Elena777 vs VideoSlots

So what you are saying here is an accredited casino here can ignore the regulator for months at a time. Totally disregard what the regulator says they should do. How long would they seriously be accredited for if they did that.
I'm not saying anything of the sort, I'm asking how you are so certain the OP is lying. You said the ADR was fake when its listed as Videoslots ADR on their site and now the email must be fake. Videoslots maybe didn't get the email from the ADR, maybe their stellar support staff missed it, maybe they decided to ignore it if it was over £5k so don't have to pay anyway, or maybe the OP is lying, to dismiss the OP's claims without them or @Team.Videoslots commenting seems a little disrespectful to me, thats all.
Look at other respected accredited casinos that have lied and fallen from grace, it isn't exactly unheard of (not that I'm saying videoslots have done anything wrong here).
 
I'm not saying anything of the sort, I'm asking how you are so certain the OP is lying. You said the ADR was fake when its listed as Videoslots ADR on their site and now the email must be fake. Videoslots maybe didn't get the email from the ADR, maybe their stellar support staff missed it, maybe they decided to ignore it if it was over £5k so don't have to pay anyway, or maybe the OP is lying, to dismiss the OP's claims without them or @Team.Videoslots commenting seems a little disrespectful to me, thats all.
Look at other respected accredited casinos that have lied and fallen from grace, it isn't exactly unheard of (not that I'm saying videoslots have done anything wrong here).

€1700 so they can't ignore it then.
 
Silly question, but if Videoslots decided to scam someone out of €10k, and the ADR ruled against them, they can just ignore it?! How in the world is that fair?!
 
Silly question, but if Videoslots decided to scam someone out of €10k, and the ADR ruled against them, they can just ignore it?! How in the world is that fair?!
No, that's not a silly question

Who'd win between He-Man & Chuck Norris is a silly question*

*Chuck Norris
 
It's certainly catchy


tenor.gif
 
Silly question, but if Videoslots decided to scam someone out of €10k, and the ADR ruled against them, they can just ignore it?! How in the world is that fair?!

I wondered that too when I read it, I checked LeoVegas, Casumo and L&L and couldn't find similar clauses in their T&C's, as I thought it might just be a standard term :confused: Maybe @Team.Videoslots can explain why they seem to have a get out clause if the ADR rules against them for cases over 5k?
 
Why is it that its always the same people whose aim it seems is to take over a whole thread for there own amusement. Whether it's real or not every thread should be taken seriously. I for one am getting a bit sick and tired of the sexual jokes, innuendos and slurrs, how is anybody meant to come to casinomiester with a real problem when all they will see if certain members hijacking every possible thread. There are groups now setup if you would like to entertain yourselves there. And this thread is the exact reason I will never ask for any help, I am sure some person will just put a stupid picture up in regards to this and that will show the complete lack of respect these members have.
 
I wondered that too when I read it, I checked LeoVegas, Casumo and L&L and couldn't find similar clauses in their T&C's, as I thought it might just be a standard term :confused: Maybe @Team.Videoslots can explain why they seem to have a get out clause if the ADR rules against them for cases over 5k?

Think the MGA would rule on it surely? If they are an ADR partner then it should be that simple.
 
Think the MGA would rule on it surely? If they are an ADR partner then it should be that simple.

No idea, the terms don't say what happens next, that I could see anyway. Seems very strange though, its like they are saying, well if its a little bit of money you can have it, but if its a lot, then we don't trust the ADR to make the right decision, so we don't have to accept it if we don't want to. Maybe @maxd might know more with him being in dispute resolution?
 
I'm going to guess they want to take it to court when it's about a larger sum of money. Question then is how many people will actually go to court in Malta for 5k? It might cost more to hire a Maltese attorney and go through the whole process than it is to just drop the case...
 
For the above reasons and the evidence presented, MADRE finds that the confiscation of the funds was unjustified. The Respondent shall either pay out any remaining funds in the player account or rescind the agreement with the player and void all bets, resulting in a repayment of any stakes offset against a seizing of any winnings and bonusses.

Dr Hans Wolfram Kessler Sole Arbiter

October 2, 2019"

Hm. Doesn’t that say they don’t have to pay the winnings so long as they refund the deposits?

It reads like there’s something more going on to me.
 
Just for a bit further information, this is the reason the account was closed

1.4 Videoslots reserves the right, at its own discretion, to:

  • refuse the opening of a Videoslots Account or to close an existing account;
  • refuse deposits without any explanation, provided that any wagers or if winnings already made will be honoured by the Company as long as these were not acquired by fraud or other illegal or illicit means;
  • suspend or cancel the Account at our own discretion from promotional activities, competitions or other services.
If Videoslots is of the opinion that there are legitimate concerns that the Account is, has been or maybe used for illegal, fraudulent or dishonest activities, we reserve the right to:

  • request documents for verification of identity, the authorisation to use a specific card (including pre-paid cards) or other facts provided by the Account holder, before expediting withdrawals;
  • hold and manage funds belonging to the Account holder in accordance with generally accepted guidelines for cash management. This may include a financial institution or a payment solution provider being entrusted to hold funds in the name of or for the benefit of the Account holder;
  • forfeit or confiscate funds available on an Account, or refuse to honour a claim, in the event that, directly or indirectly, these Terms and Conditions have been violated.
Videoslots also confirmed elsewhere that the dispute had been registered with the ADR, so I think its legitimate.

Don't like that type of terms (and not only VS have them) its basically a FU clause that allows them to confiscate money whenever they please.
 
An ADR is not an arbitration entity and thus their verdicts are NOT legally binding. As the name says it is an Alternative Dispute Resolution service and basically anyone can offer it.

Below an excerpt from the T&Cs of Madre, would be maybe wise to inform yourselves before rushing to judgement. We don't know why exactly VS declined to pay in the first place.

Per OP, VS never submitted any comments, hence, MADRE based their decision on the evidence they received, in this case from the OP only. Since the OP is from outside the EU, VS did not have to engage with MADRE as the T&Cs state.

What players from outside the EU have to understand too is that the MGA licence enables operators to offer their services legally within the EU, that's it. AFAIK, legally, an MGA licence does not apply for players from outside the EU and is a mere indication that the operator is regulated for the EU market, which does not mean they have to offer the same level of service/protection to everyone.

114986
 
Last edited:
Why is it that its always the same people whose aim it seems is to take over a whole thread for there own amusement. Whether it's real or not every thread should be taken seriously. I for one am getting a bit sick and tired of the sexual jokes, innuendos and slurrs, how is anybody meant to come to casinomiester with a real problem when all they will see if certain members hijacking every possible thread. There are groups now setup if you would like to entertain yourselves there. And this thread is the exact reason I will never ask for any help, I am sure some person will just put a stupid picture up in regards to this and that will show the complete lack of respect these members have.
This!

Many of the culprits on this particular thread have a great sense of humour - albeit rude on occasion - but as @Scott1baird says, why do you have to interfere and reduce many threads to the lowest common denominator with your 'sexual jokes, innuendos and slurs'. The very first response to the OP started this hijacking, with the corresponding responses just getting worse and worse. Debate and difference of opinion is one thing. What you guys are doing with your takeover is quite simply appalling.
 
This!

Many of the culprits on this particular thread have a great sense of humour - albeit rude on occasion - but as @Scott1baird says, why do you have to interfere and reduce many threads to the lowest common denominator with your 'sexual jokes, innuendos and slurs'. The very first response to the OP started this hijacking, with the corresponding responses just getting worse and worse. Debate and difference of opinion is one thing. What you guys are doing with your takeover is quite simply appalling.

This site needs better or more Mods to remove such posts, it just makes endless of pages just to find real responses it is kinda annoying @Casinomeister
 
This site needs better or more Mods to remove such posts, it just makes endless of pages just to find real responses it is kinda annoying @Casinomeister
well, what it requires, it as you did above; flagging them to the thread; they simply can't follow every post and will always rely on members helping by policing and reporting :thumbsup:
 
An ADR is not an arbitration entity and thus their verdicts are NOT legally binding. As the name says it is an Alternative Dispute Resolution service and basically anyone can offer it.

Below an excerpt from the T&Cs of Madre, would be maybe wise to inform yourselves before rushing to judgement. We don't know why exactly VS declined to pay in the first place.

Per OP, VS never submitted any comments, hence, MADRE based their decision on the evidence they received, in this case from the OP only. Since the OP is from outside the EU, VS did not have to engage with MADRE as the T&Cs state.

What players from outside the EU have to understand too is that the MGA licence enables operators to offer their services legally within the EU, that's it. AFAIK, legally, an MGA licence does not apply for players from outside the EU and is a mere indication that the operator is regulated for the EU market, which does not mean they have to offer the same level of service/protection to everyone.

View attachment 114986

I would suggest, Videoslots have consented permanently, due to them having it in their terms and conditions and not mentioning non EU residents not being able to use the service, plus they were quite happy for the ADR to make the decision as they refused to speak about it any further as soon as they were notified of the complaint to MADRE. This was their response that suggests they were quite happy to let the ADR make the decision

As you have registered your dispute with MADRE, we will pursue your claim through that channel.

MADRE were obviously happy to deal with the complaint, as they made a decision on it, so don't see a problem with the ADR being involved personally. VS's T&C's state the decision will be binding on this amount, so doubt they won't pay.

Having said that, the decision was only made on the 2nd, I'm sure it takes more than a few hours to get sent to the right person to deal with it at Videoslots and theres every chance they will pay at some point during the week.
 
I would suggest, Videoslots have consented permanently, due to them having it in their terms and conditions and not mentioning non EU residents not being able to use the service, plus they were quite happy for the ADR to make the decision as they refused to speak about it any further as soon as they were notified of the complaint to MADRE. This was their response that suggests they were quite happy to let the ADR make the decision

As you have registered your dispute with MADRE, we will pursue your claim through that channel.

MADRE were obviously happy to deal with the complaint, as they made a decision on it, so don't see a problem with the ADR being involved personally. VS's T&C's state the decision will be binding on this amount, so doubt they won't pay.

Having said that, the decision was only made on the 2nd, I'm sure it takes more than a few hours to get sent to the right person to deal with it at Videoslots and theres every chance they will pay at some point during the week.

To be honest, I don't know if the MGA licence applies to players from outside the EU. IMO, I would be surprised if it would.

The MGA licence came into play when casino operators were looking to have easy access to all EU countries and Malta with its low taxes/gambling-friendly laws was a perfect choice. So a lot of them set up shop on the island. The MGA licence is probably not binding in let's say China, Russia, Kenya, Brazil etc.

The terms say for "Players residing in Malta or playing under our MGA licence:" MADRE is to be approached for complaints.

Who exactly is playing under the MGA licence? The licence is not valid worldwide, many countries do not recognize it, e.g. the UK, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Romania, US, etc.

Does it apply to Russian players as the OP seems to be from Russia? I don't think so but could be totally wrong.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top