JPF - Was this term always there?

[winbig]

Just received a bonus "offer" (10% cashback...yippee! ) from Wild Jack, and this term was among many at the bottom:

#
The decision of the casino is final and no correspondence will be entered into.

Isn't that uhm...sort of predatory? I could understand a rogue casino taking this approach where the player has no voice (or anyone at all if you take it at face value), but not from an accredited group...

 

[vinylweatherman]

Just received a bonus "offer" (10% cashback...yippee! ) from Wild Jack, and this term was among many at the bottom:




Isn't that uhm...sort of predatory? I could understand a rogue casino taking this approach where the player has no voice (or anyone at all if you take it at face value), but not from an accredited group...

You will find this pretty much everywhere, even the accredited section. It means nothing, and no accredited casino to my knowledge has used such a term to "stonewall" an issue between player and casino. Those that have "stonewalled" Max over PAB issues have ended up in the "casino warnings" thread merely for failing to respond, which is essentially what this term is trying to enshrine.
Less reputable casinos will use this term, but will actually correspond, but this correspondence will be to the effect that their decision is final, they will not rethink, nor explain.

Usually, the term is seen with a promotion, and in these cases is likely meant to stop them getting bogged down in arguments, rather than any intent to renege on the offer as portrayed.

I have a similar offer at All Slots, and what you get depends on whether you have already had your quota of the standing monthly 10%, which is on top of these extra offers. It will be 10% up to the amount stated in the email, but you will get another 10% Thursday provided you have not already had 10% up to 450 in April.

 

[winbig]

You will find this pretty much everywhere, even the accredited section. It means nothing, and no accredited casino to my knowledge has used such a term to "stonewall" an issue between player and casino. Those that have "stonewalled" Max over PAB issues have ended up in the "casino warnings" thread merely for failing to respond, which is essentially what this term is trying to enshrine.
Less reputable casinos will use this term, but will actually correspond, but this correspondence will be to the effect that their decision is final, they will not rethink, nor explain.

Usually, the term is seen with a promotion, and in these cases is likely meant to stop them getting bogged down in arguments, rather than any intent to renege on the offer as portrayed.

I have a similar offer at All Slots, and what you get depends on whether you have already had your quota of the standing monthly 10%, which is on top of these extra offers. It will be 10% up to the amount stated in the email, but you will get another 10% Thursday provided you have not already had 10% up to 450 in April.

Thanks....I didn't know whether they stood by that or not

And uhmmmmmmmmmmmm
please don't hate.....

check the winner's SS thread in a min