Max's Corner Update - ICE London Review

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Max put his nose to the grindstone and came up with his ICE London review. It's a "one year later" report. :thumbsup:

Topics include:
* Kahnawake: Say Hello To An Industry Leader
* The Fallout from UIGEA Continues
* CWC and "the student clause"

All this and more here:
http://www.casinomeister.com/max_corner/18february2011.php
 

lottethedog

Newbie member
The reasoning for CWC is comical - under UK law? What about US law (banking which CWC ignore?).....seems like you can buy a beer, state a law and be 'ok' with Max....easily bought....sponsorship?
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
The reasoning for CWC is comical - under UK law?
The casino is [strike]licenced[/strike] based in the UK. The player is from the UK. Where's the "laughable" part?

As to the "easily bought" part, now that's laughable. For a beer?!? You can't be serious!

And while we're at it, if you think so little of me, us and what we do here surely you can find better places to spend your time.
 

lottethedog

Newbie member
In the UK is it okay to break US law?

Licensed in the UK? I think not.....

Stop justifying a crappy kop out by a casino "caring for a students welfare so we wont pay you your winnings"
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
In the UK is it okay to break US law?
:what: Yeah, pretty much, one hasn't got a lot to do with the other. Different countries and all. Not at all sure what you're driving at here.

Licensed in the UK? I think not.....
Yes, my bad. I meant to say "based in the UK" and have corrected my post accordingly.

Stop justifying a crappy kop out by a casino "caring for a students welfare so we wont pay you your winnings"
Excuse me? Where did I say any of that or support such a position? I clearly said I disagreed with their actions right up until the point that I learned that it was UK law and not a judgment call that drove their decision in this case. Not sure what place the off-topic belligerence has here.

And FWIW if you want to speak from a position of knowledge on the subject you might want to go back and review the original thread. I think you'll find that throughout the entire process I took a position against the casino and for the player. Only when it became clear that the casino and I weren't going to see eye-to-eye on the issue did I step aside and leave it to Bryan to make the final call.

So if you want to give credit where credit is due you might want to thank me because obviously I held the same position you did, give or take a little specificity, right up until the day that I learned about the legal precedents involved.
 
Last edited:

lottethedog

Newbie member
is it UK law that students cant gamble? I appreciate you dont 100% agree yourself, but is that the reason for non payment?
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
is it UK law that students cant gamble? I appreciate you dont 100% agree yourself, but is that the reason for non payment?
You've totally missed the point.

According to UK law, that person was defined as a student when he played at the casino. But besides that, the player considered himself a student, and was a full time student when submitting his PAB. He also lied about not being a student at that time.

The bottom line is - the casino does not allow students to play. What is so difficult to understand about that? :what:

Further note: don't disrespect the moderators. Thank you.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top