Casino Complaint Online Casino accusing us of exploitation

[vinylweatherman]

With the money with the player, the casino is unusually at a disadvantage. They will have to sue for the return of the money, and some past cases have gone sour for casinos. One tried to sue for the return of Roulette winnings from a player who used a laser measuring device and concealed computer to place bets in the best quarter of the wheel. The casino LOST this case as the game itself had not been tampered with, the player was merely observing and calculating, albeit with the help of technology.

It is VERY odd that despite the claim that the game is faulty, it has NOT been pulled. This could do William Hill some serious damage with the UKGC as they are now KNOWINGLY still operating a faulty game. Even unknowingly operating a faulty game could get them into trouble over the level of testing they are supposed to have done.

The explanation of "invalid reel combinations" is also rather troubling as unless the game is rigged, then ALL reel stop combinations should be valid.

Just don't dispose of the money, as this could work against you if this ever went to court. It seems odd that they have not gone to the court to ask that your bank freeze the disputed sum, but rely on you to not dispose of it.

It's possible that they might try to bully you into voluntarily returning the money, rather than take this to court. Betfair tried this tactic on a few players who had already been paid out after the infamous "happy hour" fiasco, but those players who called their bluff found that Betfair then admitted defeat, and didn't take them to court for recovery.

It would be worth engaging a solicitor to send them back a formal reply to their claim. It will show them that you have been seeking professional advice, and they may then be less likely to try the bullying approach because it will be your solicitor handling it.

 

[angm]

Many thanks.

 

[Casino2014man]

I feel a bit for the OP because if it was me and I had won say 10k four months ago, I am pretty sure by now I would have blown through most of it..

Edit - scrap that - just saw its 6 figures

 

[citizenx]

This would have led them to go through everything and get the provider to check the whole lot out. Maybe there was a fault which this picked up and from their point of view your betting patterns would show that you knew their was a fault to have been betting so high.

I don't think that demonstrates the person either knew or even had reason to suspect there was a fault.

Slots are a game of chance, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. Depending on your situation, you may withdraw or go for the gamblers alternative when you're winning - up the stakes in the hope of the "dream win".

In a general sense, the burden of proof on "cheating" should be with the casino and should not be just "reasonable doubt" but hard, incontestable evidence.

I'm not going to comment on this specific case as I have little evidence for doing so but if, as a player, I was on a "streak" i'd up my stakes/push my luck and see how it goes. I wouldn't have any reason, if i was winning to believe there was anything amiss - just as i wouldn't if i was losing. Think casinos should offer strong proof of intent or swallow the loss.

 

[angm]

Exactly. The game goes through a series of levels with the highest level offering more chance of bonus. We thought it was part of the game being on the highest level.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Well, this game is still available, but if there was even a reasonable suspicion of a malfunction, it should have been pulled pending the outcome of the investigation. As for the OP, it's not even a suspicion, it's a direct accusation.

I would have thought the UKGC would require games that are malfunctioning to be immediately removed from use until the fault had been checked and rectified.

This failure to act like the game is faulty just HELPS the OP if this ever went to court as they could counter the malfunction claim with evidence that the game had not been pulled for what is supposedly a pretty serious fault, and then try to get a statement from the UKGC on the procedure to be followed by a UK licenced operator upon discovering a fault in a game, and then see if William Hill had followed it.

For now, any player is exposed to the accusation of exploiting a fault if they manage to win "too much" on this game.

 

[citizenx]

Well, this game is still available, but if there was even a reasonable suspicion of a malfunction, it should have been pulled pending the outcome of the investigation. As for the OP, it's not even a suspicion, it's a direct accusation.

I would have thought the UKGC would require games that are malfunctioning to be immediately removed from use until the fault had been checked and rectified.

This failure to act like the game is faulty just HELPS the OP if this ever went to court as they could counter the malfunction claim with evidence that the game had not been pulled for what is supposedly a pretty serious fault, and then try to get a statement from the UKGC on the procedure to be followed by a UK licenced operator upon discovering a fault in a game, and then see if William Hill had followed it.

For now, any player is exposed to the accusation of exploiting a fault if they manage to win "too much" on this game.

Take on board your points but I would say this:

It is possible that a bug is discovered in a game and fixed without significant downtime - depending on the nature of the fault and how the game is deployed.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Take on board your points but I would say this:

It is possible that a bug is discovered in a game and fixed without significant downtime - depending on the nature of the fault and how the game is deployed.

It would still have to be reported.

William Hill are going to struggle in court over this, so they are probably bluffing about going this far to retrieve their money. More likely they will try to pressure the OP into handing the money back, and will ban them from all William Hill properties, and this may end up being a Playtech wide ban.

If they could have retrieved the money themselves, William Hill would have done it, so it looks like they can't. It's probably because these sums have been paid out over several weeks, and only with very recent ones would they stand a chance of persuading the player's bank to hand it back due to "an error".

The OP has the upper hand, they have the money. It's a case of sitting tight and seeing how far William Hill are going to take it.

I wouldn't think a simple "malfunction voids pay" would work here as the bets have been resolved, added to the casino balance, and then paid out. It's like the shop that sells something for a tenth of the price due to an error. Once the transaction is done and the customer leaves with the goods, it's too late for the shop to demand their return or the correct price be paid, the error stands unless the customer takes pity on the shop and returns the item.

 

[Kiwiguy]

Well I usually hear this kind of thing before the winnings are paid out but your saying you
have that 6 figure sum and (we) meaning a group.....

Couple of things :

1. Admission of a fault at their end Admission of Liability .
2. Suspicion of using an exploit that's pure speculation never heard of an exploit sometimes
the RNG treats you well sometimes its a right pain in the behind.
3. There's nothing material here other than theory.

gl .

 

[AffGency]

the only problem is that she lives in the UK

any other Country, WH would know there is no big chance to get any money back

So if you want to seek advice, ask UK players ... anyone from any other country are not able top help you ...a nd by any chance ( im not a UK player ) do not write back to them at all

 

[Jono777]

Totally disagree, there are ppl that bet alot more then 90 bucks a spin, how about 500-5000 bucks a spin.
My highest bet has been 25€ per spin and same story here, did a small deposit of 50€ won around 1k with 1€ bet, then just keept raising my bet per spin.

Fair enough of course as mentioned in post just my humble opinion, I will be more than happy to be proven wrong.

Of course as a player myself I always enjoy hearing 'winner stories' especially BIG ones lol

 

[angm]

The 'we' part of this refers to me and my other half. I say 'we' because it is my family and when he played I sat besides him that was all.

 

[mathsboy1975]

Not taking sides and I wish you all the best however please forgive me for thinking this but I feel

Not even the highest of high rollers (gamblers with a bankroll such as Simon Cowell or Richard Branson etc)
would play those kind of bet sizes unless they 'knew' they were going to win or at least were pretty darn certain.

I have come across many 'emptiers' or 'forcers' both in land based bookies/arcades and online where the 'machine' can be fleeced totally or continued wins built up, only then have I seen anyone make such high stakes.

Like I say I could be totally wrong and am not pointing the finger at all but experience makes a small alarm bell ring my end too. This will also explain one of the reasons behind the investigation, as If me a mere 'nobody' thinks like this then the bookies/casino is bound to.

All the best!

I totally disagree with this. Only 2 weeks ago I deposited £100 and turned it into £4.5K by gradually increasing stakes. At one point in an attempt to hit the big time I was betting £125 per spin for about 30 spins. If I had won a 6 figure sum on one of these spins and subsequently received messages from the casino saying that I was going to face legal action and that my betting patterns are irregular I would be absolutely livid. Big win streaks happen and frankly if the game was at fault the casinos should be taking legal action against the game developers and not the player who got lucky.

If I decide to deposit £500 and stake it all on a SINGLE spin, that is my choice as a player. If a casino doesn't want to take that risk they should cap the bet stake lower. Allowing stakes that high and then crying "foul" when someone gets lucky is an absolute disgrace. If there was a genuine fault or bug in the game code then how is a player able to distinguish game faults from lucky streaks???

If a genuine fault is found in the game I wonder how many losing players will be compensated???

 

[lnspin]

No its all withdrawn and we had some security checks which passed and were fine. We stopped in beginning of Jan

Well they already paid you.. Transfer the $$ to a different account or go spend it.. Just dont play there anymore. Play somewhere else

 

[Jono777]

I totally disagree with this. Only 2 weeks ago I deposited £100 and turned it into £4.5K by gradually increasing stakes. At one point in an attempt to hit the big time I was betting £125 per spin for about 30 spins. If I had won a 6 figure sum on one of these spins and subsequently received messages from the casino saying that I was going to face legal action and that my betting patterns are irregular I would be absolutely livid. Big win streaks happen and frankly if the game was at fault the casinos should be taking legal action against the game developers and not the player who got lucky.

If I decide to deposit £500 and stake it all on a SINGLE spin, that is my choice as a player. If a casino doesn't want to take that risk they should cap the bet stake lower. Allowing stakes that high and then crying "foul" when someone gets lucky is an absolute disgrace. If there was a genuine fault or bug in the game code then how is a player able to distinguish game faults from lucky streaks???

If a genuine fault is found in the game I wonder how many losing players will be compensated???

Please read and digest my posts. Its expressed only as a 'thought' or 'possibility' not even an opinion.

All I was saying, having MEGA gambling experience in general both as an 'operator' and as a punter you do come across these situations which turn out to be the way I suggested in my first post or totally the opposite (I also admitted that I could be totally wrong way ahead of the actual outcome too!)

It was merely something which 'popped into my head' that I wanted to share not an accusation or any attempt at accusing OP of anything

 

[mathsboy1975]

Please read and digest my posts. Its expressed only as a 'thought' or 'possibility' not even an opinion.

All I was saying, having MEGA gambling experience in general both as an 'operator' and as a punter you do come across these situations which turn out to be the way I suggested in my first post or totally the opposite (I also admitted that I could be totally wrong way ahead of the actual outcome too!)

It was merely something which 'popped into my head' that I wanted to share not an accusation or any attempt at accusing OP of anything

I was not having a go mate - I was just saying that I disagreed. To my mind a player should be allowed to bet how much he/she wants to whenever they want to (excluding bonus terms of course). To be fair the OP story made me really angry (which you can probably tell from my post) but I was in no way having a pop at you at all.

 

[angm]

Thank you for your posts. TBH this had really got my partner worried as we have spent some - who wouldn't?

We know we haven't done anything wrong and we know that - it just worries us as we play online all of the time and have never had problems - saying that we have never won several big wins though over a period of time. As I say if it keeps paying, I'll keep playing, most people would as you would presume it was a winning streak and being on the top level you would assume it was just the game

 

[dunover]

OP - do NOT worry, they haven't a chance of getting your money back. It would never go to court because it would get them bad publicity, the game would have to be PROVABLY faulty which requires many expert witnesses and industry programmers which would cost them a fortune even if they could prove it. If they could prove it then you the customer has basically been sold 'faulty goods' in that the game should never have passed checks and been audited for play. Then the games are supposed to be random which means by definition you cannot influence the outcomes. If WHG claim it's faulty then all customers who've played it and lost could then ask for refunds of stakes.

THEY ARE BLUFFING!

The only scenario I can see whereby a slot can be 'faulty' is in the Orcs vs Imps scenario or a better example being Tomb Raider 2 with cumulative features. A basic safeguard of these cumulative features is averaging stakes when paying bonuses. This means you can't play 4/5 of the bonus trigger at say 30p a spin, then raise to 15 quid to get the last 1/5 and be paid at £15 stakes on the big bonus returns, you get an average. It's basic programming. If this slot has a bug relevant to my example then the casino should sue the developer for their losses as it's gross negligence.

Tell them you are keeping the money, they have no power to stop you disposing of those assets unless they get a legal bar to you doing so (which means they have to have very strong and straightforward grounds) and that you played the game within the rules exercising your choice of what amount to bet and when. If they are saying it's faulty then ask when it was withdrawn and the UKGC informed, and what action was taken and why the game is still out there, and as the game is faulty will they be refunding all players who lost on it?

You have a strong comeback to every argument and every eventuality they propose. Faulty goods are not your problem, but theirs. You have more chance of going to the Moon than court over this.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Thank you for your posts. TBH this had really got my partner worried as we have spent some - who wouldn't?

We know we haven't done anything wrong and we know that - it just worries us as we play online all of the time and have never had problems - saying that we have never won several big wins though over a period of time. As I say if it keeps paying, I'll keep playing, most people would as you would presume it was a winning streak and being on the top level you would assume it was just the game

If you have spent it in good faith, that's tough for William Hill even if they win. As far as you were concerned, they did a raft of security checks and then paid out your withdrawals. In these circumstances, it's reasonable for a consumer to assume the money is theirs.

Maybe move what's left into a high interest account for now, so that you at least benefit from some interest no matter what the outcome. Find out how long William Hill have to make a claim before they are out of time and you can freely keep the money with no fear of any future court claim. Often these types of investigation can drag on for months, even years.

Maybe other players should email William Hill and ask the question "I have heard rumours that this game is faulty, yet it is still showing as available to play, what is the position on this?" or "I have lost a fortune in this game, and I have now heard that this may not merely be down to bad luck, but that the game is faulty. I would therefore like my stakes refunded under the provisions for "malfunction voids play".

If they reply that there is nothing wrong with the game, and never has been, this would be very useful for the OP in their case, and may well be sufficient to make William Hill back off.

I am interested to see how William Hill will handle their own "joyless" situation - I have little, if any, sympathy for them for good Canadian reasons

 

[paul7388]

Thought I would just add something else to this thread.

Its now turning into all the usual stuff about how William Hill cant do this and cant do that. We also have all the expert opinions and advice on what people should do.

That's all good except for one little matter. All we have is the OPs explanation as to what has happened nothing more. Not saying I don't believe the OPs story but at the moment its only one persons word on what happened. But lets face it it would hardly be the first time someone has came on here with a story everyone believed that turned out to be a pack of lies.

Noone can actually know for definite the OP is telling the whole truth and without knowing for definite all this advice is useless. If indeed William Hill had a game that was paying way too much then others would have had the same sort of luck and William Hill WOULD have pulled the game.

If it indeed was just a lucky streak then William Hill would pay it no matter the bet size and are hardly going to be trying to recover money months later because a player was lucky. If anything they would be trying to use the OPs good luck for promotional purposes.

Sorry but I think there must be slightly more to this story or we at least don't have every detail.

 

[angm]

its interesting. You do only have my word but I don know what else there is to out. Me and mine aren't some kind of underworld gangsters that go around playing slots to find a loop hole. We've played slots for years and sometimes have been lucky and sometimes not. What leaves a bitter taste is that we thought we were lucky and kept playing until our luck ran out like all other people do on slots. I am not sure how you think there is more to this than what I am saying. We played in innocence and there was nothing underhand in what we were doing. The we by the way just refers to me sitting with my other half whilst he was playing.

There is no other side we are ordinary people who live in an ordinary home with an ordinary family​

 

[Simmo!]

Not even the highest of high rollers (gamblers with a bankroll such as Simon Cowell or Richard Branson etc)
would play those kind of bet sizes unless they 'knew' they were going to win or at least were pretty darn certain.

I've done it before - admittedly not to £180 but I've hit £90 on the odd occasion when I've been on a roll. But it usually ended in tears LOL. Some of us have a philosophy which goes something like: start with a little bit, build it into a bigger bit then go all-or-nothing, looking for the big one. I wouldn't recommend it to everyone but it can be fun and annoying in unequal measure.

To the OP:

I'd definitely wait until the results of their investigation are forthcoming before taking any action. With a full report, then you'll have everything you need to make a decision on what to do next. That is probably the point at which people here can advise you without having to speculate and therefore more accurately.

I wouldn't worry until that point either although the fact that they have asked you for assurances already, well, I would ignore that and not commit yourself to anything - or consult a lawyer before replying. It is their onus to prove you are in the wrong and in my opinion any action you take now needs to be properly advised in case it goes further. Any communications you make now might come back to bite you later. That's only my opinion but I was once falsely accused of something and received the advice that they were trying to make me incriminate myself by engaging in a dialogue so to say nothing until they took legal action. It never happened.

As a side-note, we see a lot of players come through here looking for advice on what seems a straightforward matter but once all the facts are out from both sides, it is often very different to how it was first portrayed. I am not saying you fall into that category but a lot of members who could offer good advice will probably be reserving judgement.

 

[lord flashheart]

Could the issue here not be something to do with the activity on both accounts??? As far as I know, William Hill is partner friendly, but as one account was suspended then play continued on the other account in the same manner could William Hill have seen that as potentially manipulating said machine? And that's the reason for their email??

 

[mimi26]

To be honest if it was me, I would just tell them the money has gone! (If they start harassing you to keep the money) you have had it over 2 months so you could have easily spent it (I know I would have). But that's just me, I would not let it bother me in the slightest.

 

[mathsboy1975]

If it indeed was just a lucky streak then William Hill would pay it no matter the bet size and are hardly going to be trying to recover money months later because a player was lucky. If anything they would be trying to use the OPs good luck for promotional purposes.

Sorry but I think there must be slightly more to this story or we at least don't have every detail.

You may be right but what would be gained here other than denting the reputation of William Hill (and what good would that really be as it is pretty poor anyway)?? If it is pure fabrication, then surely a William Hill rep could outright deny that such an email was sent to the OP.

The only things I find strange about the post was that there was mention of "invalid reel combinations" which could surely be proved or disproved outright from game records. Similarly, asking the OP to respond that they will agree not to spend the winnings 2 months after receiving them seems rather odd as for all they know the money could have been spanked already.

It all sounds like bullyboy tactics to me - if they have solid evidence then surely the first point of contact should be an official solicitors letter and some legal means of preventing the OP from using the funds (assuming not already spent). Heavy handed threats that they should not spend it because they are considering legal action because they think the OP has cheated are really out of order.

If all of this is true and I were in the OPs position I would certainly get some legal advice as it must be quite a stressful situation, particularly if the money is already spent. If nothing else it could help clarify the potential ways that things could escalate and may even bring you some peace of mind.