IRRESPONSIBLE gaming issue

[zazedac]

Ok so
I set myself deposit limits at casinos cos we all know how temptation can sometimes rule over reality. Right now I will not name this casino, however...
I was a regular player at said casino. I set a deposit limit weekly. But it didn't work. I was still easily able to deposit more than my limit. After bringing this issue up with them over and over again they put 200 back into my CASINO account (so really still allowing me to play with money I wouldn't have been able to had their limits actually worked) and they then told me they would be closing my account. Because they couldn't fix the technical glitch I was constantly experiencing. I then signed up with another casino not realising they were linked. Shouldn't they have not allowed me to deposit? I only realised today it was the same group. Is this right? I'm just after opinions here. Cos it all seems a little shifty to me

 

[Nifty29]

Ok so
I set myself deposit limits at casinos cos we all know how temptation can sometimes rule over reality. Right now I will not name this casino, however...
I was a regular player at said casino. I set a deposit limit weekly. But it didn't work. I was still easily able to deposit more than my limit. After bringing this issue up with them over and over again they put 200 back into my CASINO account (so really still allowing me to play with money I wouldn't have been able to had their limits actually worked) and they then told me they would be closing my account. Because they couldn't fix the technical glitch I was constantly experiencing. I then signed up with another casino not realising they were linked. Shouldn't they have not allowed me to deposit? I only realised today it was the same group. Is this right? I'm just after opinions here. Cos it all seems a little shifty to me

Did you bother to check for any links first? It is almost always possible to link casinos if you read their website carefully, OR look around/ask at CM.

It appears you're expecting software and casino operators to micro-control your gambling. Apart from being a neat way of passing responsibility for yourself on to another party, it is not 100% effective.

Also, how long after the "we will be closing your account" email did you deposit at the other casino? Did you withdraw the $200, or lose it back? IMO, the casino was VERY RESPONSIBLE in returning the $200 to you that had already been lost...they did NOT have to do that.

The only thing that looks "shifty" to me is you flitting from one casino to another excluding yourself etc and depositing without seemingly doing ANY research beforehand. You're looking for trouble...and finding it. If you're not prepared to do your homework, then you shouldn't expect the casinos to keep refunding your losses (which I assume is what you're getting at, like your previous thread).

 

[rockycatt]

you will prolly find out that your are blocked [when/if you win a good some $$] I think you set your self up for this best to get in touch and tell them up front

Today, 03:26 PM

 

[zazedac]

Nifty- Really they didn't have to do that? I would think that their practices in taking excess money over the responsible gaming limit would be illegal. And it was a lot more than 200. I would tend to think the RESPONSIBLE thing to do would've been to admit their software failure and refund the excess. Not shove some credits onto my casino account and then tell me they're closing it cos they can't fix the glitch!!! It was a month later that I found the other casino and deposited. I don't think I should have to do a ton of research before playing anywhere as to who owns what etc. But I guarantee had I had a win at this casino the isue would have been brought up straight away. You're such a happy bloke aren't you?

 

[nepatsfan01]

Did you bother to check for any links first? It is almost always possible to link casinos if you read their website carefully, OR look around/ask at CM.

It appears you're expecting software and casino operators to micro-control your gambling. Apart from being a neat way of passing responsibility for yourself on to another party, it is not 100% effective.

Also, how long after the "we will be closing your account" email did you deposit at the other casino? Did you withdraw the $200, or lose it back? IMO, the casino was VERY RESPONSIBLE in returning the $200 to you that had already been lost...they did NOT have to do that.

The only thing that looks "shifty" to me is you flitting from one casino to another excluding yourself etc and depositing without seemingly doing ANY research beforehand. You're looking for trouble...and finding it. If you're not prepared to do your homework, then you shouldn't expect the casinos to keep refunding your losses (which I assume is what you're getting at, like your previous thread).

I know I'm going to get some sort of "Nifty" backlash... it's the reason I rarely respond to anything that you don't agree with because I find your manner and your words harsh to say the least. But can't you give the op some credit for trying to be a responsible gambler? I don't think it's unreasonable at all to expect that when you set the limits that the casino won't let you go over the limits. And no, I don't think the op is expecting casino operators to micro-control the gambling... I think they are being responsible and expecting the casino operators to do what they are set up to do which is to limit the deposits that the op chose.

Whether the op is new or not to the casino world, it is not unreasonable to think that they didn't know that the casinos were related. Not all of us have the years of experience and knowledge that the great Nifty does. My goodness. The op is obviously a newbie to the forum, therefore not having found all the answers.

When you know better, you do better - Maya Angelou

Now the op knows better and will do better. But to criticize them for taking responsibility for their own gambling which SO many of us do? It's just crappy.

 

[zazedac]

Thankyou nepats. God I wish this was like facebook where I can block the creepy stalker guys that haunt my fan page with their shit cos I categorise anyone that CONSTANTLY slags people for asking for an opinion in the same basket.
I set limits so that I dont get carried away. If a casino can't honor their promises especially when it comes to deposit control I would expect that they make enough money to go ok our stuff up we will refund the excess. And not to my gambling account where I can just play it again. Cos it wouldn't have been there in the first place had their software worked as it was supposed to. I'm not being a sore loser I make enough money to fund my habits, I just don't think its right.

 

[Nifty29]

Nifty- Really they didn't have to do that? I would think that their practices in taking excess money over the responsible gaming limit would be illegal. And it was a lot more than 200. I would tend to think the RESPONSIBLE thing to do would've been to admit their software failure and refund the excess. Not shove some credits onto my casino account and then tell me they're closing it cos they can't fix the glitch!!! It was a month later that I found the other casino and deposited. I don't think I should have to do a ton of research before playing anywhere as to who owns what etc. But I guarantee had I had a win at this casino the isue would have been brought up straight away. You're such a happy bloke aren't you?

The bolded statement you made shows why you have had so many issues with casinos, and why you will continue to have them as long as you maintain that attitude.

The fact that you seem to exclude or limit yourself just about everywhere means you have to be TWICE as vigilant as the average player. If you don't believe me, keep doing what you're doing and you will learn the hard way.

Happy is immaterial. What gets my goat is people who expect everyone else to be responsible for their behaviour. If you have to keep expecting software and casinos to control your spending, then you have a gambling problem....sorry, I usually refrain from saying that outright, but in your case it is very clear. No software or casino in the world will stop you from gambling your money if you really want to do it....and you are proving this to be true.

The other point to clarify here is that you did NOT self-exclude at the first casino. The casino refunded some deposits, and closed your account (I assume you know that they did this for sure?? did you check first?). There is no reason for them to place you on a "banned/excluded" list, as you were not banned/excluded....your account was closed because they could not fix the technical problem you were having with your limits. VERY big difference.


So, the answer is NO they should NOT have stopped your deposits, because you did not ASK them to exclude you from their casino group. If you had been banned for fraud or something like that, then it is likely that they WOULD have stopped you, but it seems you actually parted on amicable terms.

Why don't you name the casino? I don't see the harm, and at least the rep could address the issue ( I assume you PM'ed the rep like we are supposed to when we have an issue with their operation and post about it?).

When taken in isolation, your post tells me that you may well be after some more "refunds" etc and you're perhaps wondering if that is what is expected of the casino. However, when taken along with your previous thread about the same thing at other casinos, it is obvious to me that you are primarily looking for your losses to be returned, when you have NO valid reason for them to be returned. Buyer's remorse does not apply to casino deposits...perhaps that is something you might want to think about.

You already had several views in your previous thread about pretty much the same thing. So, either you were not listening, or you didn't like what you heard and you're looking for different views. People might have differing views about what casinos should do in the case of self-exclusion, and to what degree the player is responsible, but in a case like this where there is NO self-exclusion, the same rule applies to you that applies to the rest of us..... you deposit, you play, you lose....YOU LOSE. No givsies backsies. NO refunds. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

I also have to say that all the accredited casino I know are very upfront about their connections to the other casinos within their group. I would be EXTREMELY surprised if you did ANY checking at all before you played at their sister casino, as I'll wager the information is readily available both here and on their own websites.

 

[zazedac]

Nifty- What is the point in having responsible gaming limits at a casino if they aren't going to work???

 

[rockycatt]

Thankyou nepats. God I wish this was like facebook where I can block the creepy stalker guys that haunt my fan page with their shit cos I categorise anyone that CONSTANTLY slags people for asking for an opinion in the same basket.
I set limits so that I dont get carried away. If a casino can't honor their promises especially when it comes to deposit control I would expect that they make enough money to go ok our stuff up we will refund the excess. And not to my gambling account where I can just play it again. Cos it wouldn't have been there in the first place had their software worked as it was supposed to. I'm not being a sore loser I make enough money to fund my habits, I just don't think its right.

go to your profile page or thres and find the ignore link

 

[zazedac]

And since I pitched a bitch about it I don't feel the need to mention the name of this casino publicly at this point, it may lose them customers due to an issue they still may be able to resolve and are admitting their wrongdoing in

 

[zazedac]

Thankyou rockycatt

 

[Nifty29]

I know I'm going to get some sort of "Nifty" backlash... it's the reason I rarely respond to anything that you don't agree with because I find your manner and your words harsh to say the least. But can't you give the op some credit for trying to be a responsible gambler? I don't think it's unreasonable at all to expect that when you set the limits that the casino won't let you go over the limits. And no, I don't think the op is expecting casino operators to micro-control the gambling... I think they are being responsible and expecting the casino operators to do what they are set up to do which is to limit the deposits that the op chose.

Whether the op is new or not to the casino world, it is not unreasonable to think that they didn't know that the casinos were related. Not all of us have the years of experience and knowledge that the great Nifty does. My goodness. The op is obviously a newbie to the forum, therefore not having found all the answers.

When you know better, you do better - Maya Angelou

Now the op knows better and will do better. But to criticize them for taking responsibility for their own gambling which SO many of us do? It's just crappy.

You have your view. I have mine.

In my view, responsible gambling means taking personal responsibility. Once you start replying on third parties, particularly those who survive on deposits from gamblers, you give away some of that personal responsibility, and it's all downhill from there.

You say setting the limits in the first place is responsible.....I say YES, but ONLY if you're enforcing it YOURSELF i.e. not relying on casinos to do it for you. I say responsible is only having a certain amount in your "gambling bank account" and putting the rest somewhere safe, so that you cannot overspend. If you cannot do that, then you have a serious gambling problem, and you should not be gambling.....and certainly NOT be expecting every casino you manage to overspend at (YOUR choice to do that BTW) to refund your losses.

Expecting to freeroll every casino that you (deliberately....unless you cannot count) overspend at IS crappy IMO. Why should zazedaz get their deposits refunded and not me? Maybe I spent more than I wanted to.....does that mean I get my money back? It's ridiculous to expect casinos to cover your losses.

I'll also say one thing...I have NEVER seen a casino deny winnings because someone overspent their limit. NEVER. So, any deposits you manage to make over your limit are LEGITIMATE deposits i.e. you win, you win...you lose, YOU LOSE. I'll bet if the OP won they would be saying "Woohoo...I'm so glad I was able to make those extra deposits". Catch my drifts? They deposited expecting to win (and why would you deposit if you thought you would not be paid FFS), so they should expect to lose.

Thankyou nepats. God I wish this was like facebook where I can block the creepy stalker guys that haunt my fan page with their shit cos I categorise anyone that CONSTANTLY slags people for asking for an opinion in the same basket.
I set limits so that I dont get carried away. If a casino can't honor their promises especially when it comes to deposit control I would expect that they make enough money to go ok our stuff up we will refund the excess. And not to my gambling account where I can just play it again. Cos it wouldn't have been there in the first place had their software worked as it was supposed to. I'm not being a sore loser I make enough money to fund my habits, I just don't think its right.

I'm not here to make you feel good. Sorry about that.

You asked for opinions and advice, and I am offering them.

It really annoys me when players lose their dough and start looking for ways to scam it back....and trying to get money back that was LEGITIMATELY deposited and lost IS scamming IMO. Accept you lost more than you wanted to, and get over it. If you can't do that, you should consider getting professional help, because your future is not a bright one....believe me, I have seen it.

Oh and BTW, the first casino DID refund you some cash. You could have withdrawn it (I suppose you didn't?). Beyond that, I would prefer to hear from the casino rep on this one. The second casino doesn't owe you as cent.

 

[zazedac]

I don't think the second casino owes me anything. I have closed that account after realising the association. I do think the first casino does!

 

[Nifty29]

Nifty- What is the point in having responsible gaming limits at a casino if they aren't going to work???

Two seperate issues.,

Issue #1 = Gambling limit function not working properly (we have only your word for that ATM). You inform the casino, and they attempt to fix it. Perhaps they give you some compensation (which they DID), and that's the right thing to do. The casino closes your account as they cannot make the function work, which is also the right thing to do to HELP you. It does NOT help them as it costs them money.

Issue #2 = Deposits made over limit should be refunded. Ahhh...NO. You WOULD have been paid if you won....as I said, I've never seen anyone NOT be paid under those circumstance (only after self-exclusion which is totally different). So, your deposits were legitimate and should not be refunded.

On Issue #1 we are close to agreement.

On Issue #2, we are not.

 

[LaurieJim]

I do admire you for posting about this as there are players out there that need that little direction when they can't stop depositing , the casinos that offer this are doing a great service but they can't be focused on one player 24/7 as most use many servers for deposits.

The casino did a nice gesture of putting the 200.00 back into your account , you were lucky , wish that had happened to me

Contact the other casino and let them know , if they close your account , so be it , there are a number of casinos out there that are more than happy to take your money , this casino must have valued you as a depositor and player to have given back the money.

I do see your point but the best policy is to stay within a set limit at any one casino and you keep control of it or otherwise it controls you, I have done this too in the past and it never worked out but thats just me.

Much Luck,
Laurie

 

[cpdnd31]

OK I want to understand this a little better.

A) you set up a gambling limit. lets say 200.00 a month
B) It glitched

1. how exactly did it glitch? Was it just letting you deposit or did you contact support and say my acct has a limit on it and I want to change that please so I can deposit again.

C. Casino gave you money back- 200.00 which I will ASSUME is the amount you were able to deposit over the limit.
D. They couldn't fix so closed acct.

Correct so far?

OK here are my questions: Did you not know you went that far over your limit?
Do you not agree that if they can't fix it -it is a good thing that they closed acct. ( I think that they are protecting you very well.)
Are you upset because the next casino was related? I'm sorry but that is your own fault for not researching casino. Researching a casino in my opinion is the smartest thing a player can do-- reason casinomeister exists and you should know better.

until we know more about said glitch I think we need to hold off on opinions of who and what is responsible at this point.

 

[LaurieJim]

I don't think the second casino owes me anything. I have closed that account after realising the association. I do think the first casino does!

Again, the 200.00 was fair on the casinos part but any other monies owed or not is up to Max to deal with in your PAB !

At this point I would not comment futher and let Max take a look at it , just my thoughts.

Laurie

 

[skiny]

Deposit limits are only useful if you can't keep track of how much money you're depositing and even then their usefulness is limited. Maybe you forgot about the deposit you made on Tuesday and on Saturday you try to make another one and you're reminded when you've reached your limit. If you have deposit limits set up because you can't control how much money you're spending you're really just slapping a bandage on a problem that's going to keep finding new ways to bleed.

All it takes is a second account at a new casino and your deposit limits go right out the window. If you're serious about limiting your deposits and a bad memory is the issue the most effective way to keep the problem under control is to keep records of your own deposits at all casinos. You can make up an elaborate table in Excel or leave a piece of scrap paper on your desk but by doing so you've taken responsibility for your own record keeping and relieved the casino of the responsibility of covering the costs of your own failures.

For the casino this is a lose/lose situation. If you go beyond your deposit limits for any reason and you win you're sure to keep the money. If you lose you'll expect the deposits returned. The other position the casino is put in is to have to guess if these limits are required because you have a problem remembering how much money you deposited or if you have no control over how much you gamble. Personally, I don't see how limiting a person's deposits at one casino will control a gambling problem. If the real issue is you have no control over your gambling then the real solution is to find a new hobby.

I think these deposit limits should be set up as a courtesy at best and casinos should not be responsible if a player manages to exceed them. Casinos have no idea where else you're playing and a player could have well since exceed these limits at other casinos before coming back and trying to slip past the limits at their own. There are dozens of ways to keep track of how much money you're depositing and if none of them work for you then maybe you need a hobby that doesn't require financial bookkeeping to keep you from over spending.

 

[dunover]

I do think SE and deposit limit facilities are a good thing generally, and what I have seen is that almost all the casinos on the accredited list have them, whether a requirement or not. This IMO tends to reflect well upon the casino as it clearly recognizes certain gamblers can lose control, and they are NOT taking advantage of this fact like some would. Of course Nifty is correct in that ultimately the responsibility is the individual's, but I'd have to slightly disagree about the black-and-whiteness of that view - a player who may have hitherto been totally responsible CAN lose control, for whatever reason, for the first time. Remember every alchy had a tipping point which started their addiction, every druggie a certain fix and the same applies to every gambling addict. If that casino can look you straight in the eye and say 'You had every chance to pull back' then they have a clear conscience and believe it or not (some reps on here have said as much) they don't want to take money from unfortunates.
I know people could simply open another account as Nifty said and effectively get around the issue. One casino can only do so much though, and the SE/deposit limit facilities are about as good as it gets. A decent goodwill and player-friendly gesture I think.
The OP was bloody lucky to get a 200 refund, although I suspect he spunked it and never made a w/d. It means he was definitely playing at a reputable site, or at least one with a conscience. The thing is, he very well KNEW he had already spent his limit and complained AFTER the event when he had lost. The casino provided the facility as part of the deal to the player, so yes it should have worked. But how would the player have felt if he had won a packet, tried to w/d and just had the over-deposit(s) refunded? He would have complained about that too. So, I think the site did right by him, in fact went that extra mile for him.

 

[skiny]

Ok so
I set myself deposit limits at casinos cos we all know how temptation can sometimes rule over reality. Right now I will not name this casino, however...
I was a regular player at said casino. I set a deposit limit weekly. But it didn't work. I was still easily able to deposit more than my limit. After bringing this issue up with them over and over again they put 200 back into my CASINO account (so really still allowing me to play with money I wouldn't have been able to had their limits actually worked) and they then told me they would be closing my account. Because they couldn't fix the technical glitch I was constantly experiencing. I then signed up with another casino not realising they were linked. Shouldn't they have not allowed me to deposit? I only realised today it was the same group. Is this right? I'm just after opinions here. Cos it all seems a little shifty to me

Here's the problem as I see it. The OP played at casino A with deposit limits set up. Those limits repeatedly failed since he said he brought the issue up with them over and over. Eventually they put 200 back in his account to cover the extra deposits and closed his account.

At this point the OP knew there was an ongoing problem since the issue was brought up more than once and failed to take matters into his own hands by keeping track of his own deposits. The casino I called "A" returned 200 dollars to the OP and closed the account. In my opinion, since this was not a self exclusion issue casino A has no more responsibility to the OP.

The casino sets up an account at casino B which is apparently a sister casino to casino A. There is no reason for casino A to follow the OP from casino to casino or to red flag the OP at other casinos since this issue was not addressed as a gambling problem. If the problem was a software issue that kept casino A from effectively limiting the OPs deposits, casino B may well have had better luck with it.

The question I have is whether or not the $200 reimbursement was withdrawn. If it wasn't there is definitely a problem since the money was returned to the OP after a complaint of over depositing. If the OP knew he deposited over his limit and played the returned money instead of withdrawing it the OP either didn't really mind losing the extra 200 or has a gambling problem.

In either case, unless the OP admits to the first casino that he has a gambling problem, what he does at other casinos is none of the first casino's business.

 

[dunover]

Here's the problem as I see it. The OP played at casino A with deposit limits set up. Those limits repeatedly failed since he said he brought the issue up with them over and over. Eventually they put 200 back in his account to cover the extra deposits and closed his account.

At this point the OP knew there was an ongoing problem since the issue was brought up more than once and failed to take matters into his own hands by keeping track of his own deposits. The casino I called "A" returned 200 dollars to the OP and closed the account. In my opinion, since this was not a self exclusion issue casino A has no more responsibility to the OP.

The casino sets up an account at casino B which is apparently a sister casino to casino A. There is no reason for casino A to follow the OP from casino to casino or to red flag the OP at other casinos since this issue was not addressed as a gambling problem. If the problem was a software issue that kept casino A from effectively limiting the OPs deposits, casino B may well have had better luck with it.

The question I have is whether or not the $200 reimbursement was withdrawn. If it wasn't there is definitely a problem since the money was returned to the OP after a complaint of over depositing. If the OP knew he deposited over his limit and played the returned money instead of withdrawing it the OP either didn't really mind losing the extra 200 or has a gambling problem.

In either case, unless the OP admits to the first casino that he has a gambling problem, what he does at other casino is none of the first casino's business.

Yes, that's a decent summary of the facts - just one thing to add: Yes, the casino has no responsibility to 'follow the player around' for responsible gaming reasons BUT the OP does raise a reoccurring issue. We have seen many instances of casino groups using SE as a stick to beat the player with. Csssava are a notorious example of a group with many many sites and who never provide a list of them in any single skin's T&C's. This leads to players either getting winnings from a SUB at another site then duplicity is used as a reason to void them under a '1 SUB in group' rule or similarly winnings are voided as a player SE'd at another site in the group.

So, the OP does have a valid concern there.

 

[skiny]

Yes, that's a decent summary of the facts - just one thing to add: Yes, the casino has no responsibility to 'follow the player around' for responsible gaming reasons BUT the OP does raise a reoccurring issue. We have seen many instances of casino groups using SE as a stick to beat the player with. Csssava are a notorious example of a group with many many sites and who never provide a list of them in any single skin's T&C's. This leads to players either getting winnings from a SUB at another site then duplicity is used as a reason to void them under a '1 SUB in group' rule or similarly winnings are voided as a player SE'd at another site in the group.

So, the OP does have a valid concern there.

And that would be an issue if self exclusion was a factor. But according to the facts we have so far, self exclusion was never discussed. So if the OP deposits and wins at the second casino both casinos would have questions to answer.

The first casino would need to explain how the OP was put on a self exclusion list when the decision to close the OP's account was based on their own inability to limit the player's deposits and not based on the OP admitting to a gambling problem.

The second casino would need to explain why they were taking deposits from a player who was on a self exclusion list in the first place.

Now, I could be wrong but the fact that the first casino handed the player back 200 dollars before closing his account tells me they're not looking for trouble. If these two casinos are part of the same group it only stands to reason that the second one isn't either. I just don't see anything shady about the second casino taking deposits from a player who is apparently not on a self exclusion list.

That being said, the second casino might know about this issue if notes on players are passed from casino to casino within the casino group and if the same problem arises the player might not be so lucky to get his overspending returned. If this turns out to be an ongoing problem the OP might find himself on an exclusion list he didn't ask to be put on himself.

 

[Andy Walker]

Ok so
I set myself deposit limits at casinos cos we all know how temptation can sometimes rule over reality. Right now I will not name this casino, however...
I was a regular player at said casino. I set a deposit limit weekly. But it didn't work. I was still easily able to deposit more than my limit. After bringing this issue up with them over and over again they put 200 back into my CASINO account (so really still allowing me to play with money I wouldn't have been able to had their limits actually worked) and they then told me they would be closing my account. Because they couldn't fix the technical glitch I was constantly experiencing. I then signed up with another casino not realising they were linked. Shouldn't they have not allowed me to deposit? I only realised today it was the same group. Is this right? I'm just after opinions here. Cos it all seems a little shifty to me

Translation, I have issues with my disposal income, so I set limits to ensure that I don’t spend more than I should. I deposited more than I should have once and this showed a glitch in the system. I recognised this by admitting this was easily done.

Quote “I was still easily able to deposit more than my limit” after bringing this up with the Casino time and time again after (past tense) depositing more than my limit with money I didn’t potentially have I chose to blame them for their sign in the road that warned of a sinkhole and potential peril beyond, I ignored the sign and fell down the hole, it’s their fault because even though I could read the sign there was nobody there to stop me falling.

Maybe every Casino customer should be assigned a personal minder to slap the back of their leg when they are about to do something wrong, and scorn them if they return from the toilet without washing their hands, and send them to bed without their debit / credit cards. Sadly we know this is not going to happen.

We all know when we have spent more than a few coins over our limit and when a miracle (IMO) happens that being we are given a second chance, we should tread lightly and think a little more about the recovered funds before using a term I really hate but commonly used now “spunking” our money again, with the same outcome.

 

[Nifty29]

Yes, that's a decent summary of the facts - just one thing to add: Yes, the casino has no responsibility to 'follow the player around' for responsible gaming reasons BUT the OP does raise a reoccurring issue. We have seen many instances of casino groups using SE as a stick to beat the player with. Csssava are a notorious example of a group with many many sites and who never provide a list of them in any single skin's T&C's. This leads to players either getting winnings from a SUB at another site then duplicity is used as a reason to void them under a '1 SUB in group' rule or similarly winnings are voided as a player SE'd at another site in the group.

So, the OP does have a valid concern there.

Except....this is NOT a self exclusion issue.

It is a deposit limit issue, and I've NEVER seen wins denied as a result....and doubt I ever will.

 

[nepatsfan01]

Expecting to freeroll every casino that you (deliberately....unless you cannot count) overspend at IS crappy IMO. Why should zazedaz get their deposits refunded and not me? Maybe I spent more than I wanted to.....does that mean I get my money back? It's ridiculous to expect casinos to cover your losses.

you'll notice that I didn't address the refund aspect of this whole thing because quite frankly I agree with you. I don't think you should ever expect deposits to be refunded due to your own overspending.

However, I do think that casinos have the responsibility to limit the deposit amounts if the gambler wants them to. But if they don't, then I believe it is up to the individual to self exclude. I do not think that they should expect their deposits back.

That wasn't what i was initially replying to. I merely wanted to express my distaste in your wording regarding your obvious annoyance at people who wanted to gamble in a responsible manner. However, after rereading I realize that it was annoyance towards the op's expectation of being refunded as well as the expectation that casinos have a responsibility to as you put it to "micro control' their gambling. I think that is where we effectively disagree, as I do think the casinos should limit the players deposit amount to the amount they requested and by not doing that, it can show rogue-ish behavior on the part of the casino.

That being said, we don't know that the casino didn't do that. We don't know the reason behind the op being able to over deposit. Until that is answered I just don't think we should jump to conclusions.

 

[nepatsfan01]

And in regards to point #2 about the 2nd casino issue... I don't really get that at all. Why did you feel the need to close the 2nd account? Just because you realized they were from the same group? If you didn't self exclude from the first casino and the casino was the one that closed the account, you shouldn't have a problem getting paid. Unless there is more to this story...

Honestly, I have to say, this shouldn't be a PAB issue in general I don't believe. I think you just have to take the hit and move on and then make sure you find a casino that honors your deposit limits. If they don't, you need to self exclude. But I have to agree, that you shouldn't be refunded anything else. I think you got more than most of us when they gave you the $200. You continued to play there even though you knew they didn't honor the limits. At the very most, you should report that to Max regarding their unfairness in not honoring the limits and they can decide if that is breaking any accreditation rules or whatnot, but even then I don't know if that is the responsibility this forum or anyone. The fact is, casinos do what they want until players stop playing there and rules are changed because they are losing money. You have no recourse unfortunately, you can only look out for yourself.

 

[nisosbar]

I do want to comment here about something.

There was recently another thread here in which the threadstarter said that at one point, his gambling created problems for him. He stopped for a while, and then gradually brought it back, but with temperance, and that's where it stayed, no longer a problem.

I get annoyed at the Oprah Winfrey approach to life in which anything and everything is addictive. I'm only half-kidding that sometimes it seems like she could argue that breathing is addictive.

Gambling can be addictive, but so can smoking. I had a 3 pack per day habit at one point in my life, and I quit cold turkey. That was 20 years ago, and I no longer smoke - over the years I have tried a cigarette after a night of carousing, out with friends, etc., and I detest it. Do I consider myself a smoking addict? No. I drink maybe every day, but mostly only one glass of wine with dinner. Sometimes more, sometimes not even one glass. Am I an alcoholic? According to Oprah, I am probably an alcoholic, a smoking addict, a sex addict, lol, and God knows what else.

Having said that, I know some people do destroy their lives, but most don't. Most exercise self-restraint and self-discipline. They learn from their mistakes and grow personally.

Long-winded way of saying, I feel sorry for the threadstarter's pain, but if you failed to restrain yourself, I'm sorry but I can't fault the casino for taking your deposit and giving you a game. As others have said, they DID refund you $200 and they DID also close your account altogether. That seems more than fair, IMO.

At any rate, I wish you well, and hope that you can resolve your problems.

 

[zazedac]

Firstly I really wish people would stop making assumptions due to names and calling me he when I'm a woman.
The whole point of this initial thread is pretty simple. If a casino says that you can set a deposit limit and it's software fails on that and allows you to deposit more than this limit due to as they explained to me a software error I would think they would be reponsible!!!

 

[skiny]

Firstly I really wish people would stop making assumptions due to names and calling me he when I'm a woman.
The whole point of this initial thread is pretty simple. If a casino says that you can set a deposit limit and it's software fails on that and allows you to deposit more than this limit due to as they explained to me a software error I would think they would be reponsible!!!

The first time, yes.

If it was an ongoing problem the player should know not to trust the software to prevent exceeding the deposit limits.

 

[Nifty29]

Firstly I really wish people would stop making assumptions due to names and calling me he when I'm a woman.
The whole point of this initial thread is pretty simple. If a casino says that you can set a deposit limit and it's software fails on that and allows you to deposit more than this limit due to as they explained to me a software error I would think they would be reponsible!!!

1. My apologies on the gender thing. It was not deliberate, but I'm sure you know that.

2. I would say you're pretty much ignoring what most people are saying.

I.e. .....that obviously the CASINO is responsible for ensuring that their software functions correctly.

............that YOU are responsible for your deposits, play, and the result...in this case, a loss.

Unless you are numerically illiterate....and it appears you are not since you stated you "managed to make SEVERAL MORE DEPOSITS over my limit" I.e. you could subtract what your limit was from your actual deposit values, hence I assume you can ADD just as well.....then IMO (and based on your statements) you KNEW you were over your limit when you made "several more deposits". So, let's pretend we all didn't come down in the last shower and call a spade a spade......

You're pissed because you spent more than you wanted to, and you want the CASINO to cover your losses. I can see no other motivation behind your continual reiteration that "the casino is responsible", when everyone has AGREED already that they ARE responsible...for the software limiting function, NOT your legitimate losses.

You're digging the hole deeper with every post, and IMO it is just highlighting that it is all about getting your deposits back and nothing else.

 

[cpdnd31]

I would still like to know what exactly the glitch was? Did it not lock you out when you went to deposit after you reached your limit? Did it let you change your limit through chat/live help? How did it glitch?

 

[zazedac]

I accept when I spend more too bad so sad my fault. And this is why I set deposit limits on my transactions at the casinos I play at. Cos I know that when I'm caught up in the moment I sometimes won't think/care about how much I'm spending. But I also trust that the casino I'm playing at is able to impose these limits. The software the casino admitted was at fault for allowing me to deposit over limits

 

[skiny]

I accept when I spend more too bad so sad my fault. And this is why I set deposit limits on my transactions at the casinos I play at. Cos I know that when I'm caught up in the moment I sometimes won't think/care about how much I'm spending. But I also trust that the casino I'm playing at is able to impose these limits. The software the casino admitted was at fault for allowing me to deposit over limits

I'm not sure how that makes it shady for a second casino to take your deposits.

What method do you use to deposit? Maybe there's a way to limit your deposits that doesn't rely on the casino software.

 

[rena35]

I feel if a casino offers this too its customers then the casino should honor it if a player plays beyond the limit or remove it from the options.Also i did see where the OP lost and then the casino gave his money back which is an amazing thing for a casino to do.I am looking forward to seeing how this situation is resolved.

 

[stokes]

It is funny how you guys are strict with players and rules but lenient when it comes to casino and its own rules.

Is this limit function considered by the casino just a nice to have? I wonder if they defined it in the T&C like a function that might work?

And no, it was not a nice gesture to gave back 200 USD. They should have credited all the money above the limit.

 

[zazedac]

Ok I don't actually have much of an issue with the second casino with that I'm probably just annoyed that I didn't realise it was the same software provider cos I wouldn't have played there knowing it was the same software that let me down in the past. I don't think refunding a third of the excess deposits to my casino account is much of a resolution really it's just giving me more gambling time in their casino. I think it comes down to false advertising. If you say you are going to provide a service provide it. Pretty simple.

 

[Nifty29]

It is funny how you guys are strict with players and rules but lenient when it comes to casino and its own rules.

Is this limit function considered by the casino just a nice to have? I wonder if they defined it in the T&C like a function that might work?

And no, it was not a nice gesture to gave back 200 USD. They should have credited all the money above the limit.

OK. Go find it in the terms and conditions where it states that any deposits made over the requested limit will be refunded. Good luck with that.

Its not a case of RULES. There are no RULES involved. Your comment just shows you didn't read the thread, or just skipped over the bits that didn't fit your "poor player" POV.

The deposit limit function is a TOOL to ASSIST players with no self-control to try and curb their spending. The important words here are TOOL and ASSIST.

Remember, we have NOT heard from the CASINO at this point. It is quite possible that the OP found a way to circumvent the limit, perhaps by changing it up,depositing, and then changing it back and claiming it didn't work. Who knows? It just seems very odd to me that something that simply disables deposits at a given number would completely fail.

Anyway, all the OP cares about is freerolling the casino, and other players should be offended by that as I am.

 

[skiny]

Ok I don't actually have much of an issue with the second casino with that I'm probably just annoyed that I didn't realise it was the same software provider cos I wouldn't have played there knowing it was the same software that let me down in the past. I don't think refunding a third of the excess deposits to my casino account is much of a resolution really it's just giving me more gambling time in their casino. I think it comes down to false advertising. If you say you are going to provide a service provide it. Pretty simple.

$200 was 1/3 of your over spending which means you didn't notice you were gambling $600 more than you intended to.

Returning the $200 didn't give you a chance to recoup some of the money you didn't intend to spend. It gave you "more gambling time."

I think it's time you took a serious look at your gambling habits. You might not be an addict but you certainly don't have very much restraint.

 

[SirWegs]

Have you had any deposit limit problems on the 2nd casino your playing at?

 

[stokes]

The deposit limit function is a TOOL to ASSIST players with no self-control to try and curb their spending. The important words here are TOOL and ASSIST.

So you think this is a tool which MIGHT help (if it works) for players with gambling issue, but players should not rely on it, right? Then why some responsible casino (like Redbet) goes further and says that limits set can not be lifted within a certain period:

"Should you not wish to suspend your account but just better control your gambling times and spending you may choose to place limits on your deposits, bet amounts and even session times. You can set your own limits and determine how much you can play.

For your benefit you will not be allowed remove any restrictions placed on your account or bets until a minimum period of seven days has elapsed from when you created the limitation. Increase in restrictions will be effected immediately."

I think if a casino has this functionality then it needs to maintain it and take the responsibilty.

Remember, we have NOT heard from the CASINO at this point. It is quite possible that the OP found a way to circumvent the limit, perhaps by changing it up,depositing, and then changing it back and claiming it didn't work. Who knows? It just seems very odd to me that something that simply disables deposits at a given number would completely fail.

Hmm. So the OP circumvented the limit (especially the way you were suggesting) and the casino was happy to give her 200 USD?

 

[Nifty29]

So you think this is a tool which MIGHT help (if it works) for players with gambling issue, but players should not rely on it, right? Then why some responsible casino (like Redbet) goes further and says that limits set can not be lifted within a certain period:

"Should you not wish to suspend your account but just better control your gambling times and spending you may choose to place limits on your deposits, bet amounts and even session times. You can set your own limits and determine how much you can play.

For your benefit you will not be allowed remove any restrictions placed on your account or bets until a minimum period of seven days has elapsed from when you created the limitation. Increase in restrictions will be effected immediately."

I think if a casino has this functionality then it needs to maintain it and take the responsibilty.



Hmm. So the OP circumvented the limit (especially the way you were suggesting) and the casino was happy to give her 200 USD?

Netent software is probably the best in that regard. It is very reliable from what I'm told. Unfortunately, they all aren't as good.

Nobody is arguing that the CASINO isn't responsible for its own functionality. The argument myself and many others are making is that, based on NEVER being a situation here at CM where a player has been denied payment for breaching a deposit limit, the OP would have been PAID if they WON....hence the deposits were legitimate...hence they are non-refundable.

There is NO WAY the OP didn't know they were $600 over their limit. It's BS to say that they had no idea. It's becoming more and more obvious that the OP is just after her money back because she LOST...fair and square I might add.

I have absolutely NO doubt that, if for some reason the CASINO denied a big win based on being over her deposit limit, she would have launched a PAB insisting that she sould be paid because she deposited in good faith in the expectation of being paid should she win. You can't have it both ways....actually wanting it both ways is called freerolling and it's unacceptable.

You may want to read what I said again....I said the limit changing scam was a possibility...one of many. Point being...we have only ONE side of the story, and I'm not prepared to accept someone who's trying to freeroll at face value.

Stil can't find the term where you don't get paid if you breach your limit eh? Keep looking sunshine.

 

[stokes]

Nobody is arguing that the CASINO isn't responsible for its own functionality. The argument myself and many others are making is that, based on NEVER being a situation here at CM where a player has been denied payment for breaching a deposit limit, the OP would have been PAID if they WON....hence the deposits were legitimate...

...the casino did not enforce the deposit limit hence they need to refund all above the limit.

For me it is similar to the case when you buy something in a shop where there is a difference between the price on the tag and the price at the cashier. The shop is obliged to use the price on the tag (refund the difference).

There is NO WAY the OP didn't know they were $600 over their limit. It's BS to say that they had no idea.

Empathy is not your strongest asset. She had gambling issue, that's why she wanted to set deposit limit, which the casino failed to enforce.

If it is an accredited casino I would suggest to submit a PAB as it is part of the standard do enforce deposit limit.

"Must offer and enforce spending limits in addition to both temporary and permanent self exclusion options."

Stil can't find the term where you don't get paid if you breach your limit eh? Keep looking sunshine.

Still can't find the term where you DO get paid if you breach your limit eh? Keep looking sweetheart.

 

[Nifty29]

...the casino did not enforce the deposit limit hence they need to refund all above the limit.

For me it is similar to the case when you buy something in a shop where there is a difference between the price on the tag and the price at the cashier. The shop is obliged to use the price on the tag (refund the difference).



Empathy is not your strongest asset. She had gambling issue, that's why she wanted to set deposit limit, which the casino failed to enforce.

If it is an accredited casino I would suggest to submit a PAB as it is part of the standard do enforce deposit limit.

"Must offer and enforce spending limits in addition to both temporary and permanent self exclusion options."




Still can't find the term where you DO get paid if you breach your limit eh? Keep looking sweetheart.

The fact that you cannot produce ANY example of a term that states wins are void if over a deposit limit, which was YOUR burden since it was YOU that claimed they wouldn't have been paid, proves to me once and for all that you have no reasonable intention to provide a reasonable POV.

In the spirit of ny recent statement in another thread, that's all I'm going to say about you, your opinion, and this topic.

 

[dionysus]

The fact that you cannot produce ANY example of a term that states wins are void if over a deposit limit, which was YOUR burden since it was YOU that claimed they wouldn't have been paid, proves to me once and for all that you have no reasonable intention to provide a reasonable POV.

In the spirit of ny recent statement in another thread, that's all I'm going to say about you, your opinion, and this topic.

well, that's just great, ya'll've done gone and broke Nifty - I hope you realize I'm not paying for that

 

[stokes]

The fact that you cannot produce ANY example of a term that states wins are void if over a deposit limit, which was YOUR burden since it was YOU that claimed they wouldn't have been paid, proves to me once and for all that you have no reasonable intention to provide a reasonable POV.

Just a last question/request.

Can you please show me where did I say ORIGINALLY that they would have not been paid? Feel free to quote me.

 

[Richas]

I feel if a casino offers this too its customers then the casino should honor it if a player plays beyond the limit or remove it from the options.Also i did see where the OP lost and then the casino gave his money back which is an amazing thing for a casino to do.I am looking forward to seeing how this situation is resolved.

The UKGC remote gambling technical standards (RTS)are here:

Old / Expired Link

They do cover this area

RTS 12 – Financial limits
All gambling
RTS aim 12
To provide customers with facilities that may assist them in sticking to their personal budgets for
gambling with the operator.
RTS requirement 12A
The gambling system must provide easily accessible facilities that make it possible for customers
to impose their own financial limits. Customers must be given the opportunity to set a limit as part
of the registration process (or at the point at which the customer makes the first deposit or
payment).
For lotteries, where the customer’s spend is controlled through subscriptions, additional facilities
do not have to be provided.
RTS implementation guidance 12A
a. For telephone gambling (except lotteries), customers should be asked if they would like to set a
deposit or spend limit when they register. Customers should be able to request a limit at any point
after registration. The limit should be implemented as soon as practicable after the customer’s
request. The customer should be informed when the limit will come into force.
b. For other access media (including internet, interactive TV and mobile), customers should be
offered the opportunity to select a deposit/spend limit from a list which may contain a ‘no limit’
option or to enter a limit of their choice as part of the registration or first deposit process. The ‘no
limit’ option should not be the default option.
c. Limits could be in the form of:
i. deposit limits: where the amount a customer deposits into their account is limited over a
particular duration
ii. spend limits: where the amount a customer spends on gambling (or specific gambling
products) is restricted for a given period – this type of limit may be appropriate where
the customer does not hold a deposit account with the operator
iii. loss limits: where the amount lost (i.e. winnings subtracted from the amount spent) is
restricted (for instance when a customer makes a £10 bet and wins £8, the loss is £2).
d. The period/duration of the limit should be no less than one day (or 24 hours).
e. In addition:
i. limits may be implemented per customer, per account, or other means
ii. limits could also be implemented across all products or channels or for individual
products or channels
iii. financial limit facilities should be provided via a link on the home page
iv. facilities should be available on deposit pages/screens or via a link on these
pages/screens.
RTS requirement 12B
All reasonable steps must be taken to ensure that customer-led limits are only increased at the
customer’s request, and only after a cooling-off period of 24 hours has elapsed.
RTS implementation guidance 12B
a. Increases should not be implemented until a cooling-off period of at least 24 hours from the
point at which the request to increase the limit was received. Where it is practicable to do so, the
customer should be required to confirm that they still wish to increase the limit at the end of the
cooling-off period.
b. Where possible (for instance, unless systems/technical failures prevent it) limit reductions are to
be implemented within 24 hours of the request being received.

Would these be enough or do they need toughening? (Bear in mind most sites will need to get a UK licence in 2014 and follow these rules)?

 

[spoton]

The UKGC remote gambling technical standards (RTS)are here:

Old / Expired Link

They do cover this area



Would these be enough or do they need toughening? (Bear in mind most sites will need to get a UK licence in 2014 and follow these rules)?

They should add a line of what happends in case of a technical glitch, or we will see the same situations as here. IMO a term should state that all bets over the limit is void, and that no withdrawals will be paid, and also that losses are to be refunded.

 

[skiny]

They should add a line of what happends in case of a technical glitch, or we will see the same situations as here. IMO a term should state that all bets over the limit is void, and that no withdrawals will be paid, and also that losses are to be refunded.

Sounds like a new thing for the rogues to lie about when they decide not to pay you.

Personally, I don't think it's a casino's responsibility to monitor a players spending. If you spend a little bit over your limit and now you can't afford to see a movie or buy those new shoes you wanted, tough luck. If you over spend to the point where it causes you hardship you probably shouldn't be gambling.

If the deposit limits are a function of the software the casinos themselves have very little control over it. The software provider would ultimately be responsible for it's reliability. I wonder if the same people that rely on these online deposit limits expect someone at the B&Ms to follow them around and monitory how much the lose.

What method are people using to deposit that doesn't require them to reload, transfer funds or buy cards before they make the deposits? I just don't buy the "I didn't know how much I was depositing" excuse. At what point do players become responsible for their own actions? Are we going to expect casinos to limit our wager sizes and amount of time spent gambling next? Maybe they can force us to withdrawal when our balance reaches a specific amount so we don't play it back. If you don't know how much you're gambling, write it down and add it up. If that doesn't keep you from depositing more when you've reached your limit, that's not the casino's fault.

Where is the line between just playing a little too much and a problem gambler? In my opinion it's right where we expect or require someone else to control how much we gamble.

 

[cpdnd31]

OK For the 3RD time WHAT WAS THE GLITCH? What did it do? Did it just let you deposit? Please explain what the glitch was so we can have more facts.

 

[maxd]

Please note that the OP has a PAB in progress on this issue. Assuming they have read and plan to comply with the Pitch-A-Bitch FAQ they can't and won't be responding here until the PAB has run it's course.