Hydr0 VS Intercasino

[maxd]

FTR the PAB was not about the Cancel button, it was about the goings-on between the OP and the casino in the aftermath of the Cancel button incident. That's what I looked into and it was based on that investigation that the PAB decision was given.

As to the Cancel button itself I don't have a lot to say because that's not what I was looking into. As I understand it the casino has agreed to look into the issue and has received some recommendations from the OP and others as to how the thing might be changed and improved. From what I've heard and seen they are perfectly open to hearing from players on this subject. But it is important to make a distinction between the Cancel button itself and the OP's PAB: the former may well need some looking into and there's no reason why it shouldn't be, the latter has been looked into and we all know the end result of that.

 

[bpb]

How was the PAB not about the cancel button? The whole issue started when the cancel "feature" caused the OPs winnings to go poof, and intercasino refused to undo the effects of the cancel "feature".

Feel free to replace "feature" with "horrible design flaw".

I'd personally replace "feature" with "deliberate design decision intended to increase casino revenue".

 

[chuchu59]

How was the PAB not about the cancel button? The whole issue started when the cancel "feature" caused the OPs winnings to go poof, and intercasino refused to undo the effects of the cancel "feature".

Feel free to replace "feature" with "horrible design flaw".

I'd personally replace "feature" with "deliberate design decision intended to increase casino revenue".

I am also bewildered as all along the gist of the matter was the 'cancel' button unless Hydro didn't mention it in his PAB.

 

[maxd]

I am also bewildered as all along the gist of the matter was the 'cancel' button ....

We've been over this before. I've said time and again that as far as I was concerned -- insofar as the PAB goes -- the issue of the Cancel button ended when the OP settled with the casino and said "I am content ...". Two parties had a dispute and came to an agreement. The OP even said -- and again I am repeating myself -- "I screwed up" re the button. Now regardless of what I think of the button or anything related to it the settlement between them is where this particular Cancel button issue ended.

As it happened the OP went back to the casino -- AGAIN, all of this has been said previously -- and basically tried to coerce them into giving him more. That coercion factors VERY large in my estimation because it is strictly forbidden for CM members to do this. At that point the OP has lost most of his right to claim anything from the casino, IMO. But, as previously stated, he had bartered that right away when he settled with them to begin with.

Let me put it this way: if OP's case had simply been "OMG! The Cancel button at this casino is evil and caused me to lose my money", full stop and no other stuff had gone on between them, THEN the PAB would have been about the Cancel button. But there was "other stuff", lots of it, including abuse of CM forum membership to coerce a casino. How is this not clear? Should I ignore all of the OP's shit and go after the casino? IMO no, I should not, because the OP himself made an agreement with them wherein he said in black and white that they'd come to a mutually satisfactory resolution. He wants to change his mind? Tough! Don't say "I'm happy" and take the cash then. Once you do, you're done! Duh!

If someone's property causes me to have an accident -- let's say their I stumble over a garden hose that they always leave laying about -- and I go to them and complain then at that moment I have an as yet unsettled issue. If I then agree to take $100 for my troubles and say "thank you, we're good now" then AFAIC the issue is settled. Basically the parties have settled out of court, so to speak, and it's a closed case.

If I later go back to them and say "nope, I want more, and if you don't give it to me I'm going to tell everyone what an SOB you are. Yes I will, I'll tell them! Do you hear: I'LL TELL EVERYONE YOU SUCK!" etc, etc, then the issue is no longer about the fricking garden hose. Notice I'm not even talking about the garden hose any more, all I'm talking about is getting more dosh from the garden hose guy. So the real issue now is about me being an extortionist and that's what needs to be dealt with.

And the garden hose? No doubt the garden hose guy is a putz and needs to deal with his crap laying around and screwing up other people's lives. Someone should take him to task for it. But I've lost the right to be that person because of what I've done and how I've done it. Tough titty for me, maybe I shouldn't default to manipulation and coercion next time.

Maybe you don't like my example, fine, but I'm sure you get my point. Don't like it? Talk to my boss, but stop pretending that the OP here hasn't seriously bungled his beef with the casino and basically lost the right to be taken seriously regarding that beef.

 

[skiny]

I have to agree with Max on this one. The cancel button is stupid but once you accept a settlement you have to abide by it. You're agreeing to the terms of a solution. Changing your mind later doesn't work anywhere else. Why would it here?

 

[BMWSTACK]

Yes agree that the PAB ended up not being about the cancel button because of the fact that he accepted a settlement. Seemed like a pretty quick PAB. Of course if OP didn't accept a settlement the main point of the problem would have been about cancel button.

It looks like the casino says they will look into the situation If they don't come up with a fix soon the members that play there should stay on top of them or maybe even max could do PAB on behalf of the meister community.

I am assuming that the simple solution would be to make cancel button disappear when you have an a pending balance, and have it reappear when balance is 0? I had heard some saying something about a warning, but it seems from the descriptions of this button there is no reason anybody would press cancel when a balance is active, so forget the warning get rid of the button. That cant be too hard to program.

 

[bpb]

I get mugged, and the mugger says "I'll give you half of what's in your wallet if you promise not to go to the cops". I accept. Then I go to the cops.

Are the cops going to tell me I can't file a report because I settled with the mugger?

Yeah, I know most of you think this isn't a good analogy. I think it's nearly perfect though.

 

[mrmark21]

I wont play at Intercasino due to their twenty four seven unhelpful customer support. Right now I'm counting my lucky stars it wasnt me that accidentally clicked the cancell button. I just feel sorry for the op.

 

[Hydr0]

Yes agree that the PAB ended up not being about the cancel button because of the fact that he accepted a settlement. Seemed like a pretty quick PAB. Of course if OP didn't accept a settlement the main point of the problem would have been about cancel button.

It looks like the casino says they will look into the situation If they don't come up with a fix soon the members that play there should stay on top of them or maybe even max could do PAB on behalf of the meister community.

I am assuming that the simple solution would be to make cancel button disappear when you have an a pending balance, and have it reappear when balance is 0? I had heard some saying something about a warning, but it seems from the descriptions of this button there is no reason anybody would press cancel when a balance is active, so forget the warning get rid of the button. That cant be too hard to program.

Max of course is right. It was all over for me once I accepted and played the bonus. Saying thank you at the end of the day isn't that important. The fact is that I played it, and that implies I was ok with it. Had I played the bonus, and came back after losing, advising the casino I wasn't happy about it, well that would be too little too late.

I actually told the VIP manager over the phone prior to accepting the bonus that I wasn't happy about having to complete a new set of wagering requirements, but at the same time I appreciated his efforts, as the casino's good will gesture was above and beyond what they would normally offer a player in my circumstances.

I accepted the bonus in the knowledge that it was the best the casino was willing to offer me, and that if I didn't accept it, I may regret it later. Basically I was relieved to at least have my bonus winnings returned, and to at least have an opportunity to win a nice amount again. Yeah, ok, I didn't like the new wagering requirement, and I expressed that I would much rather have the option to complete my remaining wagering requirement. That wasn't an option however. All said and done, I accepted and played the bonus, and that implied a resolution.

If I had been more experienced, I would have considered a PAB before accepting an offer from the casino that I wasn't ok with on the whole. Truth is, I thought it wouldn't have made any difference in lieu of the fact that the promo term supports void winnings once the cancel button is clicked. Again, lack of experience on my part.

Going back later and pressuring the casino for another resolution was unequivocally wrong of me, I admit that. I was obviously desperate, and pissed at myself for accepting the bonus in the first place, pissed at the crappy outcome after playing the bonus, and pissed at the casino for taking a hard line to begin with. I was so hell bent on trying to get my winnings back in the end, that my principles and integrity flew out the window to some extent. Yep, I was a dick ;-)

So, the thing started as a cancel button issue, and me trying hard to have my bonus winnings and wagering requirement reinstated. When that failed, I accepted the casinos final good will gesture in the form of another bonus, thanked them in live chat, played it, lost, and then I derailed. It turned into me doing anything I could in the hope of achieving another better resolution, even if that meant stepping on the casinos toes - which I did.

The good news is, I will never repeat the mistakes I made in this case again. I've genuinely learnt my lesson. The entire experience has actually been a blessing in disguise, and a real eye opener. It has made me take a good look at myself as well, and made me realise that I'm not always reasonable, and I can be self serving in challenging times, when I feel I'm at the rough end of the stick, so to speak.

I really made a mountain out of a mole hill in terms of my approach to resolution, when the casino met my initial request with resistance. I agree, the whole thing may well have had a happy ending for me had I playing my cards much better, and taken a more well informed and civil approach, when things went south for me.

At the end of the day, I'm very glad the cancel button issue is out there now, and that many forum members know what to expect. Intercasino are well aware of my concerns regarding the cancel button, and whilst the significance of the dangers surrounding it took a backseat somewhat as I tried to achieve another outcome for myself, I trust that in time the casino will update their bonus system making it much safer for players.

I'm also glad that forum members are aware of the importance of seeking the appropriate course of action, PAB for eg, should a similar situation ever arise at Intercasino, or any other casino with a similar bonus setup (I'm not aware of any at this time).

I've moved passed this experience, and I'm better for it.

Best wishes,
Hydr0

 

[Nifty29]

I get mugged, and the mugger says "I'll give you half of what's in your wallet if you promise not to go to the cops". I accept. Then I go to the cops.

Are the cops going to tell me I can't file a report because I settled with the mugger?

Yeah, I know most of you think this isn't a good analogy. I think it's nearly perfect though.

Perhaps the most ridiculous analogy I've ever heard.

Actually, not "perhaps".

 

[maxd]

… It was all over for me once I accepted and played the bonus. Saying thank you at the end of the day isn't that important. The fact is that I played it, and that implies I was ok with it.…

And that folks is worthy of some serious respect.

@ Hydr0, thank you. You've just shown me that what I do here isn't nearly the waste of time I sometimes worry it is.

@ bpb : please read Hydr0's latest post carefully. Therein you will find a crystal clear example of what happens when one looks at what really happened and learns from it VS being blinded by one's (unreletingly antagonistic) preconceptions and learning nothing at all. The former is worthy of kudos and respect, that latter will get you thrown to the curb.

 

[Cleveland]

I get mugged, and the mugger says "I'll give you half of what's in your wallet if you promise not to go to the cops". I accept. Then I go to the cops.

Are the cops going to tell me I can't file a report because I settled with the mugger?

Yeah, I know most of you think this isn't a good analogy. I think it's nearly perfect though.

The correct version if there even is one for that analogy would be:

Subject gets mugged. Mugger leaves the location.
Subject contacts mugger at mugger's residence.
Mugger decides to give some of the money back. Subject thanks mugger.

..........some time later

Subject calls police and tells police the story.
Police tell the subject it is now a civil matter because you entered a mutual agreement with the mugger. ***this has happened by the way, not a mugger, but a thieve***


Hydr0 already posted (# 84), and I think that was pretty much /thread. This post wasn't meant as a knock or pouring salt on wounds sort of thing, I only wanted to reply to that weird analogy. Thank you to Hydr0 for being man enough to admit the mistake and move on.

 

[skiny]

I get mugged, and the mugger says "I'll give you half of what's in your wallet if you promise not to go to the cops". I accept. Then I go to the cops.

Are the cops going to tell me I can't file a report because I settled with the mugger?

Yeah, I know most of you think this isn't a good analogy. I think it's nearly perfect though.

Of course the problem with this analogy is that nobody got mugged.

Now if you were walking down the street and saw a button that said "mug" and pressed it thinking maybe you'd get one full of beer and found out after pressing it that you were agreeing to get mugged you could go back later and claim ignorance. If the mugger said "Ok, I understand you didn't know what the "mug" button was for. I'll give you back half of what was in your wallet" and you accepted his offer, now you have made an agreement with the mugger that you must abide by and you have learned not to press buttons that say "mug."

And if you're looking for similarities in the future to define and compare events and you happen to come across an "analogy" button that appears to have the "ogy" worn off, you might want to be careful with that one too. It could too be a trick.

 

[Nifty29]

Hats off to you Hydr0.

It takes a lot of intestinal fortitude to swallow one's pride and admit fault and apologize.

I've had to do it on occasion, and although it can sting initially, it's well worth it in the long run.

Kudos

 

[TonyH]

Hi All

Just to let you know that we have now added a text pop-up that appears when a player initially opts to 'Cancel' an active bonus.

The pop-up explains that 'any remaining cash locked in the bonus will become available to withdraw and the bonus and any money you have in winnings from the bonus will be forfeited.' A player is then asked to confirm or cancel their request to cancel the bonus.

Special thanks to Hydr0 for providing the original feedback that led to this amendment.

As always, I encourage all members to PM me with their thoughts and views on how we can continuously improve our player experience and look forward to hearing from you.

Kindest regards

Tony Hayes
Casino Manager

InterCasino

 

[Cleveland]

Hi All

Just to let you know that we have now added a text pop-up that appears when a player initially opts to 'Cancel' an active bonus.

Well that was a quick and wise decision.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi All

Just to let you know that we have now added a text pop-up that appears when a player initially opts to 'Cancel' an active bonus.

The pop-up explains that 'any remaining cash locked in the bonus will become available to withdraw and the bonus and any money you have in winnings from the bonus will be forfeited.' A player is then asked to confirm or cancel their request to cancel the bonus.

Special thanks to Hydr0 for providing the original feedback that led to this amendment.

As always, I encourage all members to PM me with their thoughts and views on how we can continuously improve our player experience and look forward to hearing from you.

Kindest regards

Tony Hayes
Casino Manager

InterCasino

I would like to know why there was such resistance at the start of this issue to simply stepping back the erroneous transaction for the player. Instead, the casino sought to gain advantage from an innocent slip up itself the result of problems with the pop up not responding to the regular means of closing a browser window.

The right thing to do would have been to set the player right, and then look at ways to improve how this feature operates such that a single miss click could not have such devastating and irreversible results.

The intransigent attitude from the outset is what drove the OP into making a fool of himself over the issue by accepting a poor compromise and then trying to back out when things didn't turn out as he had hoped.

Fixing the cancel button issue does not alter the fact that the casino has a poor attitude towards players when there is no need for it, and although this issue should not cause further problems, others may do when players are faced with intransigence from CS, rather than decent customer service.

 

[dunover]

Really guy? You waste your "final" words by showing bigotry using "gay" as a slur? Wow.

In fairness here in the UK 'gay' is a term commonly used (especially by teens) to describe something ridiculous or silly. It's a recent bastardization of the word. (Last 10-15 years). Like you Americans laugh if we 'go for a fag' (cigarette). In fact, gay used to mean, originally 'bright and happy'. The homosexual connotation was a bastardization too. Just thought we should get that straight - no pun intended.

 

[dunover]

Actually hydro and the rest, I think some good has come out of all this:

We CM members will unanimously petition Max/Bryan for instant unconditional accreditation for any casino that brings in a 'CANCEL DEPOSIT/SESSION' button. Deposit 100, get down to 30 pence and bingo! - cancel your deposit and session, resetting your account to zero.

 

[bpb]

I would like to know why there was such resistance at the start of this issue to simply stepping back the erroneous transaction for the player. Instead, the casino sought to gain advantage from an innocent slip up itself the result of problems with the pop up not responding to the regular means of closing a browser window.

Yeah, this is what started this whole mess, and it ended with the OP apologizing and most people praising the casino's handling of everything.

But hey, if your customers let you get away with it ... why not. And if your customers not only let you get away with it, but vigorously defend your actions, then all the more power to the online casinos.

 

[skiny]

Yeah, this is what started this whole mess, and it ended with the OP apologizing and most people praising the casino's handling of everything.

But hey, if your customers let you get away with it ... why not. And if your customers not only let you get away with it, but vigorously defend your actions, then all the more power to the online casinos.

I appreciate that you have a different perspective. It's what keeps these threads interesting. We all agree that the cancel button is what started "the whole mess" but the OP didn't apologize for clicking it. He apologized for losing his temper and acting out of line. That has absolutely nothing to do with any buttons. But since then he has accepted responsibility for his actions and we've all moved on.

The casino has also accepted that the cancel button is detrimental to the player and has agreed to make changes to avoid these situations in the future. From what I can see praise has been given to the casino for that. The only remaining question is why the casino didn't return all the funds in the first place. The answer is probably quite simple. They didn't want to. They low balled an offer instead and the player accepted. They did what they apparently thought was a fair compromise at the time and the offer was accepted. If the OP had taken a different route and came here first the casino might have been convinced that the offer should be better. It just didn't happen that way.

From my perspective, the OP stepped up and apologized and was right for doing so and nobody has praised the casino for not returning the OPs original funds. Maybe we're reading things differently.

 

[Nifty29]

I would like to know why there was such resistance at the start of this issue to simply stepping back the erroneous transaction for the player. Instead, the casino sought to gain advantage from an innocent slip up itself the result of problems with the pop up not responding to the regular means of closing a browser window.

The right thing to do would have been to set the player right, and then look at ways to improve how this feature operates such that a single miss click could not have such devastating and irreversible results.

The intransigent attitude from the outset is what drove the OP into making a fool of himself over the issue by accepting a poor compromise and then trying to back out when things didn't turn out as he had hoped.

Fixing the cancel button issue does not alter the fact that the casino has a poor attitude towards players when there is no need for it, and although this issue should not cause further problems, others may do when players are faced with intransigence from CS, rather than decent customer service.

I don't want to go over old ground here....but you are ignoring an important fact.

The compromise....poor or otherwise....was OFFERED to the player and the player ACCEPTED it.

For all the casino knew at the time, the player may have deliberately used the cancel button. The player may have done so thinking they could remove the bonus and cashout the winnings. Who knows?

The player had the option to refuse the offer and PAB to have their balance etc restored...which in hindsight may well have happened. Its ridiculous to blame CS for the decision taken by the player....they're an adult, and they admitted they did the wrong thing both in accepting the offer and their subsequent behavior.

Of course, you're making assumptions again as to what the "error" is.. if one even exists. It seems the casino has added a popup....nothing more...which suggests to me there is NO script error or whatever at all. Did you actually SEE or replicate the error? No. Did you analyze an error report? No. Hence, you have no idea and you're essentially making stuff up again.

 

[LaHutti]

I'm sorry, but sometimes (quite often actually) your attempts to explain stupid/unfair actions from casinos, are so far fetched, I can hear angels sing......or my ears are just ringing.
The casino knows perfectly well, that the player couldn't do what you're suggesting, so there is NO way this player would give up his winnings deliberately. Are you saying that the player was temporarily insane ? That would be the only explanation why anyone would do a thing like that, and the casino simply got a chance to take the winnings, and went for it.

Yes, the player "accepted" the "offer" (To me it sounds more like a "take it or leave it" scenario, than an offer). He shouldn't have taken the offer, but I can understand why he felt it was the best he could get, based on the casinos, in my opinion, disgraceful mishandling of this incident, from the very beginning. I can name numerous accredited casinos, where you would NEVER see anything like this happening.

Apparently NOW the casino can see there was a problem with the button/the fact that the player was unable to close the window....just not when they should have put the players money back in his account, told him to finish wagering, congratulate him on his winnings, and then have fixed the problem. It seems like it wasn't that hard to fix.

All around BAD handling and BAD customer service imho.

I don't want to go over old ground here....but you are ignoring an important fact.

The compromise....poor or otherwise....was OFFERED to the player and the player ACCEPTED it.

For all the casino knew at the time, the player may have deliberately used the cancel button. The player may have done so thinking they could remove the bonus and cashout the winnings. Who knows?

The player had the option to refuse the offer and PAB to have their balance etc restored...which in hindsight may well have happened. Its ridiculous to blame CS for the decision taken by the player....they're an adult, and they admitted they did the wrong thing both in accepting the offer and their subsequent behavior.

Of course, you're making assumptions again as to what the "error" is.. if one even exists. It seems the casino has added a popup....nothing more...which suggests to me there is NO script error or whatever at all. Did you actually SEE or replicate the error? No. Did you analyze an error report? No. Hence, you have no idea and you're essentially making stuff up again.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I don't want to go over old ground here....but you are ignoring an important fact.

The compromise....poor or otherwise....was OFFERED to the player and the player ACCEPTED it.

For all the casino knew at the time, the player may have deliberately used the cancel button. The player may have done so thinking they could remove the bonus and cashout the winnings. Who knows?

The player had the option to refuse the offer and PAB to have their balance etc restored...which in hindsight may well have happened. Its ridiculous to blame CS for the decision taken by the player....they're an adult, and they admitted they did the wrong thing both in accepting the offer and their subsequent behavior.

Of course, you're making assumptions again as to what the "error" is.. if one even exists. It seems the casino has added a popup....nothing more...which suggests to me there is NO script error or whatever at all. Did you actually SEE or replicate the error? No. Did you analyze an error report? No. Hence, you have no idea and you're essentially making stuff up again.

This was AFTER the casino initially did the wrong thing and tried to take advantage of the situation. Had the casino done the right and honourable thing from the start, as one would expect of an accredited casino, the OP would not have been in a position to accept a poor offer in the first place, and so his poor handling of the situation thereafter would not have been an issue.

Most players do NOT have the patience of a saint, and casinos damn well know this, hence we have such things as 48 hour pending times. Agreed, if the OP was one of the select few who was more stubborn than the casino, and in the right way, he would have held his nerve for however long it took, and the PAB would have been about the cancel button.

The casino knew what it was doing when they persuaded the OP to take lesser offers. They knew that once they had secured an agreement, they had gotten away with taking advantage of the situation as the OP, by accepting, would waive their chances to go for a better offer.

In the end, the OP did nothing worse than the casino, he sought to take advantage of the situation too by seeking a "second bite" when the first one went sour, instead of accepting that he had been foolish and impatient in accepting the offer, and should have had more resolve.

This incident shows in more general terms the attitude of the casino towards it's players in such circumstances. The cancel button is fixed, but there are other situations where players can make minor innocent mistakes, such as getting the entering of a code and making of the qualifying deposit the wrong way round, or not noticing the rejection of a code due to a typo before making the deposit. Rather than helping to unravel the situation, this example leads me to believe that the player will be met with "tough luck" when they ask CS to unravel the problem, although a design change may come out of it for future players.

 

[Nifty29]

Vinyl

I did not say at any stage that Intercasino behaved admirably. IMO they should have reinstated his balance once it was confirmed that it was genuine and possibly a software issue. Nothing should have been offered....they should have said "Leave it with us and we will find out what happened etc". Obviously, this did not happen. In that respect, IC did NOT treat the player well, and the CS were somewhat incompetent at best. In fact, my own experience tells me their CS is a waste if time, and its one of the reasons I no longer play there.

You will notice my remarks in this thread are about a) the OPs behavior...since resolved...and b) the idea that one can have two bites of the apple when it comes to resolving an issue....which they can't. Why some people are whining about me "defending the casino blah blah blah" I have no idea. I simply said that once the offer was made and accepted, then it is game over. It is totally unreasonable to take advantage of a settlement offer I.e. use it and lose it in this case, and then go back demanding more. Even the OP acknowledges that now. I mean, if you took a settlement for $50k from some party you sued, and then found out after the fact you could you have got $1m, you can't go back and say "Oh, um, I've decided I don't like that earlier deal after all....lets make it $1m now OK?"....the other party would be hospitalized from having their sides burst with laughter.

Its also important to note that casinos get THOUSANDS of players trying to slip one past them or stooge them in some way by making up all kinds of crap about software "errors" etc to try and get free cash or recover their losses. Unfortunately, there are genuine ones among them. It sucks, but that's reality, and its why claims are sometimes met with cut and paste answers and just plain disinterest. Good agents don't, but they're tough to find.

The OP isn't just some newb who didn't know squat about online casinos. He had the chance to accept or decline the offer made to him as a resolution to the issue, and he made an informed choice to accept it. As he said, he would have been very happy if the resolution money had yielded a WIN, so he knew he could end up with nothing. He had his eyes wide open. Was he impatient? I'd say yes he was....but who is responsible for his patience level? He is. Suggesting they're responsible because he didn't want to wait and PAB is ridiculous.

Anyway, I just wanted to clarify that IMO the casino could have handled things better. So could the OP. Its done and dusted now, so lets hope both parties learnt something...and it seems they have.