Rusty
Banned User - repetitive flaming
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2006
- Location
- Manchester UK
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.