inetbet Nightmare

[Nifty29]

FYI, the OP has filed a PAB on this issue so we should have some insights shortly into what was happening and why.

Please respect the fact that the OP has been asked to refrain from further posts on this subject (here at Casinomeister) until the PAB process has completed.

Out of interest Max, what exactly is a PAB going to achieve?

The OP played their funds back fair and square, so there is nothing left to withdraw. Also, how is Inetbet going to prove that they didn't receive the emails?

I understand if it is all confidential but I just don't see what outcome could be achieved.

 

[maxd]

Good question. To begin I'm primarily I'm interested in hearing their side of it. And yes this does assume that their reply will be honest and forthcoming which I'm well aware that the iNetBet Defamation League will hoot at in derision.

Shrug. In four years of dealing with these folks I have never had reason to doubt their word and until I see evidence to the contrary I expect to proceed accordingly. FWIW they've always dealt straight with me even when I was fighting cases for £1000s on which we vehemently disagreed. Their track record on these issues is far, far better than the grumblers would have people believe.

That said, I know full well that their stand on Customer Service options is pretty hard-line and none too popular. "I'm not arguing that with you" would be particularly applicable here. People might be interested to know that we've had that discussion with them pretty much every year since I joined CM (late 2007) when we sit down with them at ICE in London. They have their reasons and I think they well know the problems involved. We may not embrace their position on this particular issue but they need to be free to make their business decisions as they see fit. To date it's never been a critical issue for us (AFAIK) so ... it is what it is.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Out of interest Max, what exactly is a PAB going to achieve?

The OP played their funds back fair and square, so there is nothing left to withdraw. Also, how is Inetbet going to prove that they didn't receive the emails?

I understand if it is all confidential but I just don't see what outcome could be achieved.

It is more of an evidence gathering PAB, rather than one intended to get the player paid. The thread has reignited the long running complaint that iNetBet's support service is poor for some players, despite being good for others. In order to get to the bottom of it, a "case study" is needed of an individual case where things appeared to go wrong repeatedly. Once the problem has been defined, a solution can be proposed, and blame applied where it is due.

What appears to be happening is not always what is really happening, but without other evidence, appearance is all we have on which to make judgement.

Those who believe iNetBet have deliberately screwed over this player should be delighted that Max has taken this on as it would "expose" iNetBet's wrongdoing. The OP screwed himself over by continuing to play despite feeling that the ONLY outcome was him not seeing any winnings because of this issue.

It is clear that there ARE issues with the support side of the iNetBet operation, as a significant number of players have made complaints that are all related to a breakdown in the email system of communication. Other issues have revealed that some email providers are the cause of the problems, and these are listed on the CM guidance as "do not use" email domains for dealing with PABs and registration to the forum. They should also be considered as "do not use" when contacting a casino.

It is possible to set up a test for your own ISP by creating an email address with a free provider known not to cause problems for casino related emails, and sending a copy of everything you send to the casino to yourself at this other email address. This will be a good test to see that everything you have sent has made it out of your own ISP's domain, and in through another known to work with casino related emails. It can be assumed that the casino's own email service allows casino related content through. This also avoids having to engage a third party who will end up receiving your documents as part of the test.

 

[maxd]

Good point! Some email providers are shite (when it comes to casino-related topics) regardless of how convenient they may seem and no matter how many people jump up and down and swear by them. They're crap for our particular business, have been for the better part of a decade, and that's why we won't accept them as email addresses for PABs. Hotmail/Yahoo/AOL leap immediately to mind, and that could well have been the source of trouble in this particular case.

 

[Glunn11]

I'd just like to comment on my own personal experience with iNetBet support. I've never had any problems with any sort of hostility; the support has always been courteous and every message has been directed at my particular inquiry. The whole waiting game sucks, though.

I had an issue arise when I requested my last withdrawal from them a few months ago. It was my first wire and they wanted a fresh set of docs. Understandable; my previous ones were outdated, and I had never used this withdrawal method before. Three days after submitting the withdrawal request, I had heard nothing from them, so I sent them an email asking what was up. They told me that they had sent "repeated requests" for documentation, none of which I had received.

So I spoke with Emily who told me that they were having issues with some Web-based email providers and suggested that I provide another kind of email address. So, I provided her with the one I got from my ISP, sent in the docs, and smooth sailing from there.

My only complaint was that I wish the back-and-forth emailing could simply be done more efficiently; I continue to only be able to enter into correspondence once a day.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Good point! Some email providers are shite (when it comes to casino-related topics) regardless of how convenient they may seem and no matter how many people jump up and down and swear by them. They're crap for our particular business, have been for the better part of a decade, and that's why we won't accept them as email addresses for PABs. Hotmail/Yahoo/AOL leap immediately to mind, and that could well have been the source of trouble in this particular case.

The other problem is that blocking is intermittent, and done without any logical process. One could add to my test by replying from your set up "third party email address" back to yourself to simulate a casino replying to your email. This will test whether replies get back to you from emails that get through. When some players have stated they have been ignored, the iNetBet rep has said that a reply did go out from their end, showing that it was a "one way block", rather than a complete one.

Many players end up getting tied to the email domain provided by their ISP, and expect it to work because they have PAID for it. ISPs may also provide "third party" run email, and this may not be obvious. If they partner with one of the "crap" ones such as Hotmail, you can find that a paid for ISP provided email service is just as bad as a "free" one.

A last resort is to buy your own domain, and use it to run your email. My "vinylweatherman" domain can be used to run email independent from my ISP. Although I don't use this function at the moment, I realise how useful it can be as it severs the main tie that binds me to my ISP, the non portabilty of my email address. Whatever I do now, I face the prospect of registering a change of email address with a long list of companies, and then checking that it has been done before I can close down my current email address and change to a different ISP. If I change my casino related emails over to my domain, and keep up the modest payments, I will be better placed to ditch any new ISP should they underperform. I could even buy a new domain for the purpose, and have a non gambling related website on it.


For me, the operator that gives me most grief over email reliabilty is Jackpot Factory, not iNetBet.

 

[maxd]

The other problem is that blocking is intermittent, and done without any logical process.

Absolutely! Years ago and in a previous position I had a chance to talk to a Yahoo guy at a conference in Vegas (this was the relatively early days of the business, as you might imagine). We asked him about the strange problems we were seeing with casino related correspondence going through Yahoo email, said it seemed pretty "on again, off again" and was their any explanation for that. His reply was to hold up his hands as say "I can't say anything. But you would not be mistaken if you decided to look elsewhere for that kind of service." My conclusion is that (a) they don't want to make it official policy so (b) they make it difficult enough to discourage us from using it but not so difficult as to seriously inconvenience their established customer base. YMMV.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Absolutely! Years ago and in a previous position I had a chance to talk to a Yahoo guy at a conference in Vegas (this was the relatively early days of the business, as you might imagine). We asked him about the strange problems we were seeing with casino related correspondence going through Yahoo email, said it seemed pretty "on again, off again" and was their any explanation for that. His reply was to hold up his hands as say "I can't say anything. But you would not be mistaken if you decided to look elsewhere for that kind of service." My conclusion is that (a) they don't want to make it official policy so (b) they make it difficult enough to discourage us from using it but not so difficult as to seriously inconvenience their established customer base. YMMV.

It is also a shaky legal position. They are censoring customers' private correspondence without telling them. In effect, they are applying US law to the whole world. This may not have been much of a concern in the early days, but with countries like the UK recognising the legality of the business, Yahoo could find themselves in the dock at the European court, something Microsoft suffered over it's actions in trying to freeze out "other browsers" from it's Windows operating system. It is because of this that users now find this "browser choice" stage appears when installing a Windows OS, even though Internet Explorer remains bundled with the OS.

In a similar position, Yahoo would have to prove that they were NOT deliberately interfering with the communications between legitimate businesses and their clients, and the above clearly shows that they ARE doing something, and want it kept secret from their customers. It seems likely that the other "troublesome" email providers are doing the same "off the record" blocking experiments as Yahoo.

The problem is gathering evidence to prove that the blocking is ocurring within the Yahoo systems, and is not reflected in any policy statement or terms of use agreed to by the customer. In law, a "free" service is not exempt just because it doesn't charge, although any refunds to the customer will be nil, an action for damages could still produce a compensation payment order from a court.

All Yahoo would have to do is make the blocking user configurable, so that customers can choose to allow casino emails through. Yahoo can only argue that their blocking is legitimate when it is done to US based customers, as they can argue that they are merely preventing their services from being used by "organised crime". It's not much different from when the DoJ seizes .com domains and shuts down an operator world wide as well as within the US. It has already lead to formal complaints by some operators to bodies that oversee international trade such as the WMO. One small country has threatened that it will retaliate (against UIGEA) by refusing to police US copyright laws on domains it oversees. This has lead to some very big interests becoming concerned that the threat could be followed through, and the pirates will descend upon these uncontrolled domains and set up their servers there out of the reach of US law enforcement. Content piracy is illegal in more places than online gambling, yet has NOT been shut down by the US (or anyone else) despite all their efforts, including seizing domains and equipment. Similarly, Wikileaks has not been silenced even by a coordinated international effort to shut it up.

 

[Nifty29]

FWIW I had an issue with my emails not reaching iNetbet earlier this year when I moved house.

My new ISP (second largest in this country) was blocking them for some reason. I was forced to use another email from anothe provider which worked fine. I knew they weren't getting my emails because 24 hours had passed with no reply - and that has NEVER happened to me with iNetbet in 10 years....this is where one has to use some common sense..if you aren't getting a reply from a place that always responds quickly, then you need to try other means e.g. another email like I did. Why anyone would keep emailing and forever not receiving a reply is beyond me really. Why not contact Emily via CM? Or ask in the forums if anyone else is having trouble...at least then the iNetbet rep would have probably seen it and contacted you and we wouldn't be here would we?

If I were iNetbet, I would have a toll-free number specifically for technical issues or verification issues. It could be made very clear on the website that no issues regarding bonuses etc will be discussed via telephone...and if some players don't get the message then they can close the account. Nobody wants the kind of people who think the rules apply to everyone except them anyway. At least this way there is some kind of "emergency" assistance which might prevent these situations from arising.

 

[Przecinek]

I've never had a problem with iNetBet getting my docs in the past. Not once.

it's an issue of your situation being inconsistent with other people's experience of dealing with this casino over the years.

I can understand that there are always exceptions even in best casinos, so that there will always be someone happy and some people dissapointed (maybe apart from 32red ) ... so I decided to dig up my old emails to give you my timescales and show that it's not really all that inconsistent at least when it comes to my exp. with Inetbet.

03/2009 - Registered with casino, didn't play, didn't deposit
11/2010 - Noticed Inetbet now Accredited. Made deposit of $50
12/2010 - First withdrawal request ... (nightmare starts lol)
12/2010 - Winnings and play void due to incorrect cupon use (seen similar cases). To cut story short "This bonus is only available to players who have not played for Real Money at iNetBet in the past 60 days". I didn't but Inetbet support claims I'm not a "player" since I haven't played for real money before. I explain that wordking is very poor, easy to misinterpret etc. Anyway what can you do? Requested to withdraw my original balance.
14/12/2010 - Passport scan sent
25/12/2010 - Faxback form & utility bill sent
08/01/2011 - One of the many followups asking when will I get my deposit back. Reply : you need to send us faxback form
13/01/2011 - More folloups asking if they want me to send docs again, or have they found my email from 25/12/2010. Reply : We asked you for second POA (didn't get that email)
29/01/2011 - Sending old POA from 2009 (when I registered)
09/02/2011 - Sending second current POA (and third POA in total)
12/02/2011 - Still getting "Your withdrawal cannot be processed as requested." My reply : "I've sent you 3 utility bills, faxback form and my ID...what next"?
19/02/2011 - "I asked you a question. That was one week ago." No reply. My account locked so I can't request another withdrawal. No reply to emails
12/03/2011 - Contacted rep here. Sent email "for attention of Emily Hanson" with all the documents, that I have already sent to support (at various stages). Wanted to sent them here via CM but was told not to. No reply.
24/03/2011 - "I'm sending you my second POA for the third time. Can you please confirm receipt?". Finally I get email that "nothing matches on my account" (I'm assuming my details etc)...
25/03/2011 - Eventually I'm told players from Poland are not allowed to play Despite that, I'm told I still have to play in their casino and turn over my deposit at least once.
01/04/2011 - My account unlocked and I withdraw what is left (sorry $35)

How can that be good support? Just felt like telling my side of the story. It's the same when I see bad exp. posted and I feel otherwise. I just want posters to be able to make up their mind. Closing account and acting like "we can just take your deposit" is a big no-no. Never had any problems like that in any other casinos (slow pay yes ... but not being so cheeky, esp. considering I've sent them lots of documents). Even if we start counting from December 2010 it's still 5 months. But more importantly if I haven't been harassing them I'd never see that money. I wonder how many people eventually gave up and left there money in Inetbet accounts.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I can understand that there are always exceptions even in best casinos, so that there will always be someone happy and some people dissapointed (maybe apart from 32red ) ... so I decided to dig up my old emails to give you my timescales and show that it's not really all that inconsistent at least when it comes to my exp. with Inetbet.

03/2009 - Registered with casino, didn't play, didn't deposit
11/2010 - Noticed Inetbet now Accredited. Made deposit of $50
12/2010 - First withdrawal request ... (nightmare starts lol)
12/2010 - Winnings and play void due to incorrect cupon use (seen similar cases). To cut story short "This bonus is only available to players who have not played for Real Money at iNetBet in the past 60 days". I didn't but Inetbet support claims I'm not a "player" since I haven't played for real money before. I explain that wordking is very poor, easy to misinterpret etc. Anyway what can you do? Requested to withdraw my original balance.
14/12/2010 - Passport scan sent
25/12/2010 - Faxback form & utility bill sent
08/01/2011 - One of the many followups asking when will I get my deposit back. Reply : you need to send us faxback form
13/01/2011 - More folloups asking if they want me to send docs again, or have they found my email from 25/12/2010. Reply : We asked you for second POA (didn't get that email)
29/01/2011 - Sending old POA from 2009 (when I registered)
09/02/2011 - Sending second current POA (and third POA in total)
12/02/2011 - Still getting "Your withdrawal cannot be processed as requested." My reply : "I've sent you 3 utility bills, faxback form and my ID...what next"?
19/02/2011 - "I asked you a question. That was one week ago." No reply. My account locked so I can't request another withdrawal. No reply to emails
12/03/2011 - Contacted rep here. Sent email "for attention of Emily Hanson" with all the documents, that I have already sent to support (at various stages). Wanted to sent them here via CM but was told not to. No reply.
24/03/2011 - "I'm sending you my second POA for the third time. Can you please confirm receipt?". Finally I get email that "nothing matches on my account" (I'm assuming my details etc)...
25/03/2011 - Eventually I'm told players from Poland are not allowed to play Despite that, I'm told I still have to play in their casino and turn over my deposit at least once.
01/04/2011 - My account unlocked and I withdraw what is left (sorry $35)

How can that be good support? Just felt like telling my side of the story. It's the same when I see bad exp. posted and I feel otherwise. I just want posters to be able to make up their mind. Closing account and acting like "we can just take your deposit" is a big no-no. Never had any problems like that in any other casinos (slow pay yes ... but not being so cheeky, esp. considering I've sent them lots of documents). Even if we start counting from December 2010 it's still 5 months. But more importantly if I haven't been harassing them I'd never see that money. I wonder how many people eventually gave up and left there money in Inetbet accounts.

Well, this is NOT just down to email problems. You also had some BS from support. There was no problem with you registering, and they would have known you were from Poland right away. This would have been confirmed as soon as you sent the first set of documents, and right away they should have told you that Polish players were not allowed, locked your account, and returned your deposit. Instead, it was a mess, and most striking is that despite saying Polish players could not play, they said you had to play through your deposit 1x.

The non matching details were probably due to the gap between you registering, and your first deposit.

They are also wrong in claiming you broke the terms, as there is nothing that says you must have played at some stage, just that it can't have been within the last 90 days. Given that you had not played, you would have received a bonus in any case had they accepted your deposit, and it would have been a better one.

This would still have been a nightmare had there been no email problems.

It seems iNetBet are far too pedantic, enforcing complex rules "for the sake of it", rather than to protect themselves from "bonus abuse" through players exploiting loopholes. They should be equally pedantic when the rules favour the PLAYER, as in this case where you followed the LETTER of the terms as stated, yet iNetBet tried to interpret a "hidden meaning" beyond what was actually stated, just as "bonus abusers" try to do.

It seems odd that your registration even went through to start with, as the selection of "Poland" as your country should have immediately lead to you becoming locked out from proceeding any further, making it impossible for you to have come back the next year and "violated" the unwritten terms of that coupon.

They should NOT be relying on players having to join CM in order to have a point of contact should there be problems with either the email or front line CS.

It may be only a few customers who suffer these "nightmares", but for a reputable business even ONE customer having such an experience should be considered to be "one too many", and lessons should be learned before another customer suffers from the same issue. It has only taken TWO customers to have a "nightmare" for considerable damage to their reputation to have ocurred through Gambling Grumbles. Their reputation here is more resilient, but there WILL be a stage at which a failure to address the issues begins to dent it.

 

[iNetBet Promos]

Przecinek - I took a quick look at your account and you seem to have failed to mention a few significant points.

Firstly the coupon you claimed on your first deposit was specifically called a "Return Bonus". As you had not played previously you were not eligible to claim this. The rules were not confusing but actually very clear.

More importantly you fail to mention that you signed up using fraudulent/misleading information. As you say you are from Poland - at the time we did not allow sign ups from that country. So you just opened an account using bogus information. You used a completely different country (UK).

VWM - before posting assumptions you might want to wait for a few facts or at least both sides of the story. We expect this kind of reaction from someone with a possible hidden agenda but not yourself. You are correct it does indeed seem odd that their registration went through - however when you know the reason why, things become a bit clearer. Regarding GG I am not sure if anyone checked but the report was pulled.

Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

 

[bb28]

Przecinek - I took a quick look at your account and you seem to have failed to mention a few significant points.

Firstly the coupon you claimed on your first deposit was specifically called a "Return Bonus". As you had not played previously you were not eligible to claim this. The rules were not confusing but actually very clear.

More importantly you fail to mention that you signed up using fraudulent/misleading information. As you say you are from Poland - at the time we did not allow sign ups from that country. So you just opened an account using bogus information. You used a completely different country (UK).

Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

OUCH! Quite a few significant points.

 

[Nifty29]

Przecinek - I took a quick look at your account and you seem to have failed to mention a few significant points.

Firstly the coupon you claimed on your first deposit was specifically called a "Return Bonus". As you had not played previously you were not eligible to claim this. The rules were not confusing but actually very clear.

More importantly you fail to mention that you signed up using fraudulent/misleading information. As you say you are from Poland - at the time we did not allow sign ups from that country. So you just opened an account using bogus information. You used a completely different country (UK).

VWM - before posting assumptions you might want to wait for a few facts or at least both sides of the story. We expect this kind of reaction from someone with a possible hidden agenda but not yourself. You are correct it does indeed seem odd that their registration went through - however when you know the reason why, things become a bit clearer. Regarding GG I am not sure if anyone checked but the report was pulled.

Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

...and this is why you don't take the players word at face value.

Didn't I say something about all dodgy complainants leaving out important facts?

So, this guy claimed a coupon he was not entitled to claim, AND he is a fraudster.

I'm also disappointed that vinyl would let loose without all the facts.

It is also the reason why, unlike Gumball Grumbles, CM does not post "reports" or warning or whatever until both sides have had the opportunity to give their input.

Any comments from the iNetBet Defamation League?

 

[The Dude]

...Gumball Grumbles...

Please don't take pot shots at other websites - especially when Graeme is a member here. Thanks!

 

[Przecinek]

I knew InetBet will try to turn the tables over.

"Attack is the best method of defense"

Nifty as usually the hasty one. Inetbet has the final word? I doubt it.

Today or tommorow at latest I will post all my POA and all other documents (removing surname)
Calling innocent player a fraudster hopefuly will finally be InetbetGate for most people.

I worked for many years in the UK. As a CSA for Orange, as network administrator for Pearsons etc.
I didn't miss those points on purpose. Nifty you too moved at some point ... sorry to see you act this way, opening champagne when I even didn't have time to defend myself. Thank you to those who have as least some remains of respect. Guilty until proven innocent. I dare to say my bad exp. whith Inetbet - I get called a "fraudster" ...so typical for InetBet. Before move I already had accounts with other casinos&sportsbooks, and after move noone apart from InetBet accted this way.

I emailed you that I changed adress however you (Inetbet) didn't reply. Country couldn't be changed - therefore I only changed entire adress. Funny you "forgot" to mention that.

"date 30 November 2010
subject Re: Welcome to iNetBet
mailed-by googlemail.com

hide details 30/11/2010

Hi,

I wanted to make a deposit, but my current adress is in Poland (and in
Cashier I have "UK" as my country).

Username: przecinek

Regards,
Mateusz"

and same mail to manager:

to [email protected]
date 30 November 2010 19:07

Guess what happened? Yes you're right - no reply. Whos fraudster now?

As to coupon being perfectly clear ...again let public decide.

"This bonus is only available to existing players who have not played for Real Money at iNetBet in the past 60 days. Deposit and Bonus must be wagered 15x before cashing out. Game restrictions apply as above. Full wagering requirements must be met prior to cash out. If coupon is applied to larger deposits coupon will become void."

You don't have to rely on one sided Inetbets stories. Fell free to PM me. I can give you my phone number so you can contact this "fraudster"... this is beyond
understanding ... tmr I release everything I got.

P.S Got lockjaw after reading Inetbet's representative post... will go and drink some melissa and then come back, so that emotions won't obscure the fact...

 

[The Dude]

I knew InetBet will try to turn the tables over.

"Attack is the best method of defense"

Nifty as usually the hasty one. Inetbet has the final word? I doubt it.

Today or tommorow at latest I will post all my POA and all other documents (removing surname)
Calling innocent player a fraudster hopefullly will finally be InetbetGate for most people.;

Technically - they said you signed up using misleading/fraudulent information. No one called you a fraudster but Nifty. Did you sign up stating you were in the UK when in fact you were in Poland? If so, why? And if this is in fact correct, I can understand why the back and forth between you and iNetBet was exasperating.

 

[Przecinek]

Technically - they said you signed up using misleading/fraudulent information. No one called you a fraudster but Nifty. Did you sign up stating you were in the UK when in fact you were in Poland? If so, why? And if this is in fact correct, I can understand why the back and forth between you and iNetBet was exasperating.

I treat saying "he signed up using bogus information" as accusation of fraud. I signed up when I was in UK. Hence old adress (UK adress) POA from Virgin Broadband (not operating from Poland). I can post here paychecks and scans of whatever I have left from that period in order to protect my dignity.

If you check CM you'll see, when I signed up here in 2007 I did put "UK" as my country. That was ages before creating Inetbet account (if Inetbet even existed at this point). I haven't submitted PABS apart from plum gaming slow pay. Surely that doesn't add up with being a fake player?

I happy to see what Inetbet will come up with now, to bad it's at my expense

P.S tommorow I will post all the proof but for the time being just have a look at T&C

"NetBet Casino has a list of Countries where players may not be able to open an account due to Country bans or IP blocks. This applies to all the Countries listed below; please contact support to see which group the given Country belongs to. For Country bans iNetBet will consider players from these countries if a credit check has been performed. Alternatively if you are in an area where an IP block may be in place please contact support and we will open an account for you.

Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Byelorussia, Bosnia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cost Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Denmark, Indonesia, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Malaysia, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine and Yugoslavia."

Can't see Poland on list of excluded coutries. Therefore main argument that I have used bogus country to claim bonus is just another Inetbet lie. OR type in "Inetbet Polska" too see list of all polish affiliates working with casino that supposedly will not accept any player from PL.

 

[The Dude]

I treat saying "he signed up using bogus information" as accusation of fraud. I signed up when I was in UK. Hence old adress (UK adress) POA from Virgin Broadband (not operating from Poland). I can post here paychecks and scans of whatever I have left from that period in order to protect my dignity.

If you check CM you'll see, when I signed up here in 2007 I did put "UK" as my country. That was ages before creating Inetbet account (if Inetbet even existed at this point). I haven't submitted PABS apart from plum gaming slow pay. Surely that doesn't add up with being a fake player?

I happy to see what Inetbet will come up with now, to bad it's at my expense

Actually you are explaining what could have happened. You signed up at iNetBet while living in the UK - you move to Poland and when doing so are asked to verify your info. It's now Polish. Did you tell them you moved? How did you notify them that you had a change of residence?

(iNetBet has been around for a little over a decade I believe)

 

[The Dude]

. As you say you are from Poland - at the time we did not allow sign ups from that country. So you just opened an account using bogus information. You used a completely different country (UK).

That was then - this is now.

 

[iNetBet Promos]

Hi all,
Just thought I should clarify.

Przecinek - the problem was not that you signed up with a UK address and then moved as stated. You signed up using a Polish address with the UK given as the specified country. This obviously looked rather suspicious to us.

As I said previously we did not allow sign ups from Poland at the time. Thus you can see why there were issues.
You did indeed send in other docs stating you lived in the UK previously. However we could not leave your account open as Polish players were not accepted at the time.

Best Regards
iNetBet Support

 

[Przecinek]

Did you tell them you moved? How did you notify them that you had a change of residence?

I don't get that "could've happened" part. Please PM me CasinoMeister, I will give you anything you might want including facebook contacts that will prove what I'm saying or whatever else we might come up with.

As to your question I explained it in one of previous posts. I've sent them two emails to support and to [email protected] - before deposit. I also sent them my POA from UK when they mentioned this so I'm suprised they cling to this false accusation, when they could expect I will defend my innocence. Unless they haven't done their homework properly and again looked only at Inetbet CS notes, rather than both mine and theirs.

I'd expect now a sincere apology from Inetbet support. No mention of the fact that I took them 5 months to sort everything out - just accusations. Maybe it's time to admit people make mistakes, and InetBet just dropped the ball.

 

[The Dude]

I don't get that "could've happened" part...

It means I believe you were in the UK for a spell and that you probably moved. I can tell that by your IPs in the forum. No biggie. Nothing to get excited about

 

[Przecinek]

Funny I remember changing adress and the fact that everything could be edited apart from country code.

What you're refering is propably not adress in the download software but my adress your payment processor/cashier processor saved when I completed my payment?
Because if you're system allows you to, you should see what adress was registered in 09/03/2009. Maybe I even got some smail letters from you.

Unfortunately it didn't occur to me to take a screenshot while changing adress

As to Inetbet not accepting players in 2010 I wouldn't mind seeing cache or screenshot of their t&c but it's been propably too long already and google doesn't have it.
This could be obviously true, but Inetbet has given me false information so many times, that I take most of the things they say with a grain of salt.

 

[iNetBet Promos]

Przecinek - No this had nothing to do with any processor. They do not provide us with client information when a deposit is made.
This was the information/address you chose to enter when registering the account initially in 2009.
You also did not edit/change the address once registered as there is no such functionality in the software.

Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

 

[Przecinek]

Unfortunately won't be able to prove this since I can't access Inetbet casino and it's been a long time anyway.
What I can do is contact other casino representatives that will show I had consistent UK adress, I have contacted them regarding my move - and maybe they can say how they handled this (very simple) issue.

I'm sure everyone can make up their minds if they want to trust Inetbet representatives. Instead of adressing any of the problems, Inetbet just tried to shake it off with black PR and accusations.

Replies from Inebet representative suggest it's nothing uncommon to wait for your deposit 5 months or more and being treated not very nice (to be polite). Even if there are some problems, investigation etc. Surely casino can (and should) investigate, but not with this type of attitude - "We can do whatever we want". Especially if based on shaky grounds. Casino makes up excuses on the go rather that admit they've made an error... and now that they've found something that can't be falsified or proved they'll stick to it - even though it still doesn't explain why investigation took so long and why all my documents and everything else that as we can see is quite easy to verify was not considered. I can say that because Inetbet rep jumped out with mismatch argument, that I though was explained by me ages ago. Just another proof you don't pay attention or didn't even read or care to understand what I was saying. If you did understand, then it's even worse, cause it means you have deliberately accused me, even though verification process has been completed succesfuly and I was paid after many months of waiting. I think it's not hard to understand why I have grudge against this particular casino...

Let's have a look at some basic problems.

Player is given runaround. - Not adressed by official representative here.

Player is given arrogant replies, accused of "lack of assistance" (my reply was "5 out of 4 times I didn't get a reply. So if anyone should be accused of lack of assistance it's you). On 21/02 I got PM from representative when I asked for follow up, that they are even "unsure why you are sending this message" and this was already at least 80 days since my w/d request. - Not adressed

Player is givin general BS and negativite attitude - I'm not allowed to play yet I have to etc, winnings voided on grounds that "terms are perfectly clear" without even a grain of autocriticism. - Not adressed.

Player is given false or deceptive information - why hassle with faxbacks, 3 proofs etc, when in the end you had FU clause ready since Poland is excluded. - not adressed.

And most importantly, player can't communicate properly with the casino. - Not adressed

None of these problems has been adressed and like I said, I don't think they ever will be. Player turns out to be innocent but no apology is or will be given...

Still considering posting all attachments and mails and everything so that everyone can see transparently the full truth that Inetbet rep wanted VWM and other members to know. Actually VWM guessed correctly that this mismatch issue stemmed from big delay between registering and first deposit. I was just about to add that this could be factor, considering I've moved in the meantime, but then read Inetbet and Nifty's posts and had to start defending myself. So it's not really all that rocket science to see what's going on, and surely not a reason to automatically treat someone as a 100% certified cheat and stall return of my deposit for 5 months. Along with that considering gathering/posting links to other posts from this forum or from google, showing that Inetbet is acting sometimes at least shady, and is making things on the go. But I'm not sure it's all worth it... after all I'll never play there and just wanted in good faith to warn other fellow players to steer clear. No agenda since I'm done with them and will never return, I'm not waiting for any money etc. If someone wants to play there - feel free but I know this will lead to more Inetbet bashes #777 #778 #779. If you want to factor the risks involved and play there, that's fine - you might have hassle free experience (like I did in many casinos that others had problems with), but there is always risk you also might be the next case in future Inetbet disputes.

Another thing I find strange is how some people cynically point out that other members have "naively" taken everything player says at face value, and they do exactly the same and take everything that casino says at face value. Definetely it's a better rule of a thumb to trust the players. Anyone following complains section can see how dirty can deceiptful some casino groups can be. Calling gamblers "scum players" (AP's not fraudsters!) as one of casino members has referred to them, in another thread shows kind of attitude that is beyond me. But that's just something for a totally different discussion.

Anyway ... if someone wants to get to know me a little bit better this is how I look like lol



Photo was taken in Iran BTW, during my hitch-hiking travels trough middle east I really have broader perspectives and better things to do than to register in 2009 and then wait more than year and a half, to abuse some "welcome back" worth cents ...very logical

Anyway thanks to everyone who managed to get trough this pretty long posts. Especially VWM and CM for being so levelheaded.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi all,
Just thought I should clarify.

Przecinek - the problem was not that you signed up with a UK address and then moved as stated. You signed up using a Polish address with the UK given as the specified country. This obviously looked rather suspicious to us.

As I said previously we did not allow sign ups from Poland at the time. Thus you can see why there were issues.
You did indeed send in other docs stating you lived in the UK previously. However we could not leave your account open as Polish players were not accepted at the time.

Best Regards
iNetBet Support

Yet you DID, which is why the OP was able to make his later deposit, claim the coupon, and run into this problem. The mismatch upon registration should, as I have said, caused the account to have been locked straight away, and it would still have been locked when the OP went to make that fateful deposit.

First, the OP is being blamed for failing to update his information when he moved back to Poland, yet you say that there was no facility for him to have done this, so it should not come as much of a surprise that he didn't.

If present in the UK at the time, there is no reason why he shouldn't have been able to play, as EU law is quite clear on the matter. It's legal here, and the law of the country you are in is what applies when it comes to legal matters.

I have watched many "reality" shows on TV where foreign nationals caught by the Police try to defend their actions by saying "it's legal in <insert country they came from here>" as though this makes a difference. They are then told that it is the law HERE that they have to obey, which is why they have been arrested.

The iNetBet terms covering this do NOT say that these countries are banned, but that it is "technical problems" such as IP blocking that have lead to the countries being in the list, and that players may need the help of CS to find a way to work around the problems and open their accounts.

The posted terms for that coupon do NOT say "return bonus", so iNetBet is relying on players interpreting this as the "spirit" in which the coupon is offered from the specific description of the qualifying criteria, which apply to both returning players, and those who have never played, but registered over 90 days prior.

Even if the player emailed the change to the casino, there is currently no mechanism in place that would give the player an indication that the email never made it through, as no receipt is sent back via autoresponder to confirm receipt, and iNetBet ONLY reply to an email if one is deemed necessary. It is therefore impossible to tell the difference between CS actioning the change but deeming no reply is necessary, and the email never arriving.

I too have not had a reply from EVERY email I have sent to iNetBet, yet there is no indication that they don't get through, nor that iNetBet emails don't get through to me. I have therefore assumed that I only received a reply where it was necessary, such as when I have asked a question. If I have stated a fact, or given "feedback", I don't necessarily expect a reply, and don't feel that I should "investigate" just because I haven't.

Even though I have not played there for ages, I still get the regular player emails, so again see no sign that there is any communication problems with my ISP with regard to emails to and from iNetBet.

Whilst the OP failed to mention a few things, the same can be said for iNetBet. The initial issue was about the coupon, nothing then was said about the players details needing investigation. The OP may not have realised this was even an issue, and even if it was, possibly thought he had it covered when he emailed iNetBet about the change.

We also had all the prevarication about documents being too large, etc when the REAL issue was that there was a discrepancy between the country and the address, which had come to light during the verification process.

Despite this, the rep originally said that nothing out of the ordinary had been requested, despite the player saying that it had. It now transpires that there obviously WERE some "out of the ordinary" requests being made, and these were down to the need to check into the reasons for the discrepancy between UK appearing in the registration at the casino, and documents showing Poland as the country of residence now.

If this was a deliberate attempt to defraud the casino, it was a stupid one, leaving a very obvious indicator in the form of a Polish address alongside a UK country declaration. I would have thought the OP would have registered with his UK address to tally with his country declaration, changing both when he moved back to Poland. This is also what a fraudster would have done, along with a few other things to fake in order to support his (fake) registration details. The fraudster would have tried to convince the casino he was still playing from the UK even when really in Poland, and would have been caught out by more detailed checks such as IP range, deposit method, etc.

 

[greasemonkey]

The common theme to all of these complaints is not just horrid CS. It is the fact that in all of these cases inetbet is actively looking for ANY REASON at all not to pay the player. inetbet is not acting like an accredited casino. would 32red always put players through the gauntlet and ask for additional info all the time and keep turning over any stone in order not to pay a player?
NO!!! This is why people are up in arms along with the bad CS. it is because inetbet is always searching for a loophole to not pay a player. If that is not found then they simply may give a nebulous reasoning and vague fraud charge. In my mind, at least, this is not how an accredited casino should operate. I do put a lot of stock into "accredited" here at CM. If you are accredited then you should act accredited and this aint it.

 

[Nifty29]

What's the point of the photo?

Completely irrelevant to the discussion.

It's also amazing how you carried on about being called a fraudster, but you're happy to use it when describing the casino

 

[nonif]

I don't play at Inetbet and I don't play at 32red ( obviously) I've read a lot about these casinos though .
Seems to me, there are numerous complaints about Inet, almost none about 32Red.
what pops up in my mind is... Why?

That's probably why I don't play there.

 

[DiamondGeezer]

Fantastic effort there Vinyl :notworthy.

If the OP wants to post a photo I can't see the problem of it myself .

 

[rainmaker]

Fantastic effort there Vinyl :notworthy.

If the OP wants to post a photo I can't see the problem of it myself .

Yeah, I also found the photo to be a refreshing contribution in this looong thread

It is OK with some sense of humor in this thread guys

As for Przecinek, I think he has given a good explanation. But I do not want to speculate about who`s right or wrong.

 

[bb28]

My 2 cents. I think Przecinek messed up a bit by not reading the terms for that coupon and I think he was a bit slack in getting around to following up with InetBet with his email correspondence. I also think InetBet sometimes has a serious issue with receipt and maybe transmission of emails. I get why Przecinek is so defensive as he feels that his integrity is under a false attack.

 

[chayton]

well I think we should just wait and see what the PAB comes up with, if anything. I'm sure the OP can understand that as much as he wouldn't like being branded a fraud (who would?) iNetBet probably doesn't like being called crooks or shady operators either.

I mean seriously, you think that the few bucks they would have paid out was a make or break for a casino that's been in business for as long as they have?

 

[Nate]

Seems to me, there are numerous complaints about Inet, almost none about 32Red.
what pops up in my mind is... Why?

Uhhhmm... its simple...

32Red is Casino of the DECADE... Inet is NOT and NEVER will be...

Nate

 

[chuchu59]

Uhhhmm... its simple...

32Red is Casino of the DECADE... Inet is NOT and NEVER will be...

Nate

Not necessarily! If you pronounce the word Decade wrongly you could come up with Decayed.

 

[The Dude]

I see that this has turned into another iNetBet bash fest.

Here is the result from the OPs PAB - we have put together a chronology of emails:

1. Sunday September 18 2011: OP to Casino: "I am sending you the verification form."
2. Monday September 19 2011: Casino to OP: request for missing info (incomplete verification form).
3. Monday September 19 2011: OP to Casino: info sent, attachment size exceeds 10 mb.
4. Tuesday September 20 2011: Casino to OP: "attachments too large", request to reformat and resend.
5. Sunday October 02 2011: OP to Casino: "stuff was sent on 20th September, please confirm".
6. Monday October 03 2011: Casino to OP: "sorry, docs not received, please resend".
   [between Oct 03 and Oct 11 OP accesses account, increases balance]
7. Tuesday 11 October 2011: OP to Casino: "WHY ARE YOU NOT ANSWERING ME?????", includes copies of msgs apparently sent on 03 Oct and 09 Oct.
8. Tuesday 11 October 2011: Casino to OP: "haven't received anything from you since our message of 03 Oct. If the file is too large it will be blocked and not received."
   [OP again accesses his account, balance decreases]
9. Thursday 13th October 2011: OP posts "inetbet Nightmare"

So who is at fault? Is it the casino's fault that the player kept playing while he waited for his ID docs to be confirmed? There was ample time to get those docs to them, and if he was really waiting - why did he continue to deposit? Regardless of the reason, I do not think that the casino was stalling or finding a reason not to pay this person.

And again, we have a 14 page bash fest.

My boldings:

It is the fact that in all of these cases inetbet is actively looking for ANY REASON at all not to pay the player. inetbet is not acting like an accredited casino. would 32red always put players through the gauntlet and ask for additional info all the time and keep turning over any stone in order not to pay a player?
NO!!! This is why people are up in arms along with the bad CS. it is because inetbet is always searching for a loophole to not pay a player. If that is not found then they simply may give a nebulous reasoning and vague fraud charge. In my mind, at least, this is not how an accredited casino should operate. I do put a lot of stock into "accredited" here at CM. If you are accredited then you should act accredited and this aint it.

Just about every iNetBet thread in this forum has either been grossly exaggerated or littered with fraudulent complaints. You want to rip the casino to shreds because of an email issue - but there are many members here that have never had a problem. Trying to find any reason not to pay someone? I'd like to see you at the helm of a casino operation and deal with the fraud that these casinos handle on a daily basis. Operators can seem to be paranoid. Make one major mistake and perhaps some of your employees aren't going to have a paycheck next month. It's easy for you to be critical, but let's try to add some realism to the critique.

My observances: Most RTG casinos have been targets of fraud in the past couple of years. It used to be Microgaming that was getting hammered a few years ago, but of late it has been RTG. I don't know why, perhaps it's the traffic, perhaps the bonus offers, perhaps MGS has better fraud detection, who knows? One thing for sure is that these casinos protect themselves vigilantly from fraud - and if you are a player, you are going to have to deal with this. You should be prepared ahead of time to produce ID docs.

Possible Solutions: (isn't this what this thread should be about anyway?)

• iNetBet should consider having a section on their main site giving instructions on how and what to send as ID docs. Hammer into the players' heads that they should be prepared to send these docs tout de suite if or when they cash out.
  
• Perhaps provide telephone or chat support for technical problems only.
  
• Use "read receipts" for emails. If someone doesn't respond to these, perhaps there is an email issue and the casino can use the casino message system to contact the player.
  

If anyone else has any constructive criticism, lets hear it. Any further bashings will p. me o. and I'll just upgrade this thread to closed.

 

[macster]

De-stress time

Not necessarily! If you pronounce the word Decade wrongly you could come up with Decayed.

Or... it could be... "d**kh**d

 

[vinylweatherman]

I see that this has turned into another iNetBet bash fest.

Here is the result from the OPs PAB - we have put together a chronology of emails:

1. Sunday September 18 2011: OP to Casino: "I am sending you the verification form."
2. Monday September 19 2011: Casino to OP: request for missing info (incomplete verification form).
3. Monday September 19 2011: OP to Casino: info sent, attachment size exceeds 10 mb.
4. Tuesday September 20 2011: Casino to OP: "attachments too large", request to reformat and resend.
5. Sunday October 02 2011: OP to Casino: "stuff was sent on 20th September, please confirm".
6. Monday October 03 2011: Casino to OP: "sorry, docs not received, please resend".
   [between Oct 03 and Oct 11 OP accesses account, increases balance]
7. Tuesday 11 October 2011: OP to Casino: "WHY ARE YOU NOT ANSWERING ME?????", includes copies of msgs apparently sent on 03 Oct and 09 Oct.
8. Tuesday 11 October 2011: Casino to OP: "haven't received anything from you since our message of 03 Oct. If the file is too large it will be blocked and not received."
   [OP again accesses his account, balance decreases]
9. Thursday 13th October 2011: OP posts "inetbet Nightmare"

So who is at fault? Is it the casino's fault that the player kept playing while he waited for his ID docs to be confirmed? There was ample time to get those docs to them, and if he was really waiting - why did he continue to deposit? Regardless of the reason, I do not think that the casino was stalling or finding a reason not to pay this person.

And again, we have a 14 page bash fest.

My boldings:


Just about every iNetBet thread in this forum has either been grossly exaggerated or littered with fraudulent complaints. You want to rip the casino to shreds because of an email issue - but there are many members here that have never had a problem. Trying to find any reason not to pay someone? I'd like to see you at the helm of a casino operation and deal with the fraud that these casinos handle on a daily basis. Operators can seem to be paranoid. Make one major mistake and perhaps some of your employees aren't going to have a paycheck next month. It's easy for you to be critical, but let's try to add some realism to the critique.

My observances: Most RTG casinos have been targets of fraud in the past couple of years. It used to be Microgaming that was getting hammered a few years ago, but of late it has been RTG. I don't know why, perhaps it's the traffic, perhaps the bonus offers, perhaps MGS has better fraud detection, who knows? One thing for sure is that these casinos protect themselves vigilantly from fraud - and if you are a player, you are going to have to deal with this. You should be prepared ahead of time to produce ID docs.

Possible Solutions: (isn't this what this thread should be about anyway?)

• iNetBet should consider having a section on their main site giving instructions on how and what to send as ID docs. Hammer into the players' heads that they should be prepared to send these docs tout de suite if or when they cash out.
  
• Perhaps provide telephone or chat support for technical problems only.
  
• Use "read receipts" for emails. If someone doesn't respond to these, perhaps there is an email issue and the casino can use the casino message system to contact the player.
  

If anyone else has any constructive criticism, lets hear it. Any further bashings will p. me o. and I'll just upgrade this thread to closed.

The proposed solutions seem sensible. It is down to the player's impatience that a problem causes them to play on and lose a balance. It isn't any different to a player who keeps reversing withdrawals rather than waiting for them to be paid out.

The long gap and inconsistent replies afterwards were probably down to an email or two going astray, which damaged the conversation. This was not a simple question and answer exchange, but a conversation, and if one participant's turn goes missing, the integrity of the whole exchange can collapse because the party that didn't receive the communication replies as though it never existed, whilst the sending party replies as though it WAS "heard", even if not replied to.

This would explain why iNetBet appeared to contradict themselves by first saying "received, but too large", followed by "didn't receive anything" when the player followed up. To the player, it looks like a complete change of story, since it is obvious that to have known it was too large, they must have received it. Since they received it, the player might then think "why the hell didn't they at least try to work with what they had, even if it was larger than they would normally use". From my point of view, and faced with a 10meg photo that I wanted as a 1meg file, I would simply open it in some photo software, and save it back as a smaller file, I would not just throw it away. To keep expecting the player to try again and again to reformat to vaguely defined criteria looks to that player as though it is nothing more than a stalling tactic. If they then escalate the issue, they do so with prejudice, having already concluded that they are fighting a decision that has already been made not to pay them.

If RTG are being disproportionately hit by fraud, they should be looking to find out why this is happening, and fix it. At the moment, it just looks like they are "firefighting" each fraud attack as it comes along, rather than trying to discover what weaknesses the fraudsters are being encouraged by.

Maybe Microgaming had a weakness, and when MGS fixed it, they then discovered that whatever it was "worked" with RTG casinos, so simply moved on. When RTG fix it, they will probably target another software, or start over exploiting a new weakness.

 

[chuchu59]

Thanks for the chronology Bryan. If the op agrees to this he will need to explain why he didnt reply to Inet's email of 3 October before he sent them his email dated 11 Oct.

As long as this poor customer service and attitude is maintained by the casno bashings will never cease. There have been false accusations against them I am sure but why is there a horde of players up in arms against them? Do they pay? Yes. Do they have good bonuses? Yes again. Even if eveyone shuts up the harm has been done and many players will think twice before playing. Just my 2c(in Hong Kong denomination).

 

[Nifty29]

The proposed solutions seem sensible. It is down to the player's impatience that a problem causes them to play on and lose a balance. It isn't any different to a player who keeps reversing withdrawals rather than waiting for them to be paid out.

The long gap and inconsistent replies afterwards were probably down to an email or two going astray, which damaged the conversation. This was not a simple question and answer exchange, but a conversation, and if one participant's turn goes missing, the integrity of the whole exchange can collapse because the party that didn't receive the communication replies as though it never existed, whilst the sending party replies as though it WAS "heard", eveyn if not replied to.

This would explain why iNetBet appeared to contradict themselves by first saying "received, but too large", followed by "didn't receive anything" when the player followed up. To the player, it looks like a complete change of story, since it is obvious that to have known it was too large, they must have received it. Since they received it, the player might then think "why the hell didn't they at least try to work with what they had, even if it was larger than they would normally use". From my point of view, and faced with a 10meg photo that I wanted as a 1meg file, I would simply open it in some photo software, and save it back as a smaller file, I would not just throw it away. To keep expecting the player to try again and again to reformat to vaguely defined criteria looks to that player as though it is nothing more than a stalling tactic. If they then escalate the issue, they do so with prejudice, having already concluded that they are fighting a decision that has already been made not to pay them.

If RTG are being disproportionately hit by fraud, they should be looking to find out why this is happening, and fix it. At the moment, it just looks like they are "firefighting" each fraud attack as it comes along, rather than trying to discover what weaknesses the fraudsters are being encouraged by.



Maybe Microgaming had a weakness, and when MGS fixed it, they then discovered that whatever it was "worked" with RTG casinos, so simply moved on. When RTG fix it, they will probably target another software, or start over exploiting a new weakness.

The casino stated that if the email is larger than 10MB it is blocked completely I.e. the attachments cannot be opened.

How are they supposed to deal with what they have when they don't have anything? Nobody threw anything away.

@Bryan.....did the OP supply proof that he resent the files in 4 seperate emails as he claims?

 

[macster]

Thanks for the chronology Bryan. If the op agrees to this he will need to explain why he didnt reply to Inet's email of 3 October before he sent them his email dated 11 Oct.

OP means original poster? I think he did, as Casinomeister says that e-mails were sent on the 3rd and 9th.

As long as this poor customer service and attitude is maintained by the casno bashings will never cease. There have been false accusations against them I am sure but why is there a horde of players up in arms against them? Do they pay? Yes. Do they have good bonuses?

The saying "If there's smoke, there's fire" comes to mind

Even if eveyone shuts up the harm has been done and many players will think twice before playing. Just my 2c(in Hong Kong denomination).

I think new players like myself will give online casinos a try. But...
"Once bitten, twice shy"
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me".

 

[macster]

Possible solutions:
1). Operators should make it mandatory for new players to submit ID for verification. This alone will greatly reduce so-called fraud. Or ask for a debit card transaction/verification to confirm identity. Or even to prove age and prevent minor access. However, I don't see this easy solution being implemented. Why? I'm sure the reason is obvious.

2). Improve customer service. In this case, the Customer Service could have replied to the customer, mentioning that the required ID was still pending. This can easily be integrated with a CRM solution, you know, the one that is used by Marketing to very reliably send out those bonuses and promotions e-mails.

3). Casinos getting hammered with fraud? Firstly, this should not be an excuse for poor customer service. Secondly, see above for dealing with fraud.

There are essentially three "market leading" tenets; customer intimacy (e.g. your favourite hotel?), operational efficiency (Tesco and Walmart) and product leadership (Apple). It's only customer intimacy for these gaming operators. But..... this is where thy're failing miserably!!!


P.S. The player's failings are obvious and that is something that the player needs to remedy himself (or herself).

 

[macster]

De-stress time

Or... it could be... "d**kh**d

No comments? Come on - this was funny! I have the day off and I'm bored! This is random banter. I hope this is not considered spamming. If yes, sorry!

 

[vinylweatherman]

The casino stated that if the email is larger than 10MB it is blocked completely I.e. the attachments cannot be opened.

How are they supposed to deal with what they have when they don't have anything? Nobody threw anything away.

@Bryan.....did the OP supply proof that he resent the files in 4 seperate emails as he claims?

The casino stated the actual email had attachments over 10MB, so they actually had it, it was not blocked. If they had a 10MB file, it is just not credible that they had no software available to them that could deal with it.

This also fails to explain the case where splitting this 10Mb into four separate emails not only caused it to get blocked, but MORE SO than when sent as a single 10Mb file, in that they didn't even receive them to know that they couldn't be opened.

The problem is that the player does not get a "delivery failure" message, which goes against even the archaic standards of email. In addition, the casino does not get anything that tells them that an inbound email was blocked from getting through from their customer so that they could chase it up with said customer.

If I don't get a delivery failure, I assume the email made it though to it's destination, and if it then failed to make the last leg of the journey it has nothing to do with "the internet", but is down to the recipient's own setup, and therefore fully within their control. If it is something that warrants a reply, I assume it has been ignored, even if not by deliberate intent.

This goes back to my original statement that if a single method is going to be relied upon, it must work 100% of the time, and must "fail safe" when anything goes wrong so that problems can be followed up quickly.

I find it odd that in 2011 we are STILL using email for document verification, despite clear evidence that it is quite simply unfit for the purpose, and only works when everything is done "just right". Anything else requiring things to be done "just right" would come with a comprehensive user manual, yet there is almost NO technical guidance for the process of preparing and sending documents. It is no wonder that the process often causes "nightmares" for players, who are then inclined to think the hassle is intentional on the part of a casino in order to wriggle out of paying them.

 

[Nifty29]

The casino stated the actual email had attachments over 10MB, so they actually had it, it was not blocked. If they had a 10MB file, it is just not credible that they had no software available to them that could deal with it.

This also fails to explain the case where splitting this 10Mb into four separate emails not only caused it to get blocked, but MORE SO than when sent as a single 10Mb file, in that they didn't even receive them to know that they couldn't be opened.

The problem is that the player does not get a "delivery failure" message, which goes against even the archaic standards of email. In addition, the casino does not get anything that tells them that an inbound email was blocked from getting through from their customer so that they could chase it up with said customer.

If I don't get a delivery failure, I assume the email made it though to it's destination, and if it then failed to make the last leg of the journey it has nothing to do with "the internet", but is down to the recipient's own setup, and therefore fully within their control. If it is something that warrants a reply, I assume it has been ignored, even if not by deliberate intent.

This goes back to my original statement that if a single method is going to be relied upon, it must work 100% of the time, and must "fail safe" when anything goes wrong so that problems can be followed up quickly.

I find it odd that in 2011 we are STILL using email for document verification, despite clear evidence that it is quite simply unfit for the purpose, and only works when everything is done "just right". Anything else requiring things to be done "just right" would come with a comprehensive user manual, yet there is almost NO technical guidance for the process of preparing and sending documents. It is no wonder that the process often causes "nightmares" for players, who are then inclined to think the hassle is intentional on the part of a casino in order to wriggle out of paying them.

The casino stated:

Thanks for your mail.
Sorry but we cannot access the attachments as this email is over 10mb in size. Please reformat.

It's very clear Vinyl. Obviously, they do not have the software to open the attachments in this case, otherwise they would have and we would not be having this conversation.

You know, you could just admit you're wrong......there's no shame in it.

 

[chayton]

So the OP sent an email with the 10MB file, iNetBet responded they couldn't access it, OP resends docs in 4 separate emails and iNetBet gets none of them. iNetBet is waiting for the player to send in the docs, the player is waiting for iNetBet to confirm they received them and in the meantime the player is playing out the funds. The funds are gone, it's not the casinos fault. Believe me, I've played out withdrawals because I get pissy about waiting but I take full responsibility for it.

Does the OP have (maybe in his sent folder) copies of the separate 4 mails he said he sent? I'm wondering if it might be worth it to take a look at those and figure out why they didn't arrive at their destination when the first mail (and subsequent mails) did. Maybe the format of the attached files was blocked on receipt by iNetBets mail server if the attachments seemed like suspicious files? Were they zip files? PNGs? Jpegs inserted into the mail, maybe being sent as HTML files?

 

[greasemonkey]

So then the OP is not being totally honest? You did not ask for anything exceptional? You did not demand that they get proof of how they fund their ewallet and send it to you? They simply had incomplete documentation and never responded to you when you asked for complete documentation?

Since they did get the normal documents that every RTG casino asks for, why did they then go above that and demand more and different documentation about how the OP funds their accounts? If they are not doing this then it is a non issue right? They got the documents and they should have approved them... but they didn't.

if they are not looking for a way not to pay the OP then why do they ask for such weird stuff and further delay the whole process?
This is what started it all. They got the docs, then asked for bizarre stuff that is way out of the ordinary then claims to oddly never get docs again.

 

[chayton]

By bizarre stuff do you mean to show how the moneybookers account was funded? That's a new one on me too, it's not something I've ever been asked for.

 

[maxd]

The casino stated the actual email had attachments over 10MB, so they actually had it, it was not blocked. If they had a 10MB file, it is just not credible that they had no software available to them that could deal with it.

When I roughed out the chronology perhaps I was being overly brief. I wanted it short and sweet so may have given the wrong impression.

What the "Casino to OP" email of Tuesday September 20 2011 actually said was:

Thanks for your mail. Sorry but we cannot access the attachments as this email is over 10mb in size. Please reformat. ....

From this I would not conclude that they received the email successfully. I would have inquired further before coming to such a conclusion.

Please note that at no time did the OP say "you want what? that's outrageous!". In fact no complaints whatsoever, other than allegedly sending things that were not received and/or acknowledged. This bumf about "bizarre requests", etc is editorializing long after the fact.

Update: the OP has provided comments (via email) on the chronology. I've asked for permission to post those here.

Or... it could be... "d**kh**d

Please consider the possibility that the rest of us didn't find this entertaining, or even appropriate.