite those documents as proof that he was not a student when he played?

Again, if those documents would be considered proof that Player X had not been a student when he played, why would they not be seen in the same way in Dan L's case?

 

[justymich]

So wait, i'm really confused. Does this only apply to 18-21 year old students? I returned to school 6 months ago, and i'm 32 years old. I play at CW very often, does this mean if i ever managed to cashout i wouldn't be paid? These terms are so vague.

Thanks
Justy

 

[Marie2473]

I am not a student, however if I was asked this I would be pissed off. What kind of docs can prove that I have a fulltime job without me going to my boss and asking for something.
I dont think that my boss should know what I do and dont do online, as long as it is not suring work hours, and I also dont think that a casino has to know where I work and what I make (wich they would if I had to send in a payslip or something.
I guess it is ok that they wanna keep students from playing, but in the end, when you are 18 , you are 18 and considered an adult, therefor you should be able to do whatever u want.
What if this student is rich as hell and just plays for fun? Shouldnt he or she be able to for the reason that they are attending school?

This is a bit of a split for me since I see both sides ... hrmmm

 

[vinylweatherman]

Dan L informed Gambling Grumbles that he provided the documentation, When GG told this to the casino, it did not deny it. In fact, it confirmed everything that Dan L. said. Still, because he had originally said he was a student it refused to pay him.

Tom, tell me honestly -- if tomorrow, Player X who lost $7000 at Aladdin's Gold, were to ask for it back, saying that he is a student, but the only "proof" he could provide is a student ID that expired before he played, would Aladdin's give him his money?

If that ID would not be sufficient to determine that Player X is still a student, why is it sufficient in Dan L's case?

If you were to come across documents showing that Player X had, in fact, graduated before playing, would you still give him the $7000? Or would you cite those documents as proof that he was not a student when he played?

Again, if those documents would be considered proof that Player X had not been a student when he played, why would they not be seen in the same way in Dan L's case?

This is looking more and more like this is all about protecting the CASINO from STUDENTS, rather than the other way around.

It doesn't matter that your player recently graduated, he still presents the same RISK to the casino as a current students. He STILL has contact with his peers, and could STILL be in a position to collude with a "student player syndicate".

He said VERBALLY that he was a student, a casual answer to what appeared to be an inconsequential question about "occupation". Normally "occupation" doesn't matter, so people will give a "nearest answer" rather than a long winded explanation. I face this problem all the time. My own "occupation status" does NOT usually feature in those forms with a drop down menu. I am faced with looking at the options available, and picking one that I think fits the closest. I often give slightly different answers in different forms, because the menus offer different wordings and options.

When your player was asked for an occupation, he didn't have one. He chose the word "student", but could equally have said "unemployed" or even "graduate" - neither of which would have got him into trouble. At the time, the agent should have sought clarification, given that the student ID he supplied was expired, STRONGLY suggesting that he WAS, rather than IS, a "student", and used the expired student ID because he could offer nothing else with his photo on it.

CW put considerable weight on the fact that he supplied a student ID card to prove his ID. This is unwarranted, he provided an ID with a photo on it, the ONLY ONE HE HAD, SIMPLE! The option NOT to provide a photo ID simply was not available. There ARE no general photo ID cards in the UK (Tom should know this), people have OTHER cards that JUST HAPPEN to double up as a photo ID. I use my driving licence, this player used what HE had to hand, a student ID card left over from his recent studies.

He is in the UK, so probably has not yet learned to drive given that many universities do not permit students to keep cars on the premises, as well as the fact that to INSURE himself to drive would be MORE costly than the $5000 he spent at Club World. He simply preferred to spend his $5000 at Club World, rather than on a car and lessons/insurance. In his position, I would get the car first, THEN play at the casino.

I graduated well before the internet, but I DID gamble quite a bit on the fruit machines. I NEEDED a car to get to them, as well as the freedom it offered to go where and when I wanted, rather than where and when the trains and busses wanted to run.

My first "luxury" after graduating was to get an Atari 400 personal computer, so that I could try my hand at the emerging home video game industry (I've still got it).

 

[danl]

Vinylweatherman: I really appreciate your posts, but you are mistaken on the facts. I do have a driving licence and did provide it.

Regardless of that, and policy arguments aside, the issue in my case is that their terms say that students are not allowed to play, and I have provided documentation that demonstrate that I was not a student at the time when I registered, deposited or played at Aladdin's Gold Casino.

I would like to refrain from posting too extensively while there is a potentially active PAB, but I felt it was appropriate to clarify and correct the facts.


Regards,
Dan

 

[Simmo!]

A Bit OT: This student thing brings to light one of the biggest issues this industry faces. At what point do you verify a customer? All casinos will argue it isn't practical to do it pre-deposit because the player will go somewhere else. True. On the other hand, a publican won't sell alcohol to someone who looks underage then go and ask for ID later.

The difference is our industry isn't [properly] regulated so there is no penalty/incentive for not doing the right thing. In the absence of regulation that imposes these conditions it's down to the casino to do what's right for their reputation. If all casinos had a standard to adhere to then players would accept and be prepared for it.

Back OT: IMO in the Danl case, the obvious sticking point is that the player provided student ID as proof of ID. Then in retrospect, proof he was no longer a student. A bit of an Oops IMO. There is also the social responsibilty aspect that while he may no longer be a student, that doesn't mean he is yet endowed with the financial means to gamble. So I can see Club World's point here.

However, the bottom line IMO is "was Danl a student at the time he signed up and first played?". If the answer is "no" then I see no reason not to pay him (unless, as is so often the case, there are other factors in play we are not privvy to). If the answer is "yes" then strikes me it's a fair cop guv.

Cheers,

Simmo!

 

[Steve Russo]

it.

Back OT: IMO in the Danl case, the obvious sticking point is that the player provided student ID as proof of ID. Then in retrospect, proof he was no longer a student. A bit of an Oops IMO. There is also the social responsibilty aspect that while he may no longer be a student, that doesn't mean he is yet endowed with the financial means to gamble. So I can see Club World's point here.

Somehow, I suspect that refusing to pay him the $7000 he won isn't going to help him become endowed with the financial means to gamble.

In all seriousness, the casino is not claiming that he did not have the means to gamble. It would be hard-pressed to get away with that as he made a $5000 deposit.

Nor, for that matter, does Aladdin's Gold stop people from playing on its site if they are not in the best financial condition. All it requires is that they are able to fund their accounts.

The one question, as you pointed out, is whether Dan L was a full time student when he played.

Aladdin's Gold is contending that he was, based on an expired student ID that he provided and his reply on an on line chat. If Dan L is telling the truth about the documents which he says he sent them (and which the casino told Gambling Grumbles that it received) it has absolutely no reason to believe that he was a student.

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

this is not the first time that the casino has made collecting winnings difficult for a player.

The player in the link only won $110 but it took her three months, and Gambling Grumbles' intervention, to collect it. The casino refused to accept the documents she sent, and eventually demanded both her birth certificate and her marriage license!

 

[vinylweatherman]

Vinylweatherman: I really appreciate your posts, but you are mistaken on the facts. I do have a driving licence and did provide it.
Regardless of that, and policy arguments aside, the issue in my case is that their terms say that students are not allowed to play, and I have provided documentation that demonstrate that I was not a student at the time when I registered, deposited or played at Aladdin's Gold Casino.

I would like to refrain from posting too extensively while there is a potentially active PAB, but I felt it was appropriate to clarify and correct the facts.


Regards,
Dan

That's an "Oops". This is the document casinos accept as "standard". I assumed you didn't have one because you fished out a rather unusual alternative, which lead you into this situation.

Had you provided your driving license instead, this issue would never have arisen, and CW would have never had cause to ask you to confirm your current occupation.

Although most casinos don't specifically ban students, they don't LIKE students either. They think students are a higher risk because of on-campus collusion and "syndicates". You should keep your student ID to yourself, and provide the driving licence the next time you are asked to verify your account at a casino. Further, register from your home PC, not that of a friend, internet cafe, or other such shared environment. This also makes casinos think you are a student of some description, because they see a number of players coming through a single internet connection.

Casinos prefer players to play from home, and alone. It reassures them that there is little chance that players are "up to something".

If you are asked again for "occupation", DON'T say "student", tell them you are currently unemployed but looking for your first job.

Questions may also be asked about where you found a spare $5000 from given that you recently graduated, but have yet to find a job.

Wait until the PAB has run it's course before doing anything other than correcting mis-statements (such as an assumption that you didn't have a driving licence as an alternative).

Apart from your specific case, there is a GENERAL issue that needs to be discussed so that other recent graduates don't walk into the same "trap" by careless use of language during account verification.

 

[justymich]

Well i also think its imperative to know what ages they restrict as far as students go, is this only for 18-21 year old students, or all students regardless of age? I know some people mentioned what if a 50 year old returns to school, does that make him ineligible to play? However i don't believe i saw anywhere it was answered. This particular point hits home with me, since i'm 32, and recently decided to pursue another avenue of work and return to school to get the education for it. I deposit regularly at CW and would hate to be in the same boat as Dan one day simply because i attend school.

 

[butterflyboogie]

Statement and Question

I think the crux of the matter is this:

It is irresponsible for us to encourage people to gamble when they are still dependant on their parents and attending school full time.

If you are 50 and going to school full time, I'm sure you have the means to support yourself - at least I would hope you would. That's a bit different than someone straight out of high school.

Bryan,

Although I do understand what you are saying here, the need to feel "concerned" about whether an 18 year old is gambling if he or she is a student and living with parents needs to be established "before" one single deposit is made. If the casino is willing to take the money on a contigency that he or she may or not be a student, then the same said casino should be willing to pay if the individual wins. My question, if it is established that Glunn is a student and the casino is not willing to pay for the winnings, is this casino (out of the need to make sure that student gamblers are not going to act irresponsible) going to refund his or her deposits? I mean, after all the casino does not want to encourage this behavior do they?

 

[Jasminebed]

Glunn's issue has been resolved. He's provided sufficent proof of his employment.

There is another new member, danl, who is a FORMER student, and told CW he was a student when he was in fact a GRADUATE. He provided his proof:

This isn't the case, as I provided a dated degree certificate, results transcript and an award that I received for being the best graduating student on my course, which demonstrate that I had already graduated (and therefore no longer a student) at the time when I registered, deposited and played at Aladdin's Gold Casino. My provision of documentation was confirmed in my action filed with Gambling Grumbles.

but his winnings were denied. His deposit(s) were returned however. The matter is now being PAB'd here at CM.

Although the age of the OP Glunn may have triggered his request for proof of employment, all CWC properties have the clause you may not be a full time student and play at their casinos, apparently regardless of age.

I read terms and conditions, and I've joined a couple of Clubworld properties. It didn't apply to me, but it is the very first term in their T&C's. I asked where it was, and it is front and centre.

I forgot it was there. People often play at casinos for years, and even though we should, do not go back and re-read the T&Cs of casinos we trust because we decided to go back to school.

My stay-at-home Mom daughter gave online gaming a foray (not CW). She's decided that back-to-school was the right move for her (// derail, I'm so glad//). She's not gambling, so it's not a personal issue. But for many parents of young children, a little online gambling is cheaper than a sitter. When my daughter was small and I was a married lady, Bingo was my night out.

I'm all for responsible gambling, but the whole rule seems rife with problems. I'm not employed, and I couldn't prove I'm not in school. And seriously, if I did back to school briefly to upgrade skills, how the heck would Clubworld Group know unless I told them?

I think people need to be responsible for themselves. And in my jurisdiction it's 18 for gambling.

I think VWM is more on the money about CWG wanting to protect themselves. Well designed bonus will only reduce the house edge, not eliminate it, so the rash of student "bonus abusers" would not pose any threat.

Continuing with this policy may lead to students that were not lucky enough to win on their deposits requesting refunds. And perhaps students would jump on the bandwagon know that it might be possible to slip through the nets on a withdrawal, while their deposits were risk free.

"The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men, Gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain"

While I don't think Clubworld's policy is unfair, I do think it is unwise.

 

[P.V.]

danl's case

For what it's worth the player did provide a student ID even though they had recently graduated. CW's T & C's state, line 12.

"The player is required to provide their complete, current and full personal details, including their phone number where they can be contacted. Incomplete, inaccurate or fraudulent information may result in the player's account being closed and any bonus and winnings being removed."

Inaccurate information, winnings being removed is the kicker here and the player did provide a student ID rather than his DL and after he had already graduated.

Appears to be a costly mistake and a firm enforcement of CW's T & C's.

 

[Steve Russo]

For what it's worth the player did provide a student ID even though they had recently graduated. CW's T & C's state, line 12.

"The player is required to provide their complete, current and full personal details, including their phone number where they can be contacted. Incomplete, inaccurate or fraudulent information may result in the player's account being closed and any bonus and winnings being removed."

Inaccurate information, winnings being removed is the kicker here and the player did provide a student ID rather than his DL and after he had already graduated.

Appears to be a costly mistake and a firm enforcement of CW's T & C's.

Actually, he provided both the student ID (which had expired) and his driver's license, which had not expired. Neither were fraudulent. About the only thing which could be considered fraudulent was him saying in an on line chat that he was a student -- and given that he had been a student most of his life and had not yet found his first job, even that would be a stretch.

The only valid argument against providing fraudulent or incomplete information is if the truth would make you ineligible to collect (eg: if you had a second account, you were not of legal age to play, or were, in fact, a full time student).

Frankly, I find it rather risky to play at a casino which reserves the right not to pay you if you do not provide "full personal details". That is just too broad.
What if I refuse to give them a copy of my medical history? If I don't agree to discuss my sex life with them? If I refuse to tell them whether or not I am a member of a particular political party?

All these are "personal details" yet a strict reading of their T&Cs would disqualify me from getting my winnings if I refuse to answer such questions.

Aladdin's certainly has the right to question me about matters which show whether or not I am eligible to play there. If necessary they can demand that I prove that eligibility. Dan L did do that. The fact that he took a short cut and said he was a "student" should not have mattered in the least after he provided the papers proving that he was not.

If you read the other grumble about Aladdin's, to which I linked earlier in this thread, the player (Laura D), was first asked by the casino to provide her passport and a recent utility bill. She did so.

Then they asked for a fax back. She sent it to them.

Then they asked for her driver's license (which she could not provide as she is not a driver).

This was all before she contacted Gambling Grumbles. Then, as I wrote in the published report:

Not having gotten a reply from their Support address, Gambling Grumbles contacted someone we know to be close to the casino's management. In the meantime, Aladdin's Gold upped the ante and now wanted copies of Laura's birth certificate and marriage license.

She sent them and our contact got back to us saying, "We have the player id’s as requested but we don’t have the players fax back form. This form is required for all cashouts to help prevent fraud. If you can ask Laura to send it again to cashier we can process the withdrawal."

Laura did, indeed, send it again. This time it was rejected on two counts: a. It did not have her user name on it (which, as they knew what it was, they could easily have added). b. They said it was too blurry and pixilated and told her to re-scan it at 300 dpi.

Gambling Grumbles asked Laura to send us a copy of the attachment she had sent so we could judge for ourselves if it was clearly readable. It was.

All this for a mere $110? Yes, after Gambling Grumbles intervened, Laura did get paid. Presumably Aladdin's was able to do it without seeing her marriage license and without learning the details of where and when she had her wedding.

But should they have ever asked for that in the first place? At what point is something none of a casino's business?

 

[Simmo!]

The complication seems to come in how you define the point at which you cease to become a student. I just asked a current UK student for their thoughts. Here are the salient points:

1) A student gets a U Card with a specific end date where student priviledges around campus cease.

2) The point of Graduation is normally assumed to be the end of your student days, but...

a) some people hang on until the U card priviledges stop
b) some students re-enroll for further studies​

I also wonder if another avenue possibly worth investigating is the point at which a local council say you cease to be eligible for student council tax benefits and go to normal adult rate.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

 

[CoolCat]

Is it just me or does anyone else thinks CWC is becoming a little shady as of lately?

 

[Diane]

Not to stir things up even more ------ but I feel compelled to insert that ANY business has the right to question their customers (especially those using credit cards) to determine if they are acceptable to the business. Whether its done on the front of the transaction (which I would recommend) or the back end.

Any B&M casino can prevent a player from entering/gambling. And if underage or other suspicious activity can also refuse to pay on gaming wins. There have been many examples of people under age hitting jackpots and not being allowed to collect in B&M Casinos. Funds return to the casino.

"We reserve the right to refuse to serve any patron" Has been a business mantra for a long time everywhere from bars to restaurants to casinos.

It appears that GUN11 and CWC are handling it correctly behind the scenes with PM's and that's where it should stay. Tom's explanation of not wanting to allow YOUNG students to play makes perfect sense.

People waving money in the face of a business are not guaranteed the right to enter the establishment and conduct transactions. The business can decide, IMO. I would suspect CWC doesn't go on a "witch hunt" to look for ways to disqualify winners. But if there are legitimate reasons, they can and should establish their rules. Spellling this out clearly in the T&C would make their position stronger and more defensible.

IMO

Diane

Yep, same old.


As long as you lose, you're welcome.

As soon as you win, we'll do everything to 'protect' you.

As far as I know, CWC does phoneverification as soon as you make your your first deposit at one of their casinos.
Would it really be so much trouble to include the question if the new player is a student or not?
Especially if the new player appears to be rather young?

_________________________________________________________

 

[Steve Russo]

Not to stir things up even more ------ but I feel compelled to insert that ANY business has the right to question their customers (especially those using credit cards) to determine if they are acceptable to the business. Whether its done on the front of the transaction (which I would recommend) or the back end.

I agree about the front end, but not the back end. A casino has the same right to refuse to let me play that I have to refuse to play at a particular casino.

However, once the casino accepts a bet it has no right to refuse to pay off.

 

[Diane]

It happens regularly in Vegas and other gaming venues. Underage person plays poker or slot machine and then happens to win a jackpot that requires identification. Underage person cannot prove they are over the allowed age and winnings are held pending proof of age. If proof is not provided, funds remain with the casino.

I saw it happen to a 17 year old in a poker room.in Vegas. Hit bad beat jackpot for $10,000, management suits came wanting his driver's license and Social Security card to fill out the 1099-G for IRS purposes. Underage kid could not provide. He admitted he was only 17, didn't get paid and got escorted out of casino. Jackpot stayed open until someone of proper age happened to win it.

Same thing has happened with slot machines that lock up with a win that triggers a hand pay. If you can't provide the documentation to support age, you do NOT get paid. You can call the gaming commission, you can call whoever you want, but if you were not "legal" by the standards set by casino or jurisdiction you will not get paid. You may have already wagered hundreds or thousands, and you may have already won considerable amounts --- but once you trigger their threshold for asking age verfication, you are done.

Should be sufficient screening and checking of ID's on front, but people are resourceful and do sneak in.

Diane

Diane

 

[Steve Russo]

Diane,

You are talking about cases where it is illegal for the player to be gambling, hence it would be against the law for the casino to pay him.

Moreover, if a casino has told a specific person that he is not allowed on its premises, it is permitted to void his bets (in some jurisdictions). That person, however, has broken the law by trespassing.

However, if I am a good card counter, and the casino does not want card counters playing blackjack -- even though it is legal -- it will pay me my winnings until such point as it tells me I am no longer eligible to be at its tables.

Once it accepts a bet, if there is no legal reason why it should not pay out, it will.

 

[maxd]

FYI, Bryan and I are working on this. The player's PAB has been submitted to the casino manager. They are usually very responsive to these issues so I expect to hear back on this soon.

LATER: in this and my subsequent posts I am referring to danl, not the OP (Glunn11). I have no PAB on file from Glunn11.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Once it accepts a bet, if there is no legal reason why it should not pay out, it will.

This is called and legally known as the "Contractual Aspect of Gambling". The online gaming industry prefers to ignore the above in entirety(+/-) via their TandC's (aka an idiot's Ten Commandments). Afterall stealing money is preferred to owing and paying money.

 

[maxd]

As far as the [strike]OP's[/strike] danl's issue is concerned I have heard back from CWC with info -- a chat transcript -- that triggered the concerns casino-side. I understand from what the OP told them where their issues arose.

That said this isn't settled yet and I'll be in touch with both the casino and the OP for more info and clarifications. Unfortunately the weekend is upon us and further developments will have to wait until Monday.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

As far as the OP's issue is concerned I have heard back from CWC with info -- a chat transcript -- that triggered the concerns casino-side. I understand from what the OP told them where their issues arose.

That said this isn't settled yet and I'll be in touch with both the casino and the OP for more info and clarifications. Unfortunately the weekend is upon us and further developments will have to wait until Monday.

Just to be sure I am not confused, the OP's aka Glen(n)'s issue(s) has/have not been settled yet. Am I correct?

 

[maxd]

My bad. I've been talking about 'danl'. I'll clean this up ASAP.

Ok, have clarified the previous posts. I've been talking about danl and his PAB. Nothing I've said applies to Glunn11 and I have no PAB on file for that user.

 

[The Dude]

If you can't provide the documentation to support age, you do NOT get paid. You can call the gaming commission, you can call whoever you want, but if you were not "legal" by the standards set by casino or jurisdiction you will not get paid. You may have already wagered hundreds or thousands, and you may have already won considerable amounts --- but once you trigger their threshold for asking age verfication, you are done.

Excellent point.

This is not an issue of "stealing" someone's money, this is an issue of a casino enforcing its policy. In fact, it a policy set forth to protect young players. Some of the comments about this casino being on the take are really unnecessary, and quite thoughtless in my opinion.

This casino does not allow underage play, and play from full time college students. That's clear as a bell and it's stated #1 in their terms and conditions - it's not hidden anywhere.

I'm not going to get involved with this publicly until this is settled via PAB.

 

[Glunn11]

Just to be sure I am not confused, the OP's aka Glen(n)'s issue(s) has/have not been settled yet. Am I correct?

My issues have all been squared away without PAB.

This thread is now a vessel for DanL's complaints afaik.