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. Dismiss Notice
  3. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice

Poll:Best Screenshot of the Month?



Candidates Revealed...Cast your vote!.
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 US court ruling

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by jetset, Mar 2, 2015.

    Mar 2, 2015
  1. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    You must register/login in order to see the link.

    What do you think?
     
    2 people like this.
  2. Mar 2, 2015
  3. mcgameboy

    mcgameboy Screenieholic & Essayist mm2

    Occupation:
    Casual Stocktaker (Inventory Counter)
    Location:
    Belfast
    Typical double standards.

    The casino settled with the card manufacturer and the details of that settlement have been withheld due a confidentiality agreement.

    So having settled with them, they then go after the players as well?

    Sorry, but that totally stinks. And I hope it comes back to bite them.

    I know there is the maxim that "the house always wins". But this is taking it too far.

    What about all the LOSING bets made by players during this period? Are the casino going to pay all of those back? As if!

    I don't see this doing the Golden Nugget any favours at all in the long term, once word of this spreads.
    Players will not be able to trust them one inch. And as a result, they will have no option but to give them a wide berth.

    The only people that will go there are people who actually enjoy losing their money. The very type of people casinos want.

    As for people who want (and try to) win...sorry, nope, you're not welcome in here.

    Stinks to high heaven IMHO. Another victory for the big bad casino at the expense of the little guy.
     
  4. Mar 2, 2015
  5. MiltonW

    MiltonW Experienced Member

    Occupation:
    Developer
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I guess this is like a webshop having the wrong prices for some reason. This happens every now and then, and people go crazy 'abusing' the error, knowing full well something ain't right...
    The law is with the webshop on this, and now with the casino. I think that is ok.
     
  6. Mar 2, 2015
  7. spintee

    spintee Meister Member webby mm2

    Occupation:
    gambler :)
    Location:
    Northants
    Well wouldn't it of been cheaper to let the players keep there cash than going threw all the courts? Remember that casino got an settlement from the card manufacture,


    I take it that it would not of went on for to long so not so many loser's but would hey get there money back?

    Makes you laugh as say you took a casino to court stating that you sure cards are wrong there you would not stand a chance, Yet as soon as a casino spots a problem all of a sudden the players are at fault,

    I love this bit,

    “People think (casinos are) crooks anyway,” There's one of the reasons why
     
    1 person likes this.
  8. Mar 2, 2015
  9. Zabier

    Zabier Experienced Member

    Occupation:
    Writer
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Basically, the casino screwed up. That's the bottom line. It's an expensive mistake but it's their fault. How on earth it wasn't picked up quicker is beyond me but it's their fault. Feel very sorry for the players. Granted, the game wasn't fair but the players essentially won on the game being played.

    There is a tiny part of me that thinks there is no justification for keeping hold of winnings won when a game is flawed. However, as someone has said, if the tables were turned then the view point might be different.
     
  10. Mar 2, 2015
  11. Mousey

    Mousey Ueber Meister Mouse CAG

    Occupation:
    Pencil Pusher
    Location:
    Up$hitCreek
    I don't know about baccarat but at most table games in the US ... like black jack and paigow... when new decks come out, the dealer is required to spread the cards face up before shuffling - whether by hand or placed into a shuffler. I didn't see this in the article, but why the hell would a casino crack open new decks and put them into play without a spread?? Just because they were supposed to be preshuffled from factory doesn't cut it with me.
     
  12. Mar 2, 2015
  13. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    It's odd that the casino decided to forge ahead with this even though they were not out of pocket due to having settled with the card manufacturer. Players also have to take their losses, but this case shows them that they could sue casinos if they could show that their losses were "unfair" due to some problem with the game. A rash of lawsuits from both sides will give out the impressions that the casino industry is riddled with games that are "unfair" in some way.

    One possible outcome might be that ALL games played with these cards from this manufacturer are invalid, including those where the players did NOT notice anything was wrong, where they would have lost overall because they would not have changed their betting patterns to take account of the predetermined pattern.

    This was ONLY $1 million too, and it seems to buck the trend of businesses wanting their shortcomings swept under the carpet rather than showcased to their customers, which is probably why in the past the casinos have simply "eaten" the losses due to their own incompetence.

    Maybe they are adjusting their behaviour so that they are more in line with the largely unregulated online offerings so as to be better prepared for eventual legalisation and competition:rolleyes:
     
  14. Mar 2, 2015
  15. Deeplay

    Deeplay New World Order CAG mm1 webmeister

    Occupation:
    Works For Self
    Location:
    The biG Eu
    I suppose they see this as a "slot game malfunction voids all pays" issues which technically speaking it can be seen as such. I would be livid if I was one the players having to pay back though! I doubt this will hurt the big boys though either in the short term or long term. If such a thing or similar happened with an online casino that could be a different matter. But Im sure the casino will sweep this under the carpet now but why they would want to bring unwanted possible negative attention to there outfit is beyond me. A bad call all round I recon and not good at all for the players in question!
     

Share This Page