Omni Casino tricks

[MeganSpot]

After playing the monthly bonus at Omni Casino I have been banned from further participation as a bonus abuser. Here are the facts.

In September as a first time player I deposited $335 and got a $100 bonus with $2500 WR. I cashed out $465 netting $130 ($100 bonus plus $30 winnings) flat staking bj.

In October the bonus T+C were altered whereby players were obliged to meet WR $2500 first before being awarded the $100 bonus. Having completed the WR (flat staking bj) I was subsequently awarded the $100 bonus netting me a $80 profit (losing $20 in bj play).

This month I deposited $200 and again completed the WR $2500 (I bet over $2900) but this time I was not awarded the $100 bonus. On inquiry with Omni I have been thus informed:

Hello Megan,

Thank you for contacting us and I am sorry for the late reply.

Please note that in order to qualify for this month's loyalty bonus, you will be required to adhere to our promotional terms and conditions.

Though you have met the wagering requirements stipulated as one of the conditions, you have established a pattern in which your wagering is done almost solely with the use of promotional funds.

See #5 at www.omnicasino.com/common/terms_and_conditions.asp.

Persons engaging in this type of activity are typically not allowed to participate in this loyalty bonus.

We would however like to see you become eligible to receive this bonus, this month as well as next. You are, therefore, welcome to deposit and play using those deposited funds. We will continue to monitor your account and when the current pattern has stopped, your account will receive this loyalty bonus.

As always, do continue to enjoy playing at Omni Casino.

Best of luck,

Kimmoye
Customer Care Agent
Omni Casino


The said T+C at #5 read:
5] Omni Casino, CryptoLogic Inc., WagerLogic Limited and ECash Direct (UK) Limited reserve the right to review transaction records and logs, from time to time, for any reason whatsoever. If, upon such review, it appears that end users or any one or combination of them are participating in strategies which Omni Casino, CryptoLogic Inc., WagerLogic Limited and ECash Direct (UK) Limited in their sole discretion deem to be abusive, Omni Casino, CryptoLogic Inc., WagerLogic Limited and ECash Direct (UK) Limited reserve the right to revoke the entitlement of such end user(s) to the promotion."

I am at a loss to know how to become a non-abusive player. Should I design my play in a suitably wreckless fashion to ensure that I habitually lose both house and home? Is that what a non-abusive player is?

Omni writes your wagering is done almost solely with the use of promotional funds. Not true I have only once received a bonus PRIOR to wagering.

And further, You are, therefore, welcome to deposit and play using those deposited funds

But thats exactly what I have done deposited and played solely with my own funds.

I have no difficulty with Casinos deciding who can and cant receive bonuses on the basis of unambiguously defined T+Cs. But the term in their sole discretion deem to be abusive requires one to be a mind reader. Furthermore, my deeming as an abusive player came AFTER I had played over $2900 of bj. I think this is shabby treatment and quite frankly player abuse.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

The casino has evey right to exclude any player for whatever reason from receiving bonuses - however they should inform you of this PRIOR to allowing you to do the wagering requirement for such bonuses.

It is completely WRONG of them to deny you the bonus AFTER you have done the wagering to get it. If they hadn't previously informed you that they were excluding you from bonuses then they should give you the bonus IMO.

 

[DealerBusts]

I knew something like this was bound to happen with Omni's new bonus policy.
I'm always wary about bonuses that require prior wagering and that are not automatically credited once conditions are met. The casino always has the option to deny you the bonus to you so i generally avoid these situations.

 

[Stanford]

This is awful behavior. Who can mediate crypto? Is this something Megen can pitch a bitch about?

Stanford

 

[jerseyguy11]

casino is right, most land based casinos cannot offer such high promotions. They simply would not make any profits on the tables if they did. The promotions are established to reward new and loyal players. I cant blame the casino in this case. I cant blame the player either (since she met the WR). Nobody is to blame, but the casino has the right to not award you this promotion because of the pattern they indicate. I think that is fair.

 

[jerseyguy11]

you guys just LOOOOOOOOVE your bonus's

not me. i hate them heh

 

[jerseyguy11]

actually i misread this. If they notified you about this after you completed the WR, then that is unacceptable. You should argue for the last bonus, but the casino is right and you should expect anymore if you continue to play near the minimum play solely for bonus money.

 

[m249a]

Maybe they should re-name the bonus from "loyalty bonus" to something like

Completly random, compulsive gambling only bonus. Only if your randomness has no pattern. If you randomness begins to look like a random pattern then we will label you a random pattern player, and exclude you from the bonus.
At our random discretion.

That might be closer to the truth.

 

[Stanford]

Maybe they should re-name the bonus from "loyalty bonus" to something like

Completly random, compulsive gambling only bonus.

I agree. These guys are trolling for compulsives. These are the top of the line casinos too.

Remember the last scare when congress was considering banning on line gaming. We all got emails from the casinos asking us to contact our congressman. I did. I bet others did as well.

I won't do it again. And if this gets worse, I will be switching to the other side.

Jersey, these casinos don't even begin to compare to a real casino. They have spit for overhead. A real casino has large number of employees, entertainments, free drinks, free food, and free rooms. And they pay taxes and they contribute jobs to a local economy. And they don't whine near as much.

It's crazy that they accuse her of playing with promotional funds when the player doesn't get the bonus until after they have risked there own funds.

They have flat out stolen $100 from this player.

Stanford

 

[dickens1298]

Ok...let's play Devil's Advocate and reverse roles.

You're monitoring customer activity and see a customer who has been playing for three months. In the first month, as soon as she reaches the WR, she cashes out, and doesn't play there again. In the second month, she does the same. Her net "winnings" are comprised primarily of bonus money. She does not revisit the casino again in either month, preferring to wait for the bonus offer.

Would you not consider her a bonus abuser (in short, a player who plays merely for the bonus)?

True, it would help if the casino did not use such strong language and inform her that she was only risking bonus money, AND it would have helped if they had written to her before the third month's activity.

But - put another way - they did not "steal" from her in the third month. Her account was not locked, nor was she outright denied the bonus. She still has her funds (plus the earlier bonuses), and Omni offered to make good on the bonus as long as they see the pattern broken. My guess is they're waiting for her to continue to play AFTER the WR level was reached. Her pattern this month would have been similar - cash out as soon as she reached the WR, with most of her profit being bonus money.

Omni is part of the Peak Entertainment group (inclusive of Sands et al), which has been quite good in the long run. Their loyalty program is quite rich, and I've earned hundreds of dollars from it, not to mention bonuses earned. I cannot see them willing to "cheat" a customer of $100 if they did not believe it in principle.

 

[Vesuvio]

All sadly predictable: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/is-omni-rigged.5870/

Dickens, how is it 'bonus abuse' to meet all the terms and conditions of an offer? The casino offers it hoping (expecting) that the player will lose their deposit before meeting the terms. If instead they manage to get through it surely there's no problem withdrawing? (a 2500wr takes a while, even 'recreational' players might get bored after that) Call it 'bonus hunting', if you like, though it seems Megan didn't even withdraw her deposit after losing the bonus - which is the standard way of upsetting Cryptologic casinos

I've no real complaint if they want to ban all but compulsive gamblers, but not informing the player is unacceptable if they're going to credit the bonus only after wagering.

 

[KasinoKing]

I totally agree with Dickens.
Megan admitted she just flat-bet blackjack to meet the WR 3 months in a row.
What do you expect the casino to do???
I also totally agree with Omni, and I hope they continue with this policy. The only other option would be to stop giving bonuses altogether, spoiling it for 'proper' gamblers like me.

I take crypto bonuses every month, and often withdraw just after meeting WR. But I play all different games and never 'flat-bet' any of them. I've never had any complaints from the casino's, and I've done 'very nicely, thank you! '

I urge everyone NOT to just flat-bet any game for WR because;
a) It's boring as hell.
b) Your behaviour is only likely to lead to casino's getting tighter & tighter with their bonuses, making it harder for us 'proper' gamblers to maintain the income we have become accustomed to!

So CUT IT OUT!

 

[cipher]

I totally agree with Dickens.
Megan admitted she just flat-bet blackjack to meet the WR 3 months in a row.
What do you expect the casino to do???
I also totally agree with Omni, and I hope they continue with this policy. The only other option would be to stop giving bonuses altogether, spoiling it for 'proper' gamblers like me.

I take crypto bonuses every month, and often withdraw just after meeting WR. But I play all different games and never 'flat-bet' any of them. I've never had any complaints from the casino's, and I've done 'very nicely, thank you! '

I urge everyone NOT to just flat-bet any game for WR because;
a) It's boring as hell.
b) Your behaviour is only likely to lead to casino's getting tighter & tighter with their bonuses, making it harder for us 'proper' gamblers to maintain the income we have become accustomed to!

So CUT IT OUT!

I couldn't disagree more!!! QUOTE "We would however like to see you become eligible to receive this bonus, this month as well as next. You are, therefore, welcome to deposit and play using those deposited funds. We will continue to monitor your account and when the current pattern has stopped, your account will receive this loyalty bonus.

As always, do continue to enjoy playing at Omni Casino." IN OTHER WORDS, GIVE US ANOTHER CHANCE TO WIN YOUR MONEY BACK AND EVERYTHING WILL BE HONKY DOORY" that's absolute B. S.

 

[jerseyguy11]

I totally agree with Dickens.
Megan admitted she just flat-bet blackjack to meet the WR 3 months in a row.
What do you expect the casino to do???
I also totally agree with Omni, and I hope they continue with this policy. The only other option would be to stop giving bonuses altogether, spoiling it for 'proper' gamblers like me.

I take crypto bonuses every month, and often withdraw just after meeting WR. But I play all different games and never 'flat-bet' any of them. I've never had any complaints from the casino's, and I've done 'very nicely, thank you! '

I urge everyone NOT to just flat-bet any game for WR because;
a) It's boring as hell.
b) Your behaviour is only likely to lead to casino's getting tighter & tighter with their bonuses, making it harder for us 'proper' gamblers to maintain the income we have become accustomed to!

So CUT IT OUT!

somewhat accurate, but if she met the WR and wasn't notified prior tha she wasnt eligible anymore, then they have to pay that last bonus. its only fair.

but the casino has the right from now on to not give the bonus.

 

[KasinoKing]

I couldn't disagree more!!! QUOTE "We would however like to see you become eligible to receive this bonus, this month as well as next. You are, therefore, welcome to deposit and play using those deposited funds. We will continue to monitor your account and when the current pattern has stopped, your account will receive this loyalty bonus.

As always, do continue to enjoy playing at Omni Casino." IN OTHER WORDS, GIVE US ANOTHER CHANCE TO WIN YOUR MONEY BACK AND EVERYTHING WILL BE HONKY DOORY" that's absolute B. S.

I'm sorry - but you're the one who is totally wrong!
You & Megan seem to be saying 'This bonus money is already mine by right - how DARE the casino take it off me!'
Now that IS BS!

They are not saying what you said at all - they are just saying (put simply) 'please act like a gambler - take a few risks!'
Why shouldn't they say that? They are taking a HUGE risk by offering these bonuses in the first place.
Where do you think they get all this 'free money' from??
Have they got money-trees out the back???
Jeeeeeeeze! :icon_twis

 

[DeMango]

Can we move to real problems with casinos? Another blatent bonus whore outed and shut down. There are other ways to be an advantage player, use your brain!

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Casino King - I think you maybe missing the point. Omni advertised a bonus, that to get you needed to wager a certain amount. The player did this but was then refused the bonus. That is basically the same as a casino removing a bonus from a players account after its given for some bullsh*t reason about the players wagering pattern etc - its basically theft.

The bottom line is the player followed their Terms and Conditions required to get the bonus and Omni refused to give it to them AFTER the event. Now does anyone seriously think that is an acceptable practice for ANY reputable online casino?

I've no problem with any casino excluding whoever they want from promotions - however they SHOULD inform the player prior to them taking part. If they have not done this then they should give the player the bonus.

What Omni should do is give the player the bonus this month (as they hadn't previously informed them they were excluded) - but inform them they are excluded from future promotions. That is the right thing to do.

Allowing them to get away with what they have just done basically gives casinos the right to take bonuses off players whenever they feel like it.

 

[kangamick]

I have stoped playing at Omni for this very reason. I knew this new bonus system would bring trouble. They should have informed Megan before she started playing that the bonus was not available to her. Kasinoking i think you need help with your gambling buddy, i think you have a problem.

 

[dickens1298]

All sadly predictable: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/is-omni-rigged.5870/

Dickens, how is it 'bonus abuse' to meet all the terms and conditions of an offer? The casino offers it hoping (expecting) that the player will lose their deposit before meeting the terms. If instead they manage to get through it surely there's no problem withdrawing? (a 2500wr takes a while, even 'recreational' players might get bored after that) Call it 'bonus hunting', if you like, though it seems Megan didn't even withdraw her deposit after losing the bonus - which is the standard way of upsetting Cryptologic casinos

I've no real complaint if they want to ban all but compulsive gamblers, but not informing the player is unacceptable if they're going to credit the bonus only after wagering.

Just because you meet all the T&Cs of an offer does not disqualify you as a bonus abuser. Omni seems to be affixing the label of "bonus abuser" to Megan because (1) she would immediately withdraw after meeting WR, (2) she flat bet, (3) once meeting WR, she would not play at the casino again that month, (4) her profit was almost entirely the bonus.

Candidly, if every player played like her, the casinos would stop offering bonuses. You might call her a canny player - and I guess she is, since she's taking advantage of a situation - but to fail to see the casino's perspective can only hurt the players in the long run, especially if casinos decide that bonuses are a losing proposition for them.

 

[dickens1298]

From an Omni perspective, it didn't have many options. If it automatically sent a letter to Megan telling her that she was disqualified from receiving the bonus before this month, she could cry foul and complain that she was going to do things differently, and break the "pattern". They're only true "out" was to have sent an email BEFORE any play this month.

The problem with that scenario is one of logistics. Most online casinos review player patterns once a withdrawal request is submitted. Someone had to make a judgement call - personally I can see their point. And in their T&Cs, Omni DID specify that "bonus abusers" would not be allowed the bonus. So the reality is whether Megan is - in the eyes of the casino - a bonus abuser.

And - in the eyes of the casino - she is. She is playing SOLELY to reach bonus, and has done nothing to disguise her efforts.

From a purely monetary perspective, the casino hasn't "stolen" from her. Her account wasn't locked, funds were not seized, and she was free to keep bonuses from previous months. The casino simply refused to give her this month's bonus.

Casino King - I think you maybe missing the point. Omni advertised a bonus, that to get you needed to wager a certain amount. The player did this but was then refused the bonus. That is basically the same as a casino removing a bonus from a players account after its given for some bullsh*t reason about the players wagering pattern etc - its basically theft.

The bottom line is the player followed their Terms and Conditions required to get the bonus and Omni refused to give it to them AFTER the event. Now does anyone seriously think that is an acceptable practice for ANY reputable online casino?

I've no problem with any casino excluding whoever they want from promotions - however they SHOULD inform the player prior to them taking part. If they have not done this then they should give the player the bonus.

What Omni should do is give the player the bonus this month (as they hadn't previously informed them they were excluded) - but inform them they are excluded from future promotions. That is the right thing to do.

Allowing them to get away with what they have just done basically gives casinos the right to take bonuses off players whenever they feel like it.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Nobody is failing to see the casinos perspective - as previously stated the casino has every right to ban anyone they want from receiving bonuses, however they need to do it BEFORE the player takes part in the promotion. I'm sure even Megansport isn't saying they should get a bonus every month - just that they shouldn't be allowed to do the wagering and then refused the bonus.

Its like when a dodgy RTG casino offers you a fantastic signup bonus, you more than meet the required wagering and manage a good win. Now the casinos perspective is that they only offered you this bonus so that you would deposit with them and lose your money - therefore their perspective is that you must be an advantage player and void all your winnings and just give you your deposit back.

I can understand why they would do this - it's just it isn't right, the same as Omni aren't right.

 

[jerseyguy11]

i disagree. When a casino states "wager this much" and you get a bonus, that is a contract between a player and the casino.

Regardless of how bad or stupid or profitless the contract is, the casino made that contract and cannot renegotiate to their advantage. They set the terms and conditions and the player fulfilled them.

Now they can deny a bonus assuming they notify the player that they want to nullify the contract (bonus agreement). But im simply saying the casino should honor the last bonus on that contract because the player met her requirements before the casino notified her about stopping the bonuses.

 

[nafanny29]

I agree that they have to pay you the bonus as you met their T&Cs fair and square.

AS a previous poster said they are at liberty to exclude you from any future bonuses (Or even ban you from the casino if they want ) but they have to notify you in advance.

On a side note I do receive quite a few bonuses (mainly poker related) but I always play way over the minimum required by the casino (normally double the minimum). I have never encountered a bonus related problem this way.

Do you "bonuslovers" always play exactly what is needed then cashout? Asking for trouble IMHO

 

[Dirk Diggler]

From an Omni perspective, it didn't have many options. If it automatically sent a letter to Megan telling her that she was disqualified from receiving the bonus before this month, she could cry foul and complain that she was going to do things differently, and break the "pattern". They're only true "out" was to have sent an email BEFORE any play this month.

Thats correct, their only true out WAS (and IS) to have sent her an email BEFORE she played at all this month once the offer was posted on their website.

Your point about her being able to promise to do things different is neither here nor there - do you really believe they actually reverse any of these decisions once they are made? A player would have to lose some serious money before they would even bother considering re-instating them for bonuses,and even if she did manage to convince them she was going to change thats their decision - nothing to do with the player.

The problem with that scenario is one of logistics. Most online casinos review player patterns once a withdrawal request is submitted. Someone had to make a judgement call - personally I can see their point. And in their T&Cs, Omni DID specify that "bonus abusers" would not be allowed the bonus. So the reality is whether Megan is - in the eyes of the casino - a bonus abuser..

'Logistics' is the casinos problem - not the players.

I can also see their point, and have no problems with them restricting anybody's right to bonuses. It's just they should do it before the player takes part. Once a player has deposited and started wagering BOTH parties should be tied to the terms and conditions of the offer.

Also if you're allowing casinos to take advantage of 'get out clauses' that ALL casinos have about management having the rights to deny/remove bonuses etc you're going completely against the principles that this site has. A basic principle is that a casinos should stick to the terms and conditions of an advertised bonus, and not be able to pull that old trick.

From a purely monetary perspective, the casino hasn't "stolen" from her. Her account wasn't locked, funds were not seized, and she was free to keep bonuses from previous months. The casino simply refused to give her this month's bonus.

They refused to give her the bonus AFTER she had met the requirements - mathematically this is exactly the same as a casino removing a given bonus from a cashin AFTER a player has met the terms for the offer.

They both basically amount to stealing.

 

[Stanford]

Can we move to real problems with casinos? Another blatent bonus whore outed and shut down. There are other ways to be an advantage player, use your brain!

Nonsense. This player took an offer. Risked her own funds, not promotional funds. Fullfilled the requirements. And is owed the money. This money was owed, and stolen from her.

I do this all the time in real casinos. They ask me to come stay and play and they offer me rooms at a reduced rate. Had I played and they said well you flat bet the minimum so we are going to charge you for the room after all, I would be mad as hell.

Another example, a casino offered a free jacket - nice one too - for 21 blackjacks. It was at the Lady Luck. I played. I got my blackjacks. I had the free drinks. They comped my meal. And I still have the Jacket. And I never worried about them reneging. This is one of the lower scale casinos in Las Vegas.

Sadly, the lowest real casinos have more class then the top online casinos. Despite the work of those like Spearmaster, CasinoMeister and Jetset to raise the standard.

Megen, pitch a bitch if the Meister takes cryptos. He won't stand for reneging on a bonus.

Stanford