Giantvegas & Royaldice stiffed me for over $7000

[Casinomeister]

I find it quite sickened that you refuse to condemn this casino casinomeister. If no terms (bar the FU) term have been broken this guy should be paid - it's as simple as that...

You are not reading my comments closely enough.

 

[Vesuvio]

Lets be honest, players like Casperfix have harmed the general gaming community over time with their gross, obvious and greedy play. Not being content to play with a reasonable advantage they have to come up with the most extravagant techniques to get every last penny from the casinos.

What are your recommendations for playing sticky bonuses then, Mitch? The player should just potter along at small stakes and hold on to a bonus he can't withdraw? I'm asking you as a self-confessed bonus hunter, or abuser to use the terminology you seem to accept. It's no different if you slightly disguise your play and play at higher stakes than others - you still cost the casinos money. Scam them, if you like. I hate the hypocrisy of your criticism.

Casinos respond with reduced offers and complicated terms that hit and confuse the ordinary punter. Doesn't affect players like Casperfix as they are very savvy and aren't going to make mistakes, they just move on.

Do you really think there's any way bonuses can't tighten up over time? Ok, we can all try and make an orderly line, but the casinos are only in the business of making money. They're no happier giving out handouts to you than they are to others who use different strategies.

As for it affecting the "ordinary punter" - it's true, but then the ordinary punter is going to lose his deposit anyway if he accepts a bonus, pretty much regardless of the wr. The casinos know that, which is the only reason bonuses stayed generous for so long.

 

[Vesuvio]

So what am I expected to do? Rule in favor of players who knew that they were breaking one of the terms and conditions? Should we be selective and disregard #5?

Yes. If you don't do that the terms are meaningless - the casino can refuse to pay you on a whim. As I've said before, eCOGRA or any organisation claiming to regulate the industry should refuse to accept any casinos that have a similar term. Then they can arbitrate fairly on the basis of the remaining terms. Otherwise it's an absurdity.

Exactly. This situation illustrates intent to scam. If the players had made an honest mistake, I would have challenged it.

Since when is it a scam to try and win with a bonus? The casino set up the rules, not the player. Of course with bonuses casinos are always relying on the majority of players not thinking, but you can't throw a fit if people don't do what you want. Taking deposits and pocketing players' winnings is the only scam I can see ("a fraudulent business scheme"). If you accept the casino's case here I don't see where you can ever draw the line.

 

[Macgyver]

Since this thread is so long, can we clarify what rule #5 is?

If it's the statement that the player must contact the casino to remove the bonus if they wish to play an excluded game, then we just need to establish that this rule was in place on the website on the day the player deposited.

 

[casperfix]

From reading what the Casinomeister wrote I have to say that I think that

Bryan Bailey sold his soul to the devil.

Almost every affiliate in the industry that I managed to read his opinion in the past few month won't support these reserve the right terms.

These reserve the right terms are there to scare players but not to be enforced.

A casino that write these rules and also enforce them is rogued.

Why the casinos are the devil ? Because they make their money from poor miserable people, addicted people, weak people.

They are like the cigarette companies.

They will destroy the competitive person as well, people who are successful in everyday life that can't understand how come they can't beat the casino.



These casinos has license to steal anyway, they should atleast honor their own terms and condition.

I don't know anyone from Germany that all I can say.

I came to win, my way, and my way is simple get bust or win big.

I trusted the industry and I trusted Giantvegas/Royaldice, I made a mistake.

I trusted Bryan Bailey, I pitched a bitch a year ago and I was patient. I believed that when he has the time to investigate it he will come with a honest statement and send it to the casino to think again.

The casinomeister does not make money from being an arbitrator but he has a great influence on the industry.

Casino operators read this board and what do they have to say ?

Why would we pay a group of players that played the bonus well and made of us around 20,000 in one week, we better not pay them and who is going to help them? Not only no one will help them, the affiliates are going to support the casino by quoting the reseve the right terms...

I reserve the right to announce here again that Bryan Bailey sold his soul to the devil and today is a sad day to the online gaming industry.

Bryan bailey will not help a bonus hunter don't waste your time pitching a bitch go find another way to help yourself by hunting some more.

 

[Rettahs]

Being new to the online casino scene and message boards I find this situation to be very interesting. I have read a lot of threads on Bonus Issues and Casino Issues here in these forums and to me I find it all pretty amazing .

Before I found this forum and was just searching out online casinos to play at I stumbled across many websites including this one that recommend several different casino's and point out the great sign up bonus at each one. Before I read any of the threads I tried out a few casinos, won a bit and lost a bit and had fun either way. Then I started reading the forums and after reading the threads on bonus issues and casino issues I would have to say that I fall into the catagory of a "Bonus abuser" even though I had no idea what that was before I read these threads.

I say I am a bonus abuser because it seems that is the label that gets put on anyone that signs up for more than a few casino's and takes them up on their signup bonus and makes money off of it. I had no idea what "Grinding out the WR" was before reading these threads. I just knew I signed up, accepted the terms of an agreement, made a deposit and played the games that were agreed upon if I accepted the bonus. If I won I would cash out and if I lost I would write it off. I have read threads on here that you get the label bonus abuser if you cash out but never make another deposit or cash out all your winnings if you win with a bonus. I for one have never left a brick and morter casino and on my way out handed them my wallet and said "hold this for me, I will be back later" so I don't see a problem with cashing out if I am done playing for the day.

The interesting part is how casinos label people as abusers, if you play an allowed game and only that allowed game holding the edge then you abused it, if you play a different game that was allowed but doesn't count towards the WR then finish the WR on a different game, you abused it.

No fraud is being accused here and no one made the casino offer the bonus in the first place. For someone like myself, I would have played it any way I wanted, played some three card, some slots or even roulette if I got bored since it was allowed even if it didn't count towards the WR and when I finished playing if I was up for the day I would fully expect to be paid my winnings.

Long story short and I apologize for rambling here but that is why I find this thread interesting. The guy signed up, agreed to terms and played some games and won. He didn't break any rules, the casino decided later to exclude roulette, that is their right but they can't hold this guy to those set of rules/terms.

 

[Vesuvio]

Since this thread is so long, can we clarify what rule #5 is?

I assumed it was the infamous "we can consider anything we like abuse and take your money" term. If not, apologies

 

[mitch]

What are your recommendations for playing sticky bonuses then, Mitch? I'm asking you as a self-confessed bonus hunter, or abuser to use the terminology you seem to accept. It's no different if you slightly disguise your play and play at higher stakes than others - you still cost the casinos money. Scam them, if you like. I hate the hypocrisy of your criticism.
.

I approve of bonus hunting as you know and have recommended this approach to posters many times.

I am not bothered about Casperfix's approach harming the casinos they are often awash with money and could hardly be described as providing a useful service to society.

It's the way his approach harms other players that bothers me. Especially when he subsequently comes to a forum like this seeking sympathy.

I am not saying that Casperfix is not technically entitled to his money but that as a savvy player he knew he was walking a tightrope when he was aware of the casinos catch-all T&C and then decided to go ahead with this play. Refering to my football example should I have complained to the police because I had a legal right to stand there, would they have been sympathetic, are you?

We know that Bryan is the policeman in this situation and he is not sympathetic, doesn't surprise me and he shouldn't be criticised for it.

As an example, KK is a bonus hunter, he makes a profit but how many times has he not been paid? Has his approach caused casinos to drastically alter their rules? I doubt it.

Mitch

 

[derelict]

Since this thread is so long, can we clarify what rule #5 is?

I believe the rule five he's referring to is this one from Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) :

The Casino reserves the right to withhold any amount in excess of the player's original deposit from a player's withdrawal if the bonus is wagered on the above games, before the wagering on allowed games is completed fully.

The player says this rule was added after his deposit. The wayback machine is down at the moment, but I expect that it may be verifyible. In my opinion, the term that states that the prohibited games do not count toward the wagering requirements is fairly clear that the games are permitted, but do not contribute to the wagering requirements. I really don't know whether the email notification is sufficient notice, given the contradictory terms on the web site.

In my opinion, if the promotions page can be verified, he ought to be paid.

 

[Vesuvio]

It's the way his approach harms other players that bothers me. Especially when he subsequently comes to a forum like this seeking sympathy.

He's trying to get the money he's got a strong case for being owed, as far as I can see, not any TLC. I really don't get your point about harming other players. You mainly play BJ, as far as I know, and more casinos have banned that than any other game, but I'm not holding you personally responsible
What would the casino do to avoid the roulette approach? Presumably completely ban it before meeting the wr. Assuming they didn't try to trick players and made it clear then how would that affect other "legitimate" players? It'd save them money. Unless you've got a good strategy playing games not counting to the wr is the absolute worst thing you can do with a bonus.

As an example, KK is a bonus hunter, he makes a profit but how many times has he not been paid? Has his approach caused casinos to drastically alter their rules? I doubt it.

If we all played like KK the casinos would save a fortune Anyway, as before I think it's absurd to single out particular strategies for changing casino t&cs. Personally we have no influence and as a group of bonus hunters we force changes in terms. You and me included.

 

[thechap]

You are not reading my comments closely enough.

Im not sure which bit i've missed after rereading. Below is what I have interperated your comment as, but please correct me

1/ You are not going to side with the player.
2/ You recognise the player has won without breaking a term and condition, but also refuse to support him because you recognise that his play is that of an advantage player.
3/ You have stated that the FU condition has been used, but have in no point condemned them for thier use of this term.

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood your stance, but from my interpretation of your posts can't see where the points to the contrary are.

 

[thechap]

Yes. If you don't do that the terms are meaningless - the casino can refuse to pay you on a whim. As I've said before, eCOGRA or any organisation claiming to regulate the industry should refuse to accept any casinos that have a similar term. Then they can arbitrate fairly on the basis of the remaining terms. Otherwise it's an absurdity.

I 100% agree with this statement. As I tried to say before with the patent comparison, if a casino wants to write rules prohibiting certain gameplay they can bloody well pay someone to write this rules properly. In any case where there is dispute and the independent adjucator (casino meister/ ecogra etc) rules that there is a significant chance the rules may be interperated the way the player claims to have interperated them then they should rule against the casino.

It's the casinos own fault if they can't write clear rules, punish them for it. There was a recent case with uk pensions where leaflets didnt quantify how much risk was involved with a certain scheme and the government were liable for the deficit when people suffered due to this .

There is no need for a FU clause if the casinos write their terms and conditions properly. If they don't write clear and concise terms they deserve to lose money to bonus hunters who exploit the loopholes, I don't see why it should be casino meisters job to protect the casino from their own sloppiness. Sure protect them from fraudsters and slander, but if they make a mistake they should be punished. It's hypocritical of them to expect not to be punished for errors, after all do they show any symaphy to the guy who loses his house/wife/car/everything to his errors playing their games.

If the realise their mistakes, they should have no power to retrospectively apply a new term. They should learn from their mistakes then tighten their rules accoringly, I see no reason why an online casino should get special business treatment.

 

[chuchu59]

Just one more thing, imagine signing up at a casino you felt might be dodgy (why make the screen shots then). You get the bonus - and it clearly says roulette does not count towards the WR.

For those of you that are being so quick in slamming me, answer me this.
Yes or no: would you have played roulette?

Yes or no: would you have contacted the casino before playing roulette?

Although I wouldnt have played roulette, I would surely have played baccarat although they dont count towards the WRs. If it's a 100% match deposit you have doubled your bankroll. Say, I deposit $100 and get an extra $100. I push my luck and bet $200 and if I am lucky $400 on the next game. I could get to $800 with only 2 even bets starting from $100. Where else would you get this advantage. With the $800, I can easily finish off the WRs and if my balance is above $400, this risk is worth taking because if you did not get a bonus your $100 would turn into $400 only.

If the Ts and Cs state explicitly that the casino should be contacted before playing any disallowed games, sure I would do so but if they merely stated that they dont count towards WRs, I wouldnt bother doing that.

This thread is developing into something similar to the King Neptune's case. What is unclear at the moment is whether the Terms were changed, as the player claims, after he deposited. Reps from MG, Crypto and even RTG casinos come here to clarify matters but playtechs simply dont do this so we cannot confirm the dates. Furthermore, I hope that Casperfix can relay more to us on what the Playtech Dispute Team has done. He said that they werent answering his e-mails anymore. If this is true, and they did state earlier that they have doubts on whether the casino is right, then ECOGRA and even Montana would be hailed as knights in shining armour.

 

[Casinomeister]

1/ You are not going to side with the player. .

No, I am neither siding with the player or the casino on this. That's my prerogative. Like Henry VIII's, anology - it's like watching two drunks in the street fighting.

2/ You recognise the player has won without breaking a term and condition, but also refuse to support him because you recognise that his play is that of an advantage player. .

The player DID break the terms and conditions - am I the only one reading this??

Bets placed on all versions of Baccarat, all versions of Roulette, all versions of Sic Bo, all Video Poker games, all versions of Blackjack, Blackjack Switch, Blackjack Surrender, Casino War, Pontoon and Craps will not be counted toward wagering requirements. We reserve the right to withhold any amount in excess of the players original deposit from a player's withdrawal if the play bonus is wagered on the above mentioned games.

3/ You have stated that the FU condition has been used, but have in no point condemned them for thier use of this term..

Don't confuse my explanations of behaviour as condoning behaviour. This is a typical shoot the messenger scenario.

If you were to ask me why many Arabs celebrated 9/11 so jubilantly, and I explained this to you in a straight forward manner - it doesn't mean that I sympathise or condone what these people did, it would be simply an explanation.

*Note - I'm not comparing this player issue with crucial global issues; this was merely an example that hopefully you'd be able to understand.

Sure, I feel that these sort of player issues drain my resources - and that really miffs the hell out of me. I have many other player issues that are a higher level of importance than this. And many other things to do besides this.


Signed
the Devil Meister

 

[Vesuvio]

The player DID break the terms and conditions - am I the only one reading this??

Bets placed on all versions of Baccarat, all versions of Roulette, all versions of Sic Bo, all Video Poker games, all versions of Blackjack, Blackjack Switch, Blackjack Surrender, Casino War, Pontoon and Craps will not be counted toward wagering requirements. We reserve the right to withhold any amount in excess of the players original deposit from a player's withdrawal if the play bonus is wagered on the above mentioned games.

I'd accept the casino's actions if that was in the terms and conditions, but as I understand it that was something they added in an e-mail sent after he'd received the bonus. I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly never go to check my mail after receiving a bonus and before playing it.

 

[Rettahs]

The player DID break the terms and conditions - am I the only one reading this??

Bets placed on all versions of Baccarat, all versions of Roulette, all versions of Sic Bo, all Video Poker games, all versions of Blackjack, Blackjack Switch, Blackjack Surrender, Casino War, Pontoon and Craps will not be counted toward wagering requirements. We reserve the right to withhold any amount in excess of the players original deposit from a player's withdrawal if the play bonus is wagered on the above mentioned games.

Casinomeister, I believe you are making a reference to an example he posted about Del Rio casino. I do not see that in any of the screenshots he has shown of the terms and conditions for the two casino's he played at and that are in question with his winnings.

Because you have dealt with so many disputes I can understand your desire to pick and choose which to fight for and which not to. I fully respect that since it is your right and you provide from what I can see a good service to the online casino scene but for someone like myself who isn't involved on a daily basis with online casino's I would have taken their terms at face value and played whatever allowed games I wanted without any worry that my winnings may be void because they later changed their terms and conditions after the fact.

I don't know the casper guy nor does his loss affect me in any way, what bothers me is that it seems the casinos get away with withholding winnings whenever they see fit calling all sorts of things abuse when in my eyes no manner of play is abuse if you abide by the allowed games of a bonus. No matter how that bonus is played, a dollar a hand grinding out the WR or throwing it on roulette if it is allowed and getting lucky.

If these online casino's want to start taking better control of their offers they should just demand that their software provider implement an option that disables certain games if a bonus is redeemed. The reason they don't do this in my eyes is for every casper out there there are hundred or thousands who go bust trying to win with the bonus so they let them play what they want and then if someone wins they deny the bonus and refund the deposit. I have yet to have any of my winnings denied so I haven't had first hand knowledge in dealing with any of this but I can tell you if I follow the rules and they were to deny me 7 thousand I would be a tad upset also lol.

 

[casperfix]

Casinomeister, you said

The player DID break the terms and conditions - am I the only one reading this??

Bets placed on all versions of Baccarat, all versions of Roulette, all versions of Sic Bo, all Video Poker games, all versions of Blackjack, Blackjack Switch, Blackjack Surrender, Casino War, Pontoon and Craps will not be counted toward wagering requirements. We reserve the right to withhold any amount in excess of the players original deposit from a player's withdrawal if the play bonus is wagered on the above mentioned games.

THESE WERE NOT THE TERMS, THEY ARE LYING.

I SHOWED SCREENSHOTS THAT YOU CAN SEE CLEARLY THAT THEY DID NOT STATE THE WE RESERVE THE RIGHT SENTENCE.


They sent it by an email after I deposited, it looks like an AUTOMATED email that being sent with the terms, they fucked up by not putting it in the term at the website.


If I had seen such a term, I would have not played, I had missed such a term, I would not have complained.

 

[thelawnet]

No, I am neither siding with the player or the casino on this. That's my prerogative. Like Henry VIII's, anology - it's like watching two drunks in the street fighting.

The player DID break the terms and conditions - am I the only one reading this??

Bets placed on all versions of Baccarat, all versions of Roulette, all versions of Sic Bo, all Video Poker games, all versions of Blackjack, Blackjack Switch, Blackjack Surrender, Casino War, Pontoon and Craps will not be counted toward wagering requirements. We reserve the right to withhold any amount in excess of the players original deposit from a player's withdrawal if the play bonus is wagered on the above mentioned games.

Simple question: do you think that you can put some of the terms on the website and others in an email sent after signup?

If not, then the player didn't break the terms, as term wasn't on the website, only in the email sent after he signed up, and which, presumably he didn't read till after playing, and certainly the casino had no right to assume that he would, having posted terms on the website, to then say *without warning* that there would be further terms only communicated by email. It's not supposed to be a jigsaw puzzle, or 'hunt the terms and conditions'. Post the rules on your website. Very easy.

 

[SlotsWizard]

I have to side with Bryan on this one. There are too many things that are just plain fishy:

1. The screenshot of the T&C with the Date/Time window. Easily faked, and who does that? Who opens up the Date/Time window when taking a screenshot? Furthermore, this screenshot only appeared AFTER the player was asked if they had anything proving the date. It's the equivalent of changing the date and time on a camcorder and then videotaping some "evidence", but in reality that date and time are meaningless because they can be easily manipulated.

2. This player staked their entire initial balance on a single number in Roulette...and won?! Assuming player-friendly European Roulette, the odds of this happening are 1 in 37 at each casino, or 1 in 1,369 combined (0.073%). How someone can escape a 97.297% chance of losing their entire deposit in one shot, twice in a row, is far beyond the scope of my own personal experiences with even the best of luck. Obviously it can happen, but with those horrible odds it makes this situation that much more suspicious.

3. Whenever there is a gray area in the T&C's, how difficult is it to go into Live Chat and ask for clarification? It takes 5 minutes or less, and you can take a screenshot of the chat window and/or answer "yes" when you are asked "would you like a transcript emailed to you?" at the end of the session. It's that simple. Some people might say that you shouldn't have to do this, and that it's inconvenient. Well which is more convenient, a 5 minute Live Chat session to settle it before you potentially violate the terms, or a 15+ month pissing match that will never end satisfactorily for either side?

 

[chuchu59]

I have to side with Bryan on this one. There are too many things that are just plain fishy:

1. The screenshot of the T&C with the Date/Time window. Easily faked, and who does that? Who opens up the Date/Time window when taking a screenshot? Furthermore, this screenshot only appeared AFTER the player was asked if they had anything proving the date. It's the equivalent of changing the date and time on a camcorder and then videotaping some "evidence", but in reality that date and time are meaningless because they can be easily manipulated.

2. This player staked their entire initial balance on a single number in Roulette...and won?! Assuming player-friendly European Roulette, the odds of this happening are 1 in 37 at each casino, or 1 in 1,369 combined (0.073%). How someone can escape a 97.297% chance of losing their entire deposit in one shot, twice in a row, is far beyond the scope of my own personal experiences with even the best of luck. Obviously it can happen, but with those horrible odds it makes this situation that much more suspicious.

3. Whenever there is a gray area in the T&C's, how difficult is it to go into Live Chat and ask for clarification? It takes 5 minutes or less, and you can take a screenshot of the chat window and/or answer "yes" when you are asked "would you like a transcript emailed to you?" at the end of the session. It's that simple. Some people might say that you shouldn't have to do this, and that it's inconvenient. Well which is more convenient, a 5 minute Live Chat session to settle it before you potentially violate the terms, or a 15+ month pissing match that will never end satisfactorily for either side?

Hi Slotsjunkie,

Howcha doing as a webmaster?

From this player's style of betting, he will not be willing to contact live chat because the answer he will get is either to have the bonus removed before play or that winnings are voided if roulette is played. Since he didnt ask, if the terms and conditions were really altered after he deposited, he has a legitimate claim to his winnings and I think we are all agreed on this. Much as I sympathise with any player who are unable to get his rightful winnings, he has not convinced everybody that the terms and conditions were really changed afterwards. Then both Playtech Disputes and the casinos themselves havent even addressed this issue which I find to be ridiculous. Once these parties confirm on the actual date of posting these terms to the website, this is solved. The e-mail, as I said earlier, is totally irrelevant and does not assist in either the player's or casinos' arguments.

 

[SlotsWizard]

Howcha doing as a webmaster?

Okay, I suppose... it's a lot of hard work, and the only traffic I get is from Googlebot, Yahoobot, and the occasional affiliate manager. But I fully expect it to be that way for at least a year. I'm not even sure if there is anyone left who doesn't have an account at every online gambling site already anyway. Let's just say that it's a good thing I haven't quit my day job.

From this player's style of betting, he will not be willing to contact live chat because the answer he will get is either to have the bonus removed before play or that winnings are voided if roulette is played. Since he didnt ask, if the terms and conditions were really altered after he deposited, he has a legitimate claim to his winnings and I think we are all agreed on this. Much as I sympathise with any player who are unable to get his rightful winnings, he has not convinced everybody that the terms and conditions were really changed afterwards. Then both Playtech Disputes and the casinos themselves havent even addressed this issue which I find to be ridiculous. Once these parties confirm on the actual date of posting these terms to the website, this is solved. The e-mail, as I said earlier, is totally irrelevant and does not assist in either the player's or casinos' arguments.

I doubt the casino or Playtech will make a statement about this, they probably consider the matter closed. I tried checking the WayBack archive for Giant Vegas but the last entry was late 2004, which didn't look anything like the player's [alleged] June 2005 screenshot, so we'll probably never know if, when, or what T&C's were changed back then.

 

[casperfix]

SlotsJunkie, don't forget this issue is not only mine but another player from Germany.

The chances that we are talking about cheating the Roulette system or faking the screenshot is very low.

Also these screenshot were sent to the casino as well and they never denied them or claimed they are faked. These screenshots were sent also to playtech.

Thirs, the Roulette bet was not on a single number but on 3,4 numbers(I don't remember) so the chances are about 1/12 or 1/9 and catch it twice the chances are not so low.

Nothing is too fishy, this is a regular situation but when you don't like the fact that the player win too much, then the problem starts.

Sometimes the casino will claim that you breaked the terms, sometimes they will claimed that you opened multiple accounts, sometimes you used a Robot.


Why can't you understand that it was a simple deal between me and the casino. I signed up and accepted the terms that said that Roulette won't count towards the wagering, I won, then they came with a statement that was mentioned only in the Automated email they send after the deposit that Roulette was not allowed to play at all.

This is their mistake, they should be responsible to correct the mistake.


By the way, just to let everybody know, not only they did not correct the mistake but also they continue to allow Roulette even after they changed their terms at the first time. They have changed their terms again lately and only then Roulette was not allowed.


For more than half a year after my incidence Roulette... continued to be a game you can play but won't cont towards the wagering.

I remember that but I don't have a screenshot but maybe someone can help me and being the terms as they were after June 2005 to show everyone that I am right, Roulette continued to be an allowed game to play atleast at the term at the website.

I had problems with online casinos in ther past and I learned that you have to take a screenshot of the terms every time you win, nothing odd about that.

 

[SlotsWizard]

Thirs, the Roulette bet was not on a single number but on 3,4 numbers(I don't remember) so the chances are about 1/12 or 1/9 and catch it twice the chances are not so low.

The chances that we are talking about cheating the Roulette system ... is very low.

I understand and agree with the above.

Nothing is too fishy, this is a regular situation but when you don't like the fact that the player win too much, then the problem starts.

Why can't you understand that it was a simple deal between me and the casino. I signed up and accepted the terms that said that Roulette won't count towards the wagering, I won, then they came with a statement that was mentioned only in the Automated email they send after the deposit that Roulette was not allowed to play at all.

I hate to see players get screwed as much as the next guy, but my intuition keeps telling me that there's something wrong here. You seem to have the perfect answer/excuse/screenshot for everything. This is just my opinion of course. But posts such as these:

The dates are right

The winnings are right

The casino is not right ? Why dont you understand a simple thing

GIANTVEGAS AND ROYAL DICE DOES NOT WANT TO PAY WITH NO REASON, JUST BECAUSE THEY LOST TOO MUCH

I WON TOO MUCH, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST AND NOT THE LAST TIME A BAD CASINO IS NOT PAYING

ALL I WANT IS THEM TO BE BLACKLISTED THEN THEY PAY ME.

and:

Think about it, if you get an offer that need to be wagered in Slots, but u like to play craps, you play some craps risking your funds and then you got to play some slots and cashout, what is wrong with that ???

...just seem to lack the innocence of a player who has been legitimately wronged.

 

[casperfix]

I am taking back the words about blacklisting, I already mentioned that before.

I also explained that after more than a year that I am fighting on the money, everything has just exploded.

I have sent 41 emails during the past year trying to solve it quitely without the forums

 

[kreome]

I refrained from responding to date.

Although I am a side in it as well, I thought about a resolution and offered to the Casinomeister, he the casino won't agree and they don't want any business.

I offered to be paid only the winnings derived from the deposit amount which means they will substract from the cashout the winnings derived from the signup bonus in the Roulette bet.

I think this is the minimum the casino has to do, there was a deposit here and winnings from the deposit, why not paying it ? take all the winnings drived from the bonus back.

I am not happy with it but I can accept it considering the fact Bryan is not supporting our claim.

Bryan told me the casino does not want any business with me.

Well, they were more than happy to have business with me in Royaldice.

I lost $600 making the same signup bonus and they were glad to take the deposits there, they never returned them.