Casino Complaint Major Tom Casino confiscates my balance citing "discrepancies"

[vinylweatherman]

I didnt break any of these rules! Also this doesn't make sense, why are you quoting those rules when in the chat with the live support I got repeatly told that the reason my account has been closed is because of discrepancies in it and that they arent allowed to give me more information. So then i came here to casinomeister in order to get an answer to what those discrepancies are and i still didnt get an answer, but instead you quote a couple of terms that i did not break. Where are those discrepancies in my account that the livesupport wasn't allowed to talk to me about?
Why would you cite discrepancies as reason for account closing, shutting down cooperation completly and as soon as I start posting about this in public you change the reason for the closing of the account to something very vague that hasn't anything to do with the initial reason for shutting down my account?

These are rather vague terms, and this might be why live chat were being just as vague as the terms themselves. It's borderline "spirit of the bonus" confiscation. When one talks of "discrepancies", it is taken as meaning the problem is something to do with dodgy personal details or ID, multiple accounts, etc. If it's a simple breach of the terms, why not just say so.

Live chat has now dug a hole for the casino as it's near impossible to reconcile the original explanation with the one now offered by the rep.

The best way forward would be a formal PAB to get to the bottom of just why the winnings were confiscated, and whether or not this adheres to the standards for accreditation.

Your play history will be an important factor in determining whether you breached a specific term (such as the 15% max bet), or broke one of the clearly defined rules regarding play.

 

[chayton]

I think with the amount of casinos that are linked now through Digimedia that not just play at one specific casino will be looked at. If the player did anything iffy at any of the other casinos in the group, that will be taken into account as well.

Asking the rep to clarify exactly what rule the player broke isn't the answer here. The player needs to quit posting and do a PAB and Max will have access to the casino information.

For the OP, here's a link to the PAB FAQ: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/help/pab-rules/
And here's a link to the PAB form: Link Outdated / Removed

Please pay attention to the part in the FAQ about email addresses and NOT posting about your issue on the forum.

 

[xxshepxx]

Utter tripe tbh.

"Using the double up feature to increase bet size" <--- wtf is that? so we can't use the double up feature on winnings now in fear of being told we're scamming casinos, that's an absurd rule to have in there.

Very very vague rules, so they can apply it to almost any style of play.

 

[dunover]

Utter tripe tbh.

"Using the double up feature to increase bet size" <--- wtf is that? so we can't use the double up feature on winnings now in fear of being told we're scamming casinos, that's an absurd rule to have in there.

Very very vague rules, so they can apply it to almost any style of play.

With all due respect it's a vital rule. Should a player be playing at maximum bet allowed under the bonus terms, then doubling up on table games like BJ or using the 'gamble win' feature on some slots would be a get-around therefore it's specifically mentioned, usually in most casinos' terms. We actually had another thread recently where a player was caught out like that.

 

[quber]

Hi Die3Tuerme,


• We may refuse to register you as a Player or elect to deregister and exclude you or suspend you as a Player from the Casino at any time if we deem that your participation at the Casino is, shall be or has been previously, fraudulent, illegal, abusive, collusive, or in any way irregular (as detailed in clause 30 of our Promotional Terms and Conditions).

Regards

Nice to know that Fortune Tellers still have employment these days.

Maybe Die3Tuerme was going to break the rules on his next bonus.

 

[KasinoKing]

The best way forward would be a formal PAB to get to the bottom of just why the winnings were confiscated, and whether or not this adheres to the standards for accreditation.

I feel this is critical for the OP if he wants a definitive answer as to what rule he broke.
A PAB is the only way.

The casino is Accredited, and must therefore be held to CM's standards, in particular, this rule:
* Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.

KK

 

[Cleveland]

Nice to know that Fortune Tellers still have employment these days.

Maybe Die3Tuerme was going to break the rules on his next bonus.

That "shall be" part you quoted actually makes sense. If for whatever reason through whatever means a casino finds out that a player has a bad history of charge backs, multi accounting, etc., the next casino would likely think his play "shall be" ..... at their own casino. They can't say it has "previously" been at their own casino if the account is new so the term covers both incidents: New account with a bad history at other places, old account with a bad history at their own.

That's just an example. At any rate I'm curious to see if the OP PABs as been said.

 

[michielm1]

obviously OP deliberately switched between betsizes 50+% when wagering counted different.
even money bets is for gaining comps and is not allowed. the sort and variety of games with a huge percentage of deposit/bonus, makes OP i.m.o. an experienced bonushunter, who plays on and now over the edge of casino's rules.
if what was discribed by rep does noet come across as 'irregular gameplay', i cant imagine anything that should / could the irregular play...
the system clearly looks designed to beat wagering requirements and gain so many comps that a loss of deposit, could almost get covered

 

[vinylweatherman]

obviously OP deliberately switched between betsizes 50+% when wagering counted different.
even money bets is for gaining comps and is not allowed. the sort and variety of games with a huge percentage of deposit/bonus, makes OP i.m.o. an experienced bonushunter, who plays on and now over the edge of casino's rules.
if what was discribed by rep does noet come across as 'irregular gameplay', i cant imagine anything that should / could the irregular play...
the system clearly looks designed to beat wagering requirements and gain so many comps that a loss of deposit, could almost get covered

You might be misunderstanding "even money bets". What you are referring to is a practice of covering all possible numbers in Roulette such that every single spin pays back the bet - the house edge. This will make it possible to calculate exactly from the outset what profit will be left after meeting WR. This was a trick of old used to beat bonuses when WR were much lower, and this (done on French Roulette) would guarantee a profit.

"Even money bets" is merely playing the game normally, but betting on red/black/odds/evens instead of rows, streets, numbers etc. There is nothing at all "irregular" about playing Roulette like this, but it would qualify as "low risk" as the house edge is down to the zero, assuming the even money outcomes are distributed equally over the long term, which they should be.

 

[rshkrn]

So did the OP PAB?

Or was there maybe another settlement we do not know of? Eitherways would love to see what's come out of this one....

 

[michielm1]

I mistakenly assumed an even money bet is f.e. covering al red numbers with 1$/€ and 18 on color black.
so then the casino just shouldnt count accumulated points gained while wagering is not completed yet.

Still i think that if the gameplay occured as described by red, is not whats the idea/spirit/goal of (welcome ) bonusses. On the other hand... if you are permitted to play a game with set rules , limits and boundries, it shouldnt be possible to break any of them. But if there is a type of play that would describe the somewhat controversial term ' not in the spirit of the bonus', i think the op's type is what is meant .

 

[vinylweatherman]

I mistakenly assumed an even money bet is f.e. covering al red numbers with 1$/€ and 18 on color black.
so then the casino just shouldnt count accumulated points gained while wagering is not completed yet.

Still i think that if the gameplay occured as described by red, is not whats the idea/spirit/goal of (welcome ) bonusses. On the other hand... if you are permitted to play a game with set rules , limits and boundries, it shouldnt be possible to break any of them. But if there is a type of play that would describe the somewhat controversial term ' not in the spirit of the bonus', i think the op's type is what is meant .

It's certainly not "within the spirit of the bonus", however for an accredited casino, there is supposed to be no such thing, just a set of fixed rules, and a simple way for players to play their very best strategy to win, and get paid when they do.

If we look at the operational standards:-

Operational Standards
•Must pay winnings in a timely manner.
•Must not disqualify any player from a payout if terms & conditions are met, except for situations of fraud (multiple-accounts, bogus ID documents, chargebacks, etc.,).
•Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.
•Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.
•No player shall be involuntarily placed into a situation which breaches the terms and conditions during the course of play.
•Must pay out progressive jackpot wins in full or in reasonable chunks, regardless of any terms and conditions limiting payouts.*
•Must remove any bonus and associated playthrough requirements at the request of the player if play has not commenced.
•Will not entice players to reverse cash withdrawals with bonuses or other incentives.
•Will not use outsourced support. Player support must be in-house.

Violating vague criteria does NOT count as a "specific T&C violation".

This is why the OP should PAB.

If a casino wants to start using "spirit of the bonus" criteria to void winnings, then this is inconsistent with accreditation here. However, it takes a PAB in order to get at the full facts of the case, and without a PAB, Bryan is unlikely to act on this as it first has to be established that "spirit of the bonus" criteria alone were involved, rather than a specific violation of a term, such as the 15% max bet rule, or only having one account. Players who use "borrowed" identities to play several accounts, regardless of consent, are considered to have acted fraudulently, and this will also cause a PAB to fail. In general, players who are found to be playing as part of a syndicate either don't have their PAB upheld, or decide to slip away quietly rather than expose themselves to such scrutiny. Syndicate play tends to involve the misuse of identities by consent, with non playing members taking a cut for allowing their details to be used.

 

[michielm1]

i understand completely, but i could still understand that rule as separate bonus-rule. not in the general t&c's. the rules for bonuses i think, are completely up to the casino's since its their free money they are giving away.

 

[begbie100]

I'm curious to see the results for this PAB also since I have a same kind of PAB going on (irregural play to different accredited MG casino) since last June with out resolution yet.

 

[maxd]

I'm curious to see the results for this PAB also since I have a same kind of PAB going on (irregural play to different accredited MG casino) since last June with out resolution yet.

The situation with your case is unfortunate, to say the least. The bottom line is that they -- meaning the casino involved in your case -- have the following clause in their Terms:

Irregular Betting ... 10.4 The following shall be deemed irregular betting for bonus play-through requirement purposes
(a) if a player has an active bonus and moves after winning from low weighted games like table games, to high weighted games like slots (or first bets high and then low with a stake not in proportion to the balance) for the sole purpose of completing wagering requirements;
(b) moving from a low weighted game to a high weighted game after large wins for the purpose of clearing wagering requirements

They go on to say that anyone suspected of "irregular betting" will, at their discretion, be treated like bot users, hackers and other fraudsters. Needless to say that's a hell of a leap -- a WR grinder = a fraudster ?!? -- but that's what it came down to. We asked them to review their Terms and reconsider that position. They basically said "thanks but no thanks" and the conversation pretty much died there. There's been no progress on your case since.

What has happened since is that they have a new Complaints policy in place due to their UK licensing. The upshot of that if that if you disagree with them over one of their decisions you are free to go to their Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) service -- namely

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

-- for adjudication. So at this point they've said they aren't going to discuss your case further with us and if you want to appeal that you'll find yourself talking to eCOGRA not us.

So, that's were things are at for you and your PAB, which is to say stalled and going nowhere soon. As such I've taken the decision to mark your PAB as "unsuccessful" though that is, of course, no fault of yours.

We still have to decide what we're going to do about those "grinder = fraudster" Terms of theirs.

As to the OP's issue (a) Major Tom is licensed in Malta so the UK thing doesn't apply, and (b) we have a new contact within the MGA which bodes well for being able to see some results.

 

[Borgie]

So, that's were things are at for you and your PAB, which is to say stalled and going nowhere soon. We still have to decide what we're going to do about those "grinder = fraudster" Terms of theirs.

Does that mean they will have their accredited status reviewed? If they wont discuss things with casinomeister and they have terms that make it easy to call people fraudsters when they actually are not?

 

[maxd]

Does that mean they will have their accredited status reviewed?

Bryan has some big decisions to make here because there are a fair number of Accred casinos that either have or have slipped in these types of Terms. I believe he's chewing on that now, while he's working on 1000 other things.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Bryan has some big decisions to make here because there are a fair number of Accred casinos that either have or have slipped in these types of Terms. I believe he's chewing on that now, while he's working on 1000 other things.

Just because a large number of casinos decide on something doesn't make it right. If this results in a shorter accredited list and a larger reservation then so be it. The casinos know what to do if they still value the kudos of accredited status.

We have consumer organisations that are more than happy to "rogue" companies that decide to rip off customers through predatory terms and conditions, and they even launch campaigns that sometimes result in laws being changed to outlaw certain practices. I am sure that remote gambling is on their radar now that it's a legitimate licenced activity within the UK, rather than "offshore".

It is likely, however, that many UK facing operators will want players to go via the approved processes like eCogra rather than the independent mediation services that grew up around the "wild west" of remote gambling. UK players will have to follow the procedure in order to take their complaints further through the system. It is still possible to take a claim to court whatever eCogra decide, and base the case on the current consumer protection laws, focussing on trying to get this particular term struck out as an "unfair business practice".

 

[begbie100]

Couple comments.

IIRC (it was last summer), I deposited 30€ with 100% bonus. So with 60€ I did 3€ spins with Thunderstruck II and hit something nice and lowered my bet to 0.60€ and grinded the WR out. This is the behavior of a fraudster in Lucky 247's opinion.

Everybody who is interested in this case should check out this old thread and especially the post I'm directly linking to:

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/nigel207-vs-lucky247.58907/

Lucky247 rep:

We do however realise that the term highlighted by this discussion was particularly vague and did not paint the right picture as far as our way of operating is concerned. As many of you have experienced when playing on Lucky247 and commented, it is definitely not the casino's policy to void winnings for changing one's bet size - that would be ludicrous!

The term was however not clear and we have thus removed it entirely from our T&Cs, so as to avoid any confusion. Only a fool can't recognise when something's wrong and we pride ourselves on at least trying not to be fools!

 

[bruinsdude]

This is the same casino group that refused a cashout on me, resulting in my reverse-withdrawing it away during the lengthy resolution phase.

Dealing with their rep, who was Rithen at the time, was painful and slow to say the least.

They FALSELY claimed a MG audit showed bets in play on the games Scrooged and Wealth Spa. The bonuses had long been played, and the amounts collected, bonus screens exited etc. Playcheck even confirmed this.

I did not PAB at the time, although I regret that now. I communicated briefly between Rithen and Bryan, got nowhere fast, and since I reversed the over 2K, I felt it meaningless to go after an accredited casino for what seemed to be a really REALLY unlucky one-off. As I see more and more garbage come forward from this particular group, I regret never bringing this out into the open on the forum.
Bryan left that up to me, and I said let's just forget about it and move on. I did. But now I see others suffering at the hands of this outfit, no more I say.

Kick em out and throw away the key! Lol

 

[randomiam]

the red flush group was fine payed ok no bullshiit .as soon as digimedia touches something it becomes tainted and my trust goes .i have been hit with so many fluck ups from them .