eCOGRA and fortunelounge were not honest with me

[22sithon]

Royal vegas casino together with eCOGRA treated me in a very rude way, letting the casino confiscating my money for no reason.

Here is the story. I played at Royalvegas casino which is part of the fortune lounge group, I am 84 years old and their terms were hard to understand, 20% count on this 80% on this , this game is allwed, this one is not and also they put I think more than one bonus in my account from the beginning but this was not the problem.

The problem started when they sent me an email after I cashed in $2770 that since I did not wager enough they are going to process the winnings without the bonus on my next cashin. Since my deposit was 100 and I won about 2600 I was happy with that and accepted that.

I cashed in again, then they send me an email that they are confiscating all the winnings because in their terms it says that once they give you a second chance and you don't wager on that second chance they are allowed to confiscate the winnings. Well, excuse me, this is not what you wrote me in the email you sent.

I explained them that I am 84 years old and might have made a mistake but this is not the right way to treat the problem they might have with me but they ignored me.

I saw that Royal vegas is approved by an organisation named eCOGRA so I tried them to help me but they were awful, all they had to tell me is that the casino followed his term and they even warn me by an email.

I don't know about the term but the email was totally different and here is the email to show who is right here, there is no way to make mistakes.

I kept sending Emails to Tex from eCOGRA and also the casino emails but they ignore me again and again, I had no choice but to try the forums.

Here is the email they sent, of course they never honored that email and left me with my deposit back and a locked account.

Here is the first email they sent telling me that if I cash in again they are going to process the winnings without the bonus

Hi xxxxx,

We refer to your cashin of $2770 on your Royal Vegas account number
rvrxxxxxxx.

We'd like to inform you that the amount you have requested to withdrawl
includes certain bonuses
which you have received from various promotional offers. All of our
bonus allocations have wagering
requirements associated with them before they may be withdrawn.

In light of this we have credited the bonus amount back to your casino
account,
as you needed to wager $4000 on any of the games that are not excluded
from the wagering
requirements, before you may withdraw this amount. (Please note: A
maximum of 20% of your wagering requirements
can be met on BlackJack for certain bonuses).

You only wagered $800 correctly, and therefore the following bonuses
have been re-credited
to your casino account as per our Terms and Conditions.
$2770 Royal Vegas 100% match upto $100

If there is a remainder left after re-crediting the bonus to your
casino account, the
Cashin (excluding the bonus amount that was re-credited to your casino
account) will be processed
accordingly and will be on its way to you.

Please note that should the wagering requirements for any bonus not be
met in future, the bonus
will be forfeited by the casino and deducted from your next cash-in.

Should you require any additional clarity on your options, please do
not hesitate to contact us.

For more information regarding the wagering requirements of promotional
bonuses, please click on the link below:

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

It written clearly as you can see "Please note that should the wagering requirements for any bonus not be
met in future, the bonus
will be forfeited by the casino and deducted from your next cash-in. "


And then they sent this email after the second cashin:

Hi xxx,

We refer to your cashin of $2770 on your Royal Vegas account number
rvrxxxxxxx.

We'd like to inform you that the amount you have requested to cash-in
includes certain bonuses, which you have received from various
promotional offers. All of our bonus allocations have wagering requirements
associated with them before they can be cashed in.

Please note that we have deducted the forfeited bonus from your
cash-in, as you needed to wager on any of the games that are not excluded
from the wagering requirements, to cash in this amount. (Please note: A
maximum of 20% of your wagering requirements can be met on BlackJack for
certain bonuses).

You only wagered $800 correctly, and therefore the following bonuses
have been forfeited as per our Terms and Conditions.
$100 Royal Vegas 100% match upto $100

Should you require any additional clarity on your options, please do
not hesitate to contact us.

For more information regarding the wagering requirements of promotional
bonuses, please click on the link below:

 

[soflat]

I think they are referring to the following clause in the Royal Vegas sign-up bonus T&Cs:

"If you attempt to withdraw before meeting wagering requirements, you will be advised to continue wagering and the funds will be returned to your casino account. If you attempt to withdraw more than once (1) without meeting the requirements, you will forfeit your bonus and winnings, and have your purchase refunded if possible."

 

[spearmaster]

You have to admit that the email is not very clear. It does not warn of forfeiting bonus and winnings - it does say the bonus will be forfeit. It also doesn't say that the player needs to complete wagering of (amount) before attempting a further cashout.

That said, it is also the responsibility of the player to read the terms and conditions before playing.

I would think that FL and eCOGRA may want to find a middle ground here as it is evident that the email is confusing. However, I don't think you can go so far as to say that either of them are wrong.

 

[chuchu59]

It is clearly stated that bonuses will be forfeited if a second cashin is initiated although WRs have not been met. Doesnt this imply that only the bonuses which amount to $100 in this instance should be the maximum that can be confiscated. FL has only itself to blame because the whole e-mail referred only to 'bonuses' and not winnings derived from them. Let alone an 84-year old but even someone half his age would come to the conclusion that only a max. of $100 would be deducted. i doubt whether this could be interpreted any other way.

 

[soflat]

It is clearly stated that bonuses will be forfeited if a second cashin is initiated although WRs have not been met. Doesnt this imply that only the bonuses which amount to $100 in this instance should be the maximum that can be confiscated. FL has only itself to blame because the whole e-mail referred only to 'bonuses' and not winnings derived from them. Let alone an 84-year old but even someone half his age would come to the conclusion that only a max. of $100 would be deducted. i doubt whether this could be interpreted any other way.

If you want to get technical, didn't they say that they had recredited $2770 in bonuses back to his account after the first withdrawal request?

 

[Linus]

Wow. What a poorly worded and misleading email.

I'm sure what they MEANT to say, was that they would confiscate ALL the money, including the deposit, bonus, and winnings, if she tried to withdraw again (without first meeting the bonus requirements).

What they did say --- "the bonus will be forfeited by the casino and deducted from your next cash-in" --- would have left anyone with the impression that they'd deduct only the $100. IE, the bonus amount.

22, I'm sorry they did this to you. Maybe the Meister can help you out.


After having read all this, I wonder if it was intentional (hoping she would cash-out again, so they could seize ALL her funds) - or just (another) example of incompetence Royal Vegas' part.

Either way, this isn't the first complaint I've heard regarding this outfit.

I had an account there, once upon a time. I got rid of it, because 1.) their bonus conditions are so whacked, and 2.) they just didn't operate like a competent & trustworthy organization.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Odd

I play occasionally, and am well aware of this nasty trap and don't get caught. I thought also that it was the bonus that was confiscated, not the players own money and winnings.
That E-mail is a real mess, it makes no sense gramatically, referring to the bonus being token refunded and the winnings being paid, but then says the full balance has been refunded.
Previous issues have been related to them removing the biggest bonus, rather than the unwagered last bonus.
I think the players location (Israel) has something to do with this, casinos will think that a player mistake may be more than just that. This player being over 80, and the fact that it is impossible to accurately track wagering even with simple unweighted terms, let alone percentages, weightings, and whether doubling up counts, as well as what constitutes a qualifying game.
I don't believe that $2770 from $100 + $100 comes from "abusive" playing methods, but rather a willingness to place high variance bets and hope to get lucky.
It is this sort of tale, when taken at face value, that leads to the impression that it is a war of tricks and strategy between player and casino, rather than a straight forward wagering relationship.
I disagree with any confiscation of funds just for playing the wrong games and not wagering enough. I would support token refunding repeatedly till the player complies with the terms, and barring them from further promotions if they continue to disobey the terms.
Fortune Lounge have told me that if there is any doubt, players should contact the CS before submitting a withdrawal request and ask them to check that all WR have been cleared, preferrably in writing by E-mail. This is the sort of supporting evidence that would be required to take a complaint to eCogra. The E-mails posted just show that CS dealt with this poorly, but that the player did indeed breach the posted terms. I would like to know why they activated the full confiscation though, rather than removing just the bonuses. This is the term that all casinos have, but is only supposed to be enacted when they discover deliberate player fraud or attempted fraud.

With this being the players first post, and the age given as 80+; there will be a few doubts as to the integrity of this story, and maybe the casino has been thinking along these lines. It has been suggested that up to 50% of these complaints are not giving the full story.

 

[eranluv]

we have a kind of a situation here because the email says one thing and the T&C says another.
I think It's one of the cases where the casino is making use of a clause when they shouldn't be.
It's like the famous clause that the Casino reserves the right to...

It's ovious that they are just trying to avoid payment, I mean, the player didn't commit any fraud, he earned the money in a decent way but made a mistake in the cash out.
Come on guys!! that's not a reason to steal 2,600$ from him!!!

 

[fortunelounge]

The issue has not been forwarded to us by eCOGRA and as they are quite diligent with any issues referred to them I suspect that the 22sithon's mails may not have reached them for some reason or the other.

I would appreciate it if 22sithon can forward me his / her details and I will look into the issue.

VP Operations
Fortune Lounge

 

[soflat]

... the player didn't commit any fraud, he earned the money in a decent way but made a mistake in the cash out.
Come on guys!! that's not a reason to steal 2,600$ from him!!!

I agree! Give the guy another chance.

And Fortune Lounge should think about revising its email so this kind of misunderstanding does not happen again.

And why make him go through eCogra again?

 

[22sithon]

Thank you Fortunelounge for your willing to help I emailed and Private note too.

 

[chuchu59]

The issue has not been forwarded to us by eCOGRA and as they are quite diligent with any issues referred to them I suspect that the 22sithon's mails may not have reached them for some reason or the other.

I would appreciate it if 22sithon can forward me his / her details and I will look into the issue.

VP Operations
Fortune Lounge

When this case has been resolved, FL should take a hard look at the Terms and Conditions and examine why winnings should be forfeited when only the WRs have not been met when the player initiates a second cashout. Wouldnt continously reversing the withdrawal serve the purpose? The money would still be in the account and this would force the player to either finish the wagering or else he wouldnt get a cent. The confiscation of winnings is really an unfair term where the player has not committed any kind of fraud.

 

[BBKPoker]

Fortunately, many MG sites seem to be headed the EZBonus direction, which avoids problems like these from happening and is just all around a great idea.

 

[vtlady]

eCogra won't do anything to help you



eCogra is nothing but a yes organization. I feel that their realationship with most of their casinos borders incestious. Just look at their board. From personal experience they don't expect the casions to practice responsible gaming any more then most of us are millionaires.

 

[fortunelounge]

After receiving 22sithon's details I found that we did receive this complaint from eCOGRA in September last year. The decision at the time (with the information available to us then) was to maintain the status quo on the forfeit for several reasons.

I have reviewed the account again and we have credited her with the $2 670 in order to give her the opportunity to meet the wagering requirements.

In this case it seems that 22sithon sincerely did not understand the wagering requirements. Our communication to her also did not help the situation and we have since changed the content of our standard mailers.

We have mailed 22sithon with an apology and clear instructions on how to meet the wagering requirements.

VP Operations
Fortune Lounge

 

[22sithon]

Yes I got the email and this situation is resolved

Thank you for the second or actaully the third chance.

I really did not want to solve this issue in the forum but I had no choice I have been waiting for months before I decided to go to the forums.

 

[22sithon]

The casino returned the money but I am still very disappointed by eCOGRA

About 7 emails with no reply from them

I thought they are there to help the player.

Even the casino understood their mistake but eCOGRA can't understand there was a mistake and descrepancy between the emails and the terms.

Again I don't trust eCOGRA organization, they are useless and worthless to me and I guess to other players in trouble.

They are there for the casino only, they are worse that the casinos.

 

[paul02085]

Good on you Fortune Lounge for doing this. I really was feeling bad for an 84 yr old person to have this happen to them. That is my dad's age.

Now i feel an urge to go drop some bucks at a FL site. Thank you.

PS-22sithon, i would leave it at that and be glad if i were you. Good luck and good health to you!

 

[RevelationSky]

Glad your issue resolved so quickly after posting here, this forum is a great exchange for players and casinos. It sounds like Fortune Lounge has been extremely fair after considering all the facts. Hope you keep your winnings in tact!

 

[22sithon]

Did eCOGRA ever revealed what are the precentage of cases that the casino decided not to pay and eCOGRA helped the player and the casino paid other word did they ever advertise what are the prcentage of cases that they decided the player favor

 

[The Watchdog]

I agree

22sithon, I share your same opinion with eCogra...

For me a site with their endorsment makes me think they probably just paid some $$ for that logo.

I would like people to relay more on the Meister here than on them however you go to go through ecogra for claims to casinos with their endorsments.

They were named #1 watchdog by gamblingonlinemagazine.com.. I think they just gave them that award for amount of sites endorsed by them.

If I ever have the chance to become more close to the watchdog world, I would never endorse a site before truly running a quality control test.

I have seen some problems in the forum with mummysgold.com endorsed by them as well.

I am a customer of the prima poker network my self, and honestly, somethings are just not right with them. 3 examples of sites endorsed by them have given me the doubt that they don't operate as they should.

 

[dirk_dangerous]

Hey Fortune Lounge. Now that you're done beating up on old ladies, are you going to start torturing puppies?

This never should have made it to the boards, and your casino should be ashamed for having put this woman through all this.

 

[jetset]

Watchdog, when you're not knocking the USA you've been critical of eCOGRA in several of your posts and I would like to address your latest effort above.

Perhaps you would share with me your perspective of how operators achieve eCOGRA "Play It Safe" status, and what information you have that proves your viewpoint?

I'm interested to know how well informed you are on this.

 

[jetset]

QUOTE: Hey Fortune Lounge. Now that you're done beating up on old ladies, are you going to start torturing puppies? UNQUOTE

Dirk, I know you have some pretty extreme views on operators, but is this really necessary....unless you know something that we don't?

 

[spearmaster]

Hey Fortune Lounge. Now that you're done beating up on old ladies, are you going to start torturing puppies?

That's a bit below the belt, Dirk. Not typical from you, even when you disagree you generally do it in a reasonable manner.

Don't know what it is, but the forums seem to be a lot hotter lately... maybe we need to repair the airconditioning or something