Hi guys,
The casino manager reviewed the case and decided the player was indeed correct and did not violate any of the casino terms; this was only a mistake in the gameplay evaluation of our finance and fraud team.
We appreciate all the feedback and we will keep striving to improve all our services.
We apologize for any inconvenience caused and take full responsibility for this honest mistake.
The player will be paid fully.
Gia
.......is the correct answer.
Unfortunately, subsequent posts demonstrate that the damage has already been done, and now discussion is centered on the belief that this surely can't just be a "mistake", but a completely wrong line of thinking in determining whether players should have winnings confiscated.
In addition, the player has ALREADY gone to a mediator, and it was only when this failed that they came here, so why was this mistake not spotted at the first appeal.
This only goes to prove that the current appeals process is flawed, as it took far too much effort for the player to get a fair decision. One internal appeal failed, and then the first third party mediation attempt failed.
From the gameplay description alone, there doesn't even seem to be a case for review, so the question remains as to why play that was so obviously within the terms was ever sent up for said review in the first place.
It does seem that an early decision was taken that they didn't want to pay this player, and the review was more to do with coming up with a valid reason for confiscation. This meant that the review process was unfair, as the result was either predetermined, or the process was undertaken with an initial bias towards not paying.
To be honest, I would have been prepared to play a bonus just like this, and have done in the past without it causing any problems. I just choose different slots, but ALWAYS slots when it is a sign-up bonus, even if games such as Blackjack are allowed. This is because playing Blackjack and similar games with a welcome bonus gives the casino the wrong initial impression, a bit like turning up to a job interview in jeans and trainers would.
The other side of the coin is that the CASINO can give a bad initial impression by acting with haste, and this is what has happened here. Many slots players, the ones casinos make most of their money from, will be put off from trying any casino that has even the slightest history of confiscating winnings from slots only play. Many slots players are "recreational", and any argument about whether you can mathematically manipulate slots play to make it +EV is over their heads, and likely to be seen as "bullshit excuses" in order to avoid paying winners, even if there is mathematical evidence that a particular method of play IS +EV, which has been argued to be true in this case, but ONLY where an "infinite" number of identical opportunities are presented to such a player, and GoWild are in full control of all opportunities granted to such a player beyond the first (i.e., no more bonuses).
