More BS from Inetbet!!

[Rusty]

Only in your mind.

Funny you saying that after I quoted you not being sure whether they were changed during the promotion.
Sarcasm and logic are not you forte Nifty.

New coupon codes + new dates = New promotion.

Simple.

Simple but not in the way you mean.
New coupon codes?
Pretty much irrelevant. Changing the letter I to a 1 for example would mean the T&C's can be changed and now you want the player to keep a record of all previously used promo codes? Lord have mercy.
New dates?
So if I have a promotion from the 5th to 7th and then state in a promo email that the promotion has been extended to the 8th

by virtue of Nifty's rules I am then free to change the T&C's without notifying the player as this a new promo.
Those are just examples off the top of my head.
Don't ever apply to be a regulator Nifty.

If the player is participating in an exisiting promotion - but they were not. It was a new promotion.

I'm afraid that the contract law you talk about here applies only to changes of the terms and conditions of exisiting

contracts. E.G. All withdrawals now cost $25, players from Australia now have to wager double on all bonuses, anyone betting

more than 20% of their bonus on one wager will have their withdrawal denied etc etc.

The examples above would have formed part of the terms and conditions of the contract the player entered into when they

created their account. It has nothing to do with a bonus being offered somewhere down the track. In fact, you will find

that all T&Cs of online casinos state that these general rules apply in addition to any terms attached to individual

promotions.

The only contract a player has made before they redeem a coupon is the one I described above.

Once a player redeems a coupon they are entering a new and totally seperate contract that they will

adhere to the terms and conditions attached to that individual coupon... and it is here that your theory falls apart,

because the casino has no obligation to highlight the difference between that promotion and any other promotion - it is the

responsibility of the player to read and accept the terms for that individual bonus.

It matters not a jot whether the contract was written 10 years ago or yesterday.
It is not a theory that T&C's should not be changed without notifying parties bound under these T&C's.
It is a basic principle of fairness of contract accepted not only in law by all civilised countries but by the better remote

regulatory bodies that exist and laid down as part of their regulations.
Why do you think that is Nifty?
I mean at the end of your post you even agree with this.

Surely it is obvious why such a regulation should exist for remote gaming?
I am not even sure what you are trying to argue here to be frank
If it is that players are responsible to read the terms of contracts they enter into then nobody has argued otherwise but if you consider that is the only responsibility that matters and neglecting the term makers responsibility (which is greater) then you are giving carte blanch to whomever dictated the terms to rip you off.
Seriously, if you run a business in that manner you will learn some very harsh lessons very quickly and will be of a different

opinion I'm sure.

Do not confuse this issue with changing general terms of all bonuses or any other general term - on that issue I am in

agreement. Any variations to the original contract should be advised, but as I said this is a seperate contract altogether and

as long as the casino provides the terms for each contract (i.e. coupon) then the casino has fulfilled its obligations (which

inetbet did on this occasion).

The only obligation remaining is for the player to be aware of the terms of each coupon (i.e. contract) before they accept it.

Right. 9 out of 10 for the last bit. I would of given you a 10 but it was I that suggested the two issues were being confused and you that originally stated that you had no problem with T&C's being changed.
"Even if they did change them,it is up to you to check the terms before you claim the promotion. Don't blame others for your own mistake." , was what you wrote.
Glad you have changed your mind on that.
Since this is no longer Inet specific and I have derailed this thread enough any future discussion is probably better placed in the poll thread I set up

My replies in block bold.
I think we finally agree on the issue that concerned me Nifty - I guess that is worth something.

 

[Nifty29]

Funny you saying that after I quoted you not being sure whether they were changed during the promotion.
Sarcasm and logic are not you forte Nifty.

...and grammar isn't yours.


OK Rusty we can agree or disagree on some or all of the topics raised, but I have listed 3 clauses below straight from the Inetbet T&Cs which every player must agree to before they open an account.

Since you are big fan of abiding by contracts and how important they are, I figured you would be interested:

By accepting and playing using any of our promotional offers, the member indicates that the promotional terms and conditions have been read, printed, understood and agreed to.

All rules, regulations, and payoffs contained herein are subject to change and revision by the management without prior written notice.

Player shall periodically review these Terms and Conditions posted at this website at a rate not less than once monthly.

The first term is very pertinent to this situation - the player had their winnings denied because they did not read the terms of the bonus, after agreeing that they would when they created their account. It really is very simple.

So, given that every player has agreed to be bound by these terms, then all of your arguments are moot.

As I stated, insofar as changes to the general terms and conditions are concerned I believe that operators have at least a moral obligation to communicate changes to players.

However, when it comes to specific terms and conditions for individual promotions it is incumbent upon the player to make sure they read and understand those specific terms....to expect operators to highlight every difference between one promotion and another is not reasonable. Don't forget, only one player here got it wrong, and they admitted that they did not read the terms.

Time to stick a fork in this one.

 

[Rusty]

Actually Nifty the first does not concern the issue we are discussing and is already agreed upon.
The second is a T&C used by rogue casinos and would not even be allowed under a decent regulatory body.
The third is a symptom of the second.

There is only me and you left here Nifty - I agree, let's move on.

 

[dominique]

Hi Just Play,

Just to clarify - when you say "When someone doesn't qualify for a coupon the cashier doesn't take it, so it's quite obvious they CAN do this, but choose not to." this is not correct.

Yes when a player is excluded from promotions then the cashier doesn't allow them to redeem coupons. To achieve this the player is grouped into a class and that whole class can be excluded from redeeming any coupons. It is a fairly simple procedure.

However that is not the same as denying a coupon if a previous deposit was less then the current one. This is a much more complex procedure and there is no option within the software to specify this. The system cannot check what the last deposit was - if a coupon had been applied to this - if so was it the prior one in the series etc

So I am afraid what you say is incorrect, there is no way to implement this as an automatic denial.

I hope that clears things up for you.

Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

Hi,

I think you need to push for inclusion of this in the software. It is going to continue to be a point of friction, because in the player's eye you accepted the deposit and gave the bonus because of the deposit. The average player will assume all is well.

Players here at Casinomeister are mostly savvy, but your average player who does not visit forums but plays as a hobby is going to get slammed with having winnings confiscated - without any fraudulent or mal-intent.

This, in the end, hurts YOU, Inetbet. Because this player will tell all their friends that online gambling is a ripoff, and that inetbet is a bad place.

And now we are where these things hurt the entire industry. The soccer mom who had winnings confiscated because she deposited 5 bucks too much isn't going to understand why and what the rationale is, and she is going to tell all the other soccer moms that online gambling is dangerous and your money gets stolen.

Savvy players do understand the rationale, but average players do not.

I strongly suggest that you get software in place that supports your bonus structure, or that you stick with a bonus structure that is supported by the software you do have.

 

[colly]

OK I expect some might not like this but I don't think anyone novice or experienced player should be excused from a T and C condition because they didn't read the rules- If they were buried somewhere in the pit of general T and C s rather than being clearly stated as Inetbet's are then maybe there would be a case but in this case they weren't.

I actually think its better that Inetbet DIDN'T bend the rules just because it was a reasonably small amount- I would be seriously pissed if the casino took the attitude we will bend the rules if its small but we will enforce them if its a big win.

Personal opinion but i think the way its been done is fair to all players.

 

[dominique]

I made no reference to bending rules.

I suggested that INetbet (and all casinos for that matter) do not offer bonuses that are structured in a way that their software cannot support, or, alternatively, build software that supports their bonus structure.

That would be a once and for all solution to issues like this.

 

[gambler777]

It's a good job this thread is here as I didn't see that part of the promo for these coupons, not to say that it isn't there but I just didn't read that part.

I have been using these coupons almost every time and now I know.

Having said that ..rules are rules no matter how frustrating they seem.

Sorry for that nygirl it does suck.

It is there now, but it is a recent addition. I have played these and the tempting trios for months, but it is only recently, not exactly sure how long, that there has been a requirement on the size of the deposits. I would say in the last 2 months at the most. So just a change, but not highlighted or anything so those of us that played all the time did not notice it immediately. So we warn each other of these changes, should have posted it, sorry.

 

[gambler777]

OK I'm in rant mode now and this is aimed at everyone who thinks Inet are 100% right.

So the T&C's were not changed now?
Didn't Inet themselves say they changed them for clarities sake?
Obviously someone would of still been playing the promotion under the previous t&c's when they were changed if this is the case.

Perhaps if the bonus codes changed when the change to the T&C's was made it would be more acceptable and there would be less room for obfuscation otherwise a promotion should either run its course without any changes or in extreme circumstances be cancelled by the Casino.
They can always start a new promo with new T&C's.

It has nothing to do with just making players responsible for scanning the T&C's for a word change here or there if those T&C's are changed thereafter without notification.

I am replying to your post Jas but I am directing this at VWM and everyone else who sees no problem here - you are not seeing the big picture.
Not all Casinos are as trustworthy as you seem think Inetbet are and if it is seen as right for an accredited casino to change T&C's of bonuses without player notification and deny winnings on the strength of it then expect the rogues to be rubbing their hands with glee.

Under that premise I could write T&C's and change a single word in a 20 paragraph T&C altering things dramatically in my favour and you could read it twice and you wouldn't even know it.

If you think this is just me going off on one then why do you think there are such laws concerning contract law?
Why under a UKGC license is this not acceptable practice?

General ‘fair and open’ provisions
Licensees must satisfy themselves that the terms on which gambling is offered are not unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and, where applicable, meet the reasonableness test under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. An accurate summary of the contractual terms on which gambling is offered must be made available to customers and set out in plain and intelligible language.Customers must be notified of changes to terms before they come into effect.

Have you all been brainwashed overnight or are we now so desensitised by so many casino scams that this sort of thing is now acceptable?

:sob:

I think there is a misunderstanding here. Inetbet did not change the T&C's during a running promotion. The promotion is a weekend promotion being run some weekends as tasty trio and other weekends as paycheck something. What is being said is that over the course of the promos, months, the T&C's have been changed. That I agree with. Recently, though I cannot say exactly when, the change was added dealing with the previous deposit restrictions. I myself did not thoroughly read the promo because I was so used to it, and did not notice the new print till my 3rd deposit. By then it was too late, nothing I could do. Yes I could have emailed, however I have had a problem with getting emails answered as well lately. So I just took it as my loss and I need to read EVERY TIME. Yes I lost, did not get to a cashout. No I did not ask for my money back, never crossed my mind. But I did not get much pleasure out of playing the rest of my money. Inetbet gave back the deposit to the person who lost their withdrawal, that was great, but I do not think they are refunding deposits to losing players. As I said, lesson learned, I will always check the t&c's.