Non-rogues - or the "Reservation"

[The Dude]

Here's a new section at Casinomeister that lists casinos that are neither "Rogue" nor "Accredited"
https://www.casinomeister.com/grey-zone-casinos/

The Rival Whites Labels have been removed from the not recommended section of the rogue pit and entered here. So has Ladbrokes that has not shown any interest on engaging members in the forum.

It's a relatively short list at the moment, but I'm sure it will grow as time permits, and as I get input from our members.

 

[rainmaker]

.

Useful section

I think 888 may be a no man's land- candidate.

 

[maxd]

Ladbrokes needed to be de-listed IMHO, the Reservation seems just the place for them and their "we no talk" policy.

 

[bsilva028]

and in case of any complaint?
this casinos will be in "no can do" or in case of have some problem the members can make a PAB?

 

[The Dude]

and in case of any complaint?
this casinos will be in "no can do" or in case of have some problem the members can make a PAB?

Thanks! I can add a column for POCs (points of contact)

 

[maxd]

and in case of any complaint?

What Bryan said, and the "One Free Shot" rule would apply, as it would to any non-Accred casino: see Q: What is the "One Free Shot" rule?

 

[chuchu59]

I just want to reserve a 'table for 2'.

 

[Tirilej]

I saw on the list with the Rival casinos that Tradition was there. They doesn't exist anymore.
There are also several of the Rivals that are blacklisted on other forums for non payments and other things.
If every Rival is on that list maybe people think they are all good to go, even when they are not.

What to do? Collect information or do the casinos need to have done something to a CM-member to be put on the Roguelist?

 

[xxshepxx]

My personal expierience of Ladbrokes has always been good


Right from the off, joining, and getting a no deposit bonus and cashing out £300

Several cashouts, always been very quick, infact they are the quickest I have dealt with.

Just my 2p worth.

 

[bsilva028]

I saw on the list with the Rival casinos that Tradition was there. They doesn't exist anymore.
There are also several of the Rivals that are blacklisted on other forums for non payments and other things.
If every Rival is on that list maybe people think they are all good to go, even when they are not.

What to do? Collect information or do the casinos need to have done something to a CM-member to be put on the Roguelist?

but are some other rival casinos that pays the winnings (of course in white labels you must wait 5 days with the money pending) thats why i dont play there much actually
but in experiences excluding the long time of waiting i have allways been paid

 

[maxd]

My personal expierience of Ladbrokes has always been good ....

Understood, which is why they aren't blacklisted. My point here was that they don't belong on the Accred list because they will not discuss player issues. In other words if you do have troubles with them you've got virtually nowhere to turn, your only option is to take it to their licensing agent (Gibraltar). That "we don't discuss" policy pretty much disqualifies them from an Accred listing, hence my comment.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I saw on the list with the Rival casinos that Tradition was there. They doesn't exist anymore.
There are also several of the Rivals that are blacklisted on other forums for non payments and other things.
If every Rival is on that list maybe people think they are all good to go, even when they are not.

What to do? Collect information or do the casinos need to have done something to a CM-member to be put on the Roguelist?

A while back, Bryan decided to stop trying to keep up with each white label from Rival, and since the whole white label concept was being poorly handled by Rival, the whole lot were placed in the not-recommended section. They also come and go, change names, etc, making them hard to keep up with. This is why Tradition is still listed, even though they no longer exist.

To get in the pit, a casino has to have done something very wrong, and then failed to put it right. This has to have been verified by evidence from the PAB process, rather than on the grounds that "other forums" have blacklisted them. There were some Rival white labels that were in the pit by association, having done nothing to warrant it themselves. The managers of such operations believed this lumping together was unfair, so this new section removes this stigma. Being in this section does NOT imply they are "good to go", merely that they have not been assessed for any category. It is really a list of "other casinos known to Bryan". It is bound to be out of date the minute it is published. If anything is wrong, someone has to tell Bryan or Max.

 

[maxd]

To get in the pit, a casino has to have done something very wrong, and then failed to put it right. This has to have been verified by evidence from the PAB process, rather than on the grounds that "other forums" have blacklisted them.

Just to make sure that there's no confusion I thought I'd clarify this a bit.

Yes, a rogue listing is based on seriously abberant casino behaviour and yes, it's almost always because in addition to being abberant they are determined to be so, in other words a demonstrated lack of interest in or concern about the problem.

No, a PAB is not a prerequisite to being Rogued. Although a lot of them do get Rogued that way they can also be Pit-listed because of Bryan's own (that is non-PAB) efforts and/or discoveries.

And yes, it is correct that blacklists on other sites have zero influence on whether Bryan rogues a site or not. His decisions are his decisions, not hand-me-downs from elsewhere.

 

[met1959]

Liberty Slots

Are they OK? And how long have they been here?