Highnoon bonus issue

[vinylweatherman]

It's fairly easy to have several email addresses, but not so easy to have several land lines. Cell phones are a little more flexible, so one possible alternative is to use an obsolete cell with a cheap pay as you go SIM purely for casinos, and switch it off when you don't want to be disturbed by trivia. It will at least be a genuine number, even if the cell is switched off most of the time. It will get around the dilemma of providing your main contact number and hoping that it won't be let loose in the wild, forcing you to change it, or providing a fake and fearing that the casino might use this against you.

In the early days of my gambling, I signed up at some less than reputable outfits. I also had the benefit of TWO land lines, one being the compulsory phone part of the internet and TV service, the other being my main contact. I gave out the "spare" to most casinos, but was soon inundated with spammy phonecalls. In the end, I had to disconnect the "spare" landline due to it ringing at all hours. Now I stick to the reputable casinos, and they get my main land line. I still get spammy calls on it, but not to the extent that I got them on the other line. Of course, EVERYONE who has had my number denies it is they who has let it leak into the wild, but SOMEBODY has, and the fact that two lines have significantly different levels of spammy calls shows that this is more than coincidence.

 

[quber]

The Casinos know that people put in false phone details if it is obligatory but they still ask for it as they will get some valid ones. I never put in my mobile number, always 123456 or whatever their format needs, and never had an issue. A few times i have received an email asking me to call them which i am happy to do.

It is total BS to void any winnings or anything else over this. A lot of people only have work phones and they wouldn't be happy giving this out and if it is a work phone it is registered to the company so can in no way be used to ID a player.

 

[buttkiss56]

wow

WOW is all I can say after reading most of this long post.. I don't have a cell and always just put in my home phone number in cell spot. think I will stay away from this group of casino for a bit, I did play there for years.

 

[vinylweatherman]

The Casinos know that people put in false phone details if it is obligatory but they still ask for it as they will get some valid ones. I never put in my mobile number, always 123456 or whatever their format needs, and never had an issue. A few times i have received an email asking me to call them which i am happy to do.

It is total BS to void any winnings or anything else over this. A lot of people only have work phones and they wouldn't be happy giving this out and if it is a work phone it is registered to the company so can in no way be used to ID a player.

This case has shown that doing so IS a "big deal" for casinos, and the reason most players haven't run into problems doing it is because the casino hasn't used the number as one of it's basic security checks.

This thread

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/unwanted-phone-calls-what-to-do.63926/?t=63926

demonstrates WHY players are so reluctant to give casinos their number.

Just imagine if a WORK number was given to a casino and got attacked like this as a result - it could cost a player their job!


Since this is no longer a viable option for players seeking to protect their main number from scams and spam, the best suggestion (other than to just not register at a casino that marks it a compulsory field) is to get a second number that, if compromised, can just be ditched. For the UK, a cell (mobile) coupled with one of those "free SIM" offers one sees online from the carriers, will give a number with up to a 6 month lifespan for free (incoming calls only). A fiver credit can be used to further extend the lifespan by keeping the number active by placing one chargeable outbound call every 3 months or so, depending on the carrier's definition of "inactive" for a SIM.

All that matters is that when "security" at the casino dials the number, it's a valid one, even if there is no answer at the time.

 

[Casinomeister]

...It is total BS to void any winnings or anything else over this. A lot of people only have work phones and they wouldn't be happy giving this out and if it is a work phone it is registered to the company so can in no way be used to ID a player.

Yeah but, this doesn't apply to this particular case. It's not a case where someone simply screwed up - typed in a bogus number just to breeze by the sign up process, and then hoped to make amends later. This is a situation where a player deliberately submitted false information, which broke the terms and conditions, and the casino ended up with an upper hand.

This is not a case of a casino looking for an excuse not to pay a player - and this is what a number of people are making this out to be. This is a casino exercising its right to cease doing business with an individual. As a business owner myself, I am adamant that all businesses have that right. So the ball was in the casino's court, and they chose to terminate the game. They decided not to continue a relationship with this player for reasons known to the player and the casino itself.

 

[dusky]

Yeah but, this doesn't apply to this particular case. It's not a case where someone simply screwed up - typed in a bogus number just to breeze by the sign up process, and then hoped to make amends later.

Isn't that exactly what they did Bryan?

He entered the correct area code and then filled the rest in with a bogus number 12345678 to bypass where it says "Cell" because they didn't have one?

** Edit as I've just found the number they entered 6131234567, so their area code and 1234567.

I don't think this particular case is going to go anywhere but I still maintain that the casino's downright stubbornness (as is their right) has cost them much more than the $300 it would have cost to just pay the player.

 

[maxd]

Some of you may recall that I had made certain accusations against skiny and shaky earlier in the thread (link). I had said I'd divulge the details of those accusations here.

As it happens plans have changed and I have retracted the accusations so those details will not be presented at this time. Apologies for any inconvenience, there was no intention to mislead.

Before anyone decides to pillory me for damage to the formerly-accused's reputations please reflect for a moment who we're talking about here. skiny at least is a seasoned forum pit fighter and he can shrug this off in a heartbeat. I expect his council will provide shaky with whatever comfort he may need for the (temporary) damages I've caused.

 

[mimi26]

Max any news on 32red PAB, the thread has been locked so cant ask there, so I apologise in advance for asking here

 

[maxd]

Max any news on 32red PAB, the thread has been locked so cant ask there, so I apologise in advance for asking here

Coming soon, final discussions ongoing.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Yeah but, this doesn't apply to this particular case. It's not a case where someone simply screwed up - typed in a bogus number just to breeze by the sign up process, and then hoped to make amends later. This is a situation where a player deliberately submitted false information, which broke the terms and conditions, and the casino ended up with an upper hand.

This is not a case of a casino looking for an excuse not to pay a player - and this is what a number of people are making this out to be. This is a casino exercising its right to cease doing business with an individual. As a business owner myself, I am adamant that all businesses have that right. So the ball was in the casino's court, and they chose to terminate the game. They decided not to continue a relationship with this player for reasons known to the player and the casino itself.

Surely there is no difference. Typing in a bogus number to breeze through the form IS "deliberately submitting false information". Many members have admitted to doing this thinking it wouldn't be an issue. The rest is all down to how well each side can argue it's case. There is no way a casino can tell whether a false cell number was deliberately submitted in order to bypass a form, or as part of a greater deception. Their argument is basically "we can, so we have on this occasion", and it's an argument that could be used equally for any player who tries to keep their cell number from getting loose in the wild by inserting a false number.

The only reason it backfired in this case is that Club World use a phonecall as part of their routine verification procedure, so there is a 100% chance of a false number getting found out. Any player who has entered an unreachable number will get caught out by the same routine procedure at Club World, or at any other casino that uses a phonecall as part of the verification.

There was no claim from the casino that this player wasn't legit once they had the correct number, and were able to complete verification, which would be the same for any player who had bypassed the form with a fake number.

Making an accusation, then retracting it, has only served to muddy the waters further. It implies that Max found he was wrong, and has exonerated the OP of what he thought they were guilty of, or had insufficient evidence with which to back the claims.

The only accusation that has been made is that the OP has more experience with RTG than he initially claimed, however there is nothing to prove that the player knew that the previous 2 goes happened to also be at related sites to High Noon.

 

[cpdnd31]

Can we just look past the number issue for a moment. has anyone asked this casino about changing this forms wording? This is a concern to me. This is an accredited casino it should be held to high standards. Regardless of if he did it on purpose and blah blah blah this form still needs to change before the next victim.

Only reason I can think of for them to keep this forms wording is they are marketing or selling list. If this is the case they need a cell phone entry. I would be very disappointed to find out they were doing this.

 

[maxd]

Making an accusation, then retracting it, has only served to muddy the waters further. It implies that Max found he was wrong, and has exonerated the OP of what he thought they were guilty of, or had insufficient evidence with which to back the claims.

Respectfully suggest you go easy on the assumptions VWM. You've offered a couple possible explainations, I assure there are others. Suffice it to say that I thought better of it under the circumstances.

Can we just look past the number issue for a moment. has anyone asked this casino about changing this forms wording? This is a concern to me. This is an accredited casino it should be held to high standards. Regardless of if he did it on purpose and blah blah blah this form still needs to change before the next victim.

Only reason I can think of for them to keep this forms wording is they are marketing or selling list. If this is the case they need a cell phone entry. I would be very disappointed to find out they were doing this.

As I understand it this, or part of it at least, is an RTG issue. That doesn't change the value of your basic point but it does suggest that in may not simply be a casino-driven decision to make said changes.

 

[chayton]

I agree that the form needs to be changed, but if it's something that needs to be changed in the software then it might take a little time.

I've signed up at a casinos before where on account creation all they ask is a name and email address (possibly a phone number too, I don't remember) THEN you log in and add your address and other info like alternate phone numbers etc. It's in the realm of possibility that a new player might see that they only have a place to enter a cell number and might assume that once they've created the account there will be a place to add additional numbers. I'm talking about players who may never have played at RTG before.

The other thing that's bugging me about this is that the software replicates the data from that ONE number and populates 2 other phone number fields that aren't even accessible to the player when they sign up. So when casino security is running their checks, they don't see a fake cell number, a blank home number and a blank work number - they see THREE fake numbers, assumes the player entered them to defraud the casino and flags the account.

 

[Googobucs]

As I understand it this, or part of it at least, is an RTG issue. That doesn't change the value of your basic point but it does suggest that in may not simply be a casino-driven decision to make said changes.

I just went to iNetBet to create an account and this is their sign up screen so clearly this is NOT driven by RTG but is customizable by the casino.
IMO CW should be held accountable for fixing this account registration process to be more player friendly. There is simply no excuse at this point to allow a known issue to continue to fester.

as I mentioned previously I'm sure this is not the first time this has happened, nor will it be the last if they don't fix it.

 

[maxd]

... so clearly this is NOT driven by RTG but is customizable by the casino.

No, what that proves is that a casino can have a customized form which, of course, is a worthy and valid point. However, it says nothing about how or who does the customizations.

 

[skiny]

Yeah but, this doesn't apply to this particular case. It's not a case where someone simply screwed up - typed in a bogus number just to breeze by the sign up process, and then hoped to make amends later. This is a situation where a player deliberately submitted false information, which broke the terms and conditions, and the casino ended up with an upper hand.

This is not a case of a casino looking for an excuse not to pay a player - and this is what a number of people are making this out to be. This is a casino exercising its right to cease doing business with an individual. As a business owner myself, I am adamant that all businesses have that right. So the ball was in the casino's court, and they chose to terminate the game. They decided not to continue a relationship with this player for reasons known to the player and the casino itself.

You can't really be serious.

Those two are exactly the same thing regardless of the intention. Typing in a bogus number for ANY reason is deliberately submitting false information.

Now I'm trying to figure out if you're saying he didn't mean to make amends later or if he did he wouldn't have broken any terms or conditions.

I keep reading that first paragraph over and over and I can't even believe you typed it.

From what I'm gathering from your posts you seem to believe that the OP had some sort of hidden agenda when he took this free chip and then created an account using all of his real information except for a cell phone number in which he entered his real area code followed by 1 through 7 consecutively typed and then filled out a FaxBack form with all his real information including his real home phone number followed by pictures of his driver's license and credit card all in some failed attempt to fool the casino yet still somehow giving him the upper hand.

I've yet to figure out in 32 pages of posts how not wanting a casino to have your cell phone number helps you in any way when you take a bonus chip other than not getting flooded with bullshit text messages at 4 am.

All of these posts that insinuate that there was any kind of conspiracy or hidden agenda have absolutely no basis except that he entered an OBVIOUSLY fake phone number. I sure as hell hope that was step one of his master plan because if there is no step two it's a pretty useless way to gain an advantage over anyone except telemarketers.

You are absolutely correct. The casino had two choices. Either except the fact that some people really aren't willing to give out their cell phone numbers but can still be perfectly acceptable casino members once they submit a home phone number and let the OP correct the minor issue or just refuse to pay.

They CHOSE to refuse to pay.

And I've yet to hear one good reason why this casino thinks it can be such a stickler for terms and conditions when they clearly broke yours (must not confiscate winnings...) yet still refused to pay that player as well.

So which is it? Either they think terms and conditions should be followed explicitly or they don't?

Or is it just whenever it's most convenient for them?

 

[BMWSTACK]

I've yet to figure out in 32 pages of posts how not wanting a casino to have your cell phone number helps you in any way when you take a bonus chip other than not getting flooded with bullshit text messages at 4 am.

All of these posts that insinuate that there was any kind of conspiracy or hidden agenda have absolutely no basis except that he entered an OBVIOUSLY fake phone number.

And I've yet to hear one good reason why this casino thinks it can be such a stickler for terms and conditions when they clearly broke yours (must not confiscate winnings...) yet still refused to pay that player as well.

Texts at 4am. Another spin on why he put in a fake #. I have never received a text nor unrequested phone call from Clubworld, nor any other accredited.

I don't see that many posts about it being a conspiracy, other than you and others ignoring the fact a term was broke.

A Stickler for terms, are you suggesting they should ignore their own terms?

The only thing I cannot figure out is, The OP and yourself do post intelligently, and keep finding angles on this situation, but why want all of this energy and thinking applied when signing up? Why didn't the OP stop at the telephone # part and go ask questions?

 

[skiny]

Texts at 4am. Another spin on why he put in a fake #.

There is no spin. People receive texts from marketers far more often these days than actual voice calls. If you're implying that casinos don't divulge your details to marketers, maybe you can explain the dozen emails I get each day from casinos I've never heard of. You do realize that some people pay for incoming calls on cell phones, right?

I have never received a text nor unrequested phone call from Clubworld, nor any other accredited.

Well, I'm very proud of you.

I don't see that many posts about it being a conspiracy, other than you and others ignoring the fact a term was broke.

I don't make posts about it being a conspiracy. I answer them. Maybe you should go back and start over.

I'll wait here.

A Stickler for terms, are you suggesting they ignore your own terms?

They ignored Bryans.

The only thing I cannot figure out is, The OP and yourself do post intelligently, and keep finding angles on this situation, but why want all of this energy and thinking applied when signing up? Why didn't the OP stop at the telephone # part and go ask questions?

Because he's never had a casino refuse to be helpful before when there was a problem? I guess if you're used to casinos helping you rectify a problem rather than slamming the door in your face you don't think it's a big deal to type 1234567 for a cell phone and then give them your home phone later.

Everyone learns the hard way who they can trust.

 

[Googobucs]

No, what that proves is that a casino can have a customized form which, of course, is a worthy and valid point. However, it says nothing about how or who does the customizations.

Fair point. I overstated the ease with which this may be done and by whom. But is it not worth the effort to even ask them to change the form? It may be a simple in-house maintenance process that requires little effort or it may require a lot of effort.

If they are never asked to at least investigate the possibility of changing the form we'll never know.

 

[maxd]

But is it not worth the effort to even ask them to change the form?

Who has ever said such a thing? I've said that cpdnd31 had a good point re clarification of the form.

If I'm not mistaken CWC has already brought this up (on their own) in our conversations with them, can't remember what was said. So yes, I would think the topic could very likely be discussed in further detail.

 

[Casinomeister]

...

And I've yet to hear one good reason why this casino thinks it can be such a stickler for terms and conditions when they clearly broke yours (must not confiscate winnings...) yet still refused to pay that player as well.

So which is it? Either they think terms and conditions should be followed explicitly or they don't?

Or is it just whenever it's most convenient for them?

The actual term that accredited casinos abide by is this:

Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.

There is nothing vague about what he did - and the term was crystal clear.

My stance - player broke the terms deliberately - terms that were crystal clear, which he read, and that were explicit in what the circumstances are if broken. The casino has a right to decide whether or not this individual should get a free pass. They said absolutely not. You and your brother know why - and dragging all of this into the public fora is not the way to go.

But we get it, you don't agree.

Max retracted his statement not because he was wrong or didn't have his ducks in order, he made a decision to bring peace to the forum. This fight is not worth it - and this thread has become divisive and agenda fueled.

There have been some valid and helpful comments by a number of members here. But this thread is being upgraded to closed since what needs to be said about this has already be stated.