kevinhopf
Banned User - violation of <a href="http://www.cas
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2015
- Location
- Cannada, Alberta
Now these are what ifs and I am not speaking of any casino in general but its in relation to a problem a friend of mine had a while back.
OK this is the accredited casino, now lets see if these standards are held true only in wins under 5000 or big spenders? let answer some questions and find out if it holds true on a big win small spender, because the big winner can be changed from a winner to a mark as the reps will probe for ignorance of the player. May it be realized it is a conflict of interest to have those who are there to help a player as to help make sure the player understands and gets paid and yet make sure the casino makes profits for the casino and themselves, where does the money come, but from the players but the wages come from the casino
both are in conflict as this conflict of interest leads to corruption there needs to be put into place no reason to be dis honest towards the player if any casino were ran with a system to take away temptation that promotes corruption would such a casino be the master of all casinos online to reward honesty instead of dishonesty.
Its as sad state of affairs, When A player can prove an accredited casino's reps, floor managers and smooth(operators) mislead the player, tampered with account, moving money repeatedly without request, stated the player was paid (but never was )just to cause the player to gamble more, kept relevant information from the players account, reversing monies that were withdrawn and processed according to the players account but then crediting the parts with amounts missing. then say did the player gamble the winnings and there is nothing the player can do about it!! when it should be said, the player without requested was mistakenly loaned money that could only be gambled and was gambled and lost because the casino can lie cheat steal as long as it gets you to gamble it and thats ok!!! tough break but by chance the gamble had won, tough break! as the mistakenly credited (loaned cash) cannot be gambled but voided the terms only applying when that casino may need payout
lets see how the accredited casino holds up t the below questions
Operational Standards
(1) Must pay winnings in a timely manner. -----------did not pay all of the progressive to the player for a withdrawal as per the terms and agreements
(2) Must not disqualify any player from a payout if terms & conditions are met, except for situations of fraud (multiple-accounts, bogus ID documents, charge backs, etc.,). ---------------- all terms were met by oct 9 for a complete withdrawal all monies processed yet it was not payed in full
(3) Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations. -------------------- money went missing between withdrawals and the forced repeated reversals by the casino
(4) Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player------- wrongfully placed 5000 per week rule upon a progressive then ls forced credit into an account not associated with the progressive as a progressive can be withdrawn processed and divided amount those involved with the fraud
(5) No player shall be involuntarily placed into a situation which breaches the terms and conditions during the course of play.----- the player was given the only one choice with the loaned money never requested
(6) Must pay out progressive jackpot wins in full or in reasonable chunks, regardless of any terms and conditions limiting payouts.*------------- did not pay progressive on the 9th according to investigator and email sent or 12 according to reps and floor managers, and still have yet to get paid whats owed months later
(7) Must remove any bonus and associated play-through requirements at the request of the player if play has not commenced.
(8) Will not aggressively entice players to reverse cash withdrawals with bonuses or other incentives. --the casino enticed player by constantly reversing the player withdrawn money money that was not requested over and over and over again then finally locking in credited money (loaned money ) saying it was reversed from the progressive right after all moneys from the progressive were processed
(9) Will not use outsourced support. Player support must be in-house. --------how may a player know true support when the support had no benifit to what the player but in fact mislead the player and tampered with the players account unlawfully
(10) Must disclose all "sister" or related properties when applicable. If players are bound by terms that are enforced across a group of casinos, these casinos must be identified in an obvious place on the casino's website. For example: if a player is allowed only one sign up bonus for a group of casinos, these casinos need to be listed in the bonus terms and conditions (or an equally noticeable spot). If a player self-excludes from one property, the casino needs to identify all related properties that are affected by the exclusion as well.
the question we must ask ourselves is this casino still going to be accredited and licensed still, as those thing were proven but of course the revenue from such casinos to the authority and to its affiliates may override a players rights to fair treatment.
am i correct??
OK this is the accredited casino, now lets see if these standards are held true only in wins under 5000 or big spenders? let answer some questions and find out if it holds true on a big win small spender, because the big winner can be changed from a winner to a mark as the reps will probe for ignorance of the player. May it be realized it is a conflict of interest to have those who are there to help a player as to help make sure the player understands and gets paid and yet make sure the casino makes profits for the casino and themselves, where does the money come, but from the players but the wages come from the casino
both are in conflict as this conflict of interest leads to corruption there needs to be put into place no reason to be dis honest towards the player if any casino were ran with a system to take away temptation that promotes corruption would such a casino be the master of all casinos online to reward honesty instead of dishonesty.
Its as sad state of affairs, When A player can prove an accredited casino's reps, floor managers and smooth(operators) mislead the player, tampered with account, moving money repeatedly without request, stated the player was paid (but never was )just to cause the player to gamble more, kept relevant information from the players account, reversing monies that were withdrawn and processed according to the players account but then crediting the parts with amounts missing. then say did the player gamble the winnings and there is nothing the player can do about it!! when it should be said, the player without requested was mistakenly loaned money that could only be gambled and was gambled and lost because the casino can lie cheat steal as long as it gets you to gamble it and thats ok!!! tough break but by chance the gamble had won, tough break! as the mistakenly credited (loaned cash) cannot be gambled but voided the terms only applying when that casino may need payout
lets see how the accredited casino holds up t the below questions
Operational Standards
(1) Must pay winnings in a timely manner. -----------did not pay all of the progressive to the player for a withdrawal as per the terms and agreements
(2) Must not disqualify any player from a payout if terms & conditions are met, except for situations of fraud (multiple-accounts, bogus ID documents, charge backs, etc.,). ---------------- all terms were met by oct 9 for a complete withdrawal all monies processed yet it was not payed in full
(3) Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations. -------------------- money went missing between withdrawals and the forced repeated reversals by the casino
(4) Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player------- wrongfully placed 5000 per week rule upon a progressive then ls forced credit into an account not associated with the progressive as a progressive can be withdrawn processed and divided amount those involved with the fraud
(5) No player shall be involuntarily placed into a situation which breaches the terms and conditions during the course of play.----- the player was given the only one choice with the loaned money never requested
(6) Must pay out progressive jackpot wins in full or in reasonable chunks, regardless of any terms and conditions limiting payouts.*------------- did not pay progressive on the 9th according to investigator and email sent or 12 according to reps and floor managers, and still have yet to get paid whats owed months later
(7) Must remove any bonus and associated play-through requirements at the request of the player if play has not commenced.
(8) Will not aggressively entice players to reverse cash withdrawals with bonuses or other incentives. --the casino enticed player by constantly reversing the player withdrawn money money that was not requested over and over and over again then finally locking in credited money (loaned money ) saying it was reversed from the progressive right after all moneys from the progressive were processed
(9) Will not use outsourced support. Player support must be in-house. --------how may a player know true support when the support had no benifit to what the player but in fact mislead the player and tampered with the players account unlawfully
(10) Must disclose all "sister" or related properties when applicable. If players are bound by terms that are enforced across a group of casinos, these casinos must be identified in an obvious place on the casino's website. For example: if a player is allowed only one sign up bonus for a group of casinos, these casinos need to be listed in the bonus terms and conditions (or an equally noticeable spot). If a player self-excludes from one property, the casino needs to identify all related properties that are affected by the exclusion as well.
the question we must ask ourselves is this casino still going to be accredited and licensed still, as those thing were proven but of course the revenue from such casinos to the authority and to its affiliates may override a players rights to fair treatment.
am i correct??
