1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Interesting news story about SE and land based casinos

Discussion in 'North American Land Based Casinos' started by osulle, Sep 8, 2017.

    Sep 8, 2017
  1. osulle

    osulle Ueber Meister CAG mm4 mm1

    Occupation:
    life
    Location:
    Northern hemisphere
    This story caught my attention. This lady signed a Self Exclusion form at a land based casino but a few years later won a jackpot and was denied. The casino let her play won't pay the jackpot and you can bet she won't get the money she put in back either. Just an interesting story. This came out of Canada BTW.You must register/login in order to see the link.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2017
  2. Sep 8, 2017
  3. me_and_ed

    me_and_ed Ueber Meister CAG MM

    Occupation:
    Selling out
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Not right but common practice right across Canada even though each province runs their gaming separately, here in British Columbia there are signs plastered all over the place about non jackpot payouts due to SE. I believe its only a matter of time before this gets challenged in court
     
  4. Sep 8, 2017
  5. osulle

    osulle Ueber Meister CAG mm4 mm1

    Occupation:
    life
    Location:
    Northern hemisphere
    I guess I might come off as looking silly here but with all the technology and cameras that the casinos have you would have thought that the casino would have barred her from entering or kicked her out long before she had a chance to win the jackpot. I mean lots of land based casinos have facial recognition software etc. and will notice right away if a banned individual was in their casino or does that not apply to Canadian casinos?

    I guess my point is the casino should have stopped her from gambling there because she had signed a self exclusion form. Just confiscating jackpot winnings isn't good enough in my opinion. The casinos ought to be doing more. Personally I am in two minds whether she should have gotten the money or not. The casino was glad to take her money before she won the jackpot and you can bet she won't be getting any of that back.

    The only thing I know for sure is that woman probably should be going to gamblers anon.
     
  6. Sep 8, 2017
  7. slotmaster

    slotmaster Ueber Meister

    Occupation:
    Being great and stressed
    Location:
    stressville
    Another idiot who did not read what she was signing. She is lucky she was not arrested which still may happen now that she has pised off the olg. Like you signed the form and marked the box you are screwed. On the flip side they should have a system in place to not even allow these people inside but we are talking about greedy casino's.

    I would totally be on her side if she had a valid complaint like a malfunction or something weird which happened here at my local to someone else and that was on the news.
     
  8. Sep 8, 2017
  9. slotmaster

    slotmaster Ueber Meister

    Occupation:
    Being great and stressed
    Location:
    stressville

    Hey stop reading my mind!:D
     
  10. Sep 8, 2017
  11. goatwack

    goatwack Denny, two is great, but three is a crowd CAG

    Occupation:
    Stuntman
    Location:
    Londonia
    I agree, surely land-based casinos ought to pick up on this as soon as you walk onto the premises, although laws may have changed a tad since I worked in one :oops:

    Back then you'd have to have to be verified, I gather that anyone can walk in off the streets now, at least in London. How uncouth :mad:

    So all things considered, yet again this is a win-win scenario for the casino, as with the online shenanigans we witness almost daily now.

    Casino gets to keep the player's winnings/ deposits etc and claim they are following SE rules by denying subsequent jackpot. The casino is 100% at fault because the buck stops with them, ie not allowing an excluded gambler into the building. Simples. :cool:
     
  12. Sep 8, 2017
  13. me_and_ed

    me_and_ed Ueber Meister CAG MM

    Occupation:
    Selling out
    Location:
    Vancouver
    I know for fact that they have facial recognition here in BC, my friend got banned for being a drunken ass, we went in almost a year later and within 2 minutes they approached him to leave, I think its bullshit that they don't follow the same protocol, this is where I believe it will be court challenged, they want to take the money but not pay it out.
     
  14. Sep 8, 2017
  15. Jasminebed

    Jasminebed Closer to 100 than Birth

    Occupation:
    Not in workforce
    Location:
    Ontario
    Think this was previously posted here, where a man signed a form 20 years earlier.

    You must register/login in order to see the link.

    I have to wonder if these people used their rewards cards. Almost everyone I know that plays do use them, at least most of the time, because otherwise you get nothing back, we don't get alcohol free, and even a discount at the buffet requires a card.

    They use facial recognition here too, at least at several I've been to.
     
  16. Sep 8, 2017
  17. osulle

    osulle Ueber Meister CAG mm4 mm1

    Occupation:
    life
    Location:
    Northern hemisphere
    Exactly my point well said Ed :)
     
  18. Sep 8, 2017
  19. osulle

    osulle Ueber Meister CAG mm4 mm1

    Occupation:
    life
    Location:
    Northern hemisphere
    That poor man is 82 should have gotten the money poor sod. Love the way the government says denying prizes is a way to "help" problem gamblers and as the old man stated they had no problem taking his money all these years. So I know a few Canucks here have stated in the past that OLG sucks now I see for myself. If a person self excludes from a casino they need to be stopped from entering. That is the real way of helping them.
     
  20. Sep 8, 2017
  21. Jono777

    Jono777 Meister Member CAG mm4 mm1

    Occupation:
    Self- Employeed
    Location:
    Wolverhampton
    Can't have your cake and eat it!

    Whoever sits at their big oak desk and makes up these rules needs shooting!

    Pay the jackpot or refund the stakes (since the SE) unfair to not get either.

    It's getting impossible 'out there' casinos are in a win, win, win situation (house edge, don't pay players, don't refund deposits, etc,etc)

    Why do we all bother lol?
     
  22. Sep 8, 2017
  23. lockinlove

    lockinlove Staring into the sun PABaccred

    Occupation:
    I work :D
    Location:
    Canada
    Just another example of a casino freerolling a player. They have every kind of security in place to detect cheaters and past cheaters where if they step 10 feet from the door they already know about it. They can do the same with self exclusions but choose not to so they can continue to take their money and if they ever hit anything they can walk out and say sorry we just recognized you as a self excluder. No money for you gtfo.
     

Share This Page