More Fortune Lounge Problems

[Catwoman]

Not quite the right point HateMG, the money confiscated was for the amounts of bonuses I had received one to two weeks before making the shown deposits - not bonuses from these deposits.

On each case the bonuses were lost to zero days before making these deposits.

 

[Stanford]

Not quite the right point HateMG, the money confiscated was for the amounts of bonuses I had received one to two weeks before making the shown deposits - not bonuses from these deposits.

On each case the bonuses were lost to zero days before making these deposits.

Catwoman,

Trying to follow this thread it appears to me that HG is responding to what FL just said. That you received the bonus for these particular deposits.

From what you say FL told you that it was because you had not met requirements for old bonuses where your account went to zero.

The confusion comes from FLs recent statement that seem to indicate they think you received the bonus and then withdrew your deposit.

In any event, I can't see anything you did wrong.

Stanford

 

[Catwoman]

The returned money is now back in my Neteller account without doing any further wagering.

 

[pokermaven]

Another case of Fortune lounge ripping off the player.

Here is what happened from what I can follow. Catwoman got some bonuses and lost all the money including her deposit. A couple weeks later she deposited fresh money and got no bonuses for that money. Catwoman tries to cashout and they hold the playthrough requirements from bonuses received weeks prior that were already lost, against her new deposits.

What a load of crap you are fortune lounge. You may think that you are being slick, but the majority of us here can see through your smoke and mirror BS.

 

[bewitch]

The BONUS is the problem....I am not on either side here. Glad catwoman get her money back.

As much as I like the "free" money, I also know there is nothing free these days, including those "free" 3 days/ 2 night vacation stuff. LOL~

Now, if I took bonus from the MG casino, I usually don't attempt to cashout. It's more for play. It's just too much fine prints to read .

Have a nice weekend!

 

[Catwoman]

Well just had another $35 removed from my cashin due to wagering requirements for old bonuses lost in full.

Went back their last weekend against my better judgement.

 

[bewitch]

Catwoman, If you really like to play at MG casino. You might want to try the captaincooks and casino kingdom. I " think" the bonus account is seprate from real account. But please check with their CS to makse sure.

In this case, you deposit/play at your real account and also play at your bonus account. I "THINK" they are independant from each other. Personally , I hardly play at FL casino because I always got confused about the term and conditions. I am also afraid of all these carry over wager requirements.

 

[caruso]

What a load of crap you are fortune lounge. You may think that you are being slick, but the majority of us here can see through your smoke and mirror BS.

I would suggest rather that the "load of old crap" here is this completely pointless bump of a thread which hadn't been touched for two weeks for no reason other than muck-spreading.

If you can't follow the rules, DON'T take the freebies.

 

[Niels]

Purchased $500, Received match bonus of $150 Wagerering requirement: purchase + bonus x 10 = $6 500

Is that fair???
That sounds crazy to me, that you have to be punished to purhcase additional money. It should only count up to the 150 match bonus so that the wager requrement should be 150+150 X 10 = 3000 and the last 350$ should not even be counted within the wager requirment....

And another thing: If a casino has carry over wager requirements, then it shuld be mentioned in their terms and conditions, right?

I think it is kinda cool that Fortune Lounge has a supporter that actually takes part in this forum, I am just now curious bout the explanation he/she might come up with now?

 

[GrandMaster]

Purchased $500, Received match bonus of $150 Wagerering requirement: purchase + bonus x 10 = $6 500

Is that fair???
That sounds crazy to me, that you have to be punished to purhcase additional money. It should only count up to the 150 match bonus so that the wager requrement should be 150+150 X 10 = 3000 and the last 350$ should not even be counted within the wager requirment....

And another thing: If a casino has carry over wager requirements, then it shuld be mentioned in their terms and conditions, right?

I think it is kinda cool that Fortune Lounge has a supporter that actually takes part in this forum, I am just now curious bout the explanation he/she might come up with now?

It is a 30% match bonus on $500. Nobody is being punished. If you purchase more, the WR only applies to the matched portion of your deposit.

 

[caruso]

That sounds crazy to me, that you have to be punished to purhcase additional money. It should only count up to the 150 match bonus so that the wager requrement should be 150+150 X 10 = 3000....

???

The casino has the right to set the terms on the free money they offer. Are you saying saying that should be the PLAYERS' prerogative?? "Dear FL, I require that you offer me a 100% bonus up to $150, with an X times playthrough."

It doesn't work that way.

And another thing: If a casino has carry over wager requirements, then it shuld be mentioned in their terms and conditions, right?

Right, it should.

Since they don't, it isn't.

 

[RobWin]

Right, it should.

Since they don't, it isn't.

Caruso, are you saying that Fortune Lounge Does Not have carry over wager requirements any longer as they did a couple of months ago ?

 

[Clayman]

are you saying that Fortune Lounge Does Not have carry over wager requirements any longer as they did a couple of months ago ?

Correct - although depending on your deposit date, it's possible you could be still be subjected to them. New deposits are not.

 

[RobWin]

Correct - although depending on your deposit date, it's possible you could be still be subjected to them. New deposits are not.

Thanks Clayman for clarifing that for me.