Casino Complaint Online Casino accusing us of exploitation

[vinylweatherman]

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.

It's a traditional 5 reel video slot, there should be no such thing if the game is fair and random. If there IS such a thing, then it's a "rigged" slot in that the probabilities of the reel stops are not "natural", and some are even blocked by the software from occurring. This could be in breach of the licencing conditions in itself. William Hill have chosen their words poorly given that this is the first shot in what they say will be a legal battle, and that inevitably this initial email will form part of the documents for the judge to consider.

 

[lord flashheart]

Yes we were doing huge bets at some points. It all started with a lucky bonus of £3k we start betting at £1.50 and then went to £3.00 but there were points we were betting £90 and a few at double that. Many thanks for looking at my post though. I halve also won 2K on a slot at a £2 bet and this was the original start of this although that was on another site

Did you play this game in the same way at the other site? Perhaps iovation flagged something here and alerted others.

No its all withdrawn and we had some security checks which passed and were fine.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

This contradicts your next quote below.

My other half's account was suspended in January, mine was suspended in February as i was still playing on this and some other slots on there. The winning streak did stop hence why we stopped playing

I personally feel that this is the issue here - you kept playing this game after your other half's account was suspended. William Hill must feel you were using both accounts in order to gain an advantage although their email doesn't make sense if that is the case.

Was the email sent after your other half's account was suspended or your account?

 

[lord flashheart]

Not played this game but....

Just read the rules / game information about this particular slot and from the information given on the willhill site, it does sound very possible from how the OP has stated how they were playing that the game could have been manipulated. Not in the way will hill stated in the email though.

Quite interested to see how this pans out!

 

[Sovietsky]

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.

I belive that ppl are very awere about that and majority of times it always turns out that the player lied. But innocent until proven guilty I guess.

 

[pmhcfc]

Funny how we all think different

If it were me, most of the money would have been well spent by now and what hadn't would have been put into a different account when WH sent their very first Email about it.

Again, if it were me (so this is just another opinion), and I knew I had done nothing wrong I'd be telling WH to 'bring it on' and good luck with getting your money back cos it'aint happening.

Bluff and Bluster from WH in my opinion - if it did go to court then something like the Sun newspaper would love to get their teeth into the story and would probably pay you well for it (the story) and the bad publicity for WH just wouldn't be worth it - they'd lose thousands of online customers which would equate to losing a lot more than the money they paid out to the OP in the first place.

Go treat yourselves lol, you deserve it. You've got what we all secretly hope for...an amazing lucky streak with a super mega stupid silly super fantastic win...Well done to you both!!!

 

[Jakestar]

If they've already paid you, then that's final. It's like at a brick & mortar casino, once a cashier hands you money, then it's irreversible and final.

 

[angm]

I didn't play that game I played other ones when my oh account was suspended. We have played on another site and not won loads but it does show the same patterns. The patterns they are talking about I guess are sometimes playing on big stakes and playing until early morning but that is no different to other sites. We will be getting legal advice and will fight this as it isn't t right what they are doing

 

[vinylweatherman]

Just read the rules / game information about this particular slot and from the information given on the willhill site, it does sound very possible from how the OP has stated how they were playing that the game could have been manipulated. Not in the way will hill stated in the email though.

Quite interested to see how this pans out!

I am thinking this is another "Dark Knight style emptier". If so, this is advantage play, not fraud. In the Dark Knight case, the rules were also wrong, so the game did NOT "malfunction", it played according to the rules at the time. This game was also fixed "on the fly", no downtime nor publicity. In effect, the casino offered a game that had an element of strategy by which the player could boost their RTP, just like Blackjack. The downside was that the RTP could be boosted to above 100%.

I had a quick play for free on this, and the obvious AP strategy to try would be raising the stake once there was only one banana left.

Once a casino has paid an advantage player, tough - it's too late to change one's mind, and casinos that have tried this in the past have ended up in the rogue pit (Betfair for example).

Many years ago, Prime casino pulled back a payout from a player's Neteller account after two weeks because they had decided the player had "advantage played". They were to regret the move, and gave the money back due to the bad PR.

Advantage play is not illegal, so William Hill will really struggle over this.

 

[lord flashheart]

I didn't play that game I played other ones when my oh account was suspended. We have played on another site and not won loads but it does show the same patterns. The patterns they are talking about I guess are sometimes playing on big stakes and playing until early morning but that is no different to other sites. We will be getting legal advice and will fight this as it isn't t right what they are doing

Are you sure about that????

At the end of last year we won over a period of a couple of months winnings equating to a six figure sum.

I assume this was on the game you mentioned

My other half's account was suspended in January, mine was suspended in February as i was still playing on this and some other slots on there. The winning streak did stop hence why we stopped playing

Here you say that you were still playing it after your OH account was suspended.

You seem to have forgotten things you've previously said, which is making it look like you knew what you were doing.

If you did find a way to exploit a game, then well done! I don't believe that you should pay the money back but I do believe that you knew exactly what you were doing.

It appears that William Hill are acting like a debt recovery agent in possession of a statute barred debt by resorting to strongly worded communication in the hope that you pay the money back, but legally there is probably nothing they can do.

 

[lord flashheart]

I am thinking this is another "Dark Knight style emptier". If so, this is advantage play, not fraud. In the Dark Knight case, the rules were also wrong, so the game did NOT "malfunction", it played according to the rules at the time. This game was also fixed "on the fly", no downtime nor publicity. In effect, the casino offered a game that had an element of strategy by which the player could boost their RTP, just like Blackjack. The downside was that the RTP could be boosted to above 100%.

I had a quick play for free on this, and the obvious AP strategy to try would be raising the stake once there was only one banana left.

Once a casino has paid an advantage player, tough - it's too late to change one's mind, and casinos that have tried this in the past have ended up in the rogue pit (Betfair for example).

Many years ago, Prime casino pulled back a payout from a player's Neteller account after two weeks because they had decided the player had "advantage played". They were to regret the move, and gave the money back due to the bad PR.

Advantage play is not illegal, so William Hill will really struggle over this.

Not saying that it is fraud, but I do think they knew what they were doing. I've also stumbled across empties and manipulation before - mainly land based, but a few online aswell. I know WH won't be able to do anything (well unless games were hacked or something, but don't feel this is the case)

 

[ugaboga]

You can't manipulate a slot machine by pressing the spin button, changing lines or coin. William Hill has no case here. The game in question was never taken down.

Unless they're going to introduce rules that you can't alter bet size, what exactly can they claim the player did to cause the malfunction? There is only so much you can do with an online slot! It's not like he held some device at it to manipulate the rng!

 

[Jakestar]

You can't manipulate a slot machine by pressing the spin button, changing lines or coin. William Hill has no case here. The game in question was never taken down.

Unless they're going to introduce rules that you can't alter bet size, what exactly can they claim the player did to cause the malfunction? There is only so much you can do with an online slot! It's not like he held some device at it to manipulate the rng!

Didn't you know? Alternating screen size/making your laptop run on battery then putting the power cord in and out occasionally/moving your play window around is the sure-fire way to produce big wins! ;P

Jokes aside, exactly as you say. Scare tactics from WH is all I see. Spend your winnings, go ball room dancing, and forget about WH.

 

[lord flashheart]

You can't manipulate a slot machine by pressing the spin button, changing lines or coin. William Hill has no case here. The game in question was never taken down.

Unless they're going to introduce rules that you can't alter bet size, what exactly can they claim the player did to cause the malfunction? There is only so much you can do with an online slot! It's not like he held some device at it to manipulate the rng!

You can if there is something wrong within the programming of the machine. Manipulate may not be the best word to use, but it is entirely possible.

A game doesn't have to be taken down to be fixed as someone has previously stated on this thread

 

[Jakestar]

You can if there is something wrong within the programming of the machine. Manipulate may not be the best word to use, but it is entirely possible.

A game doesn't have to be taken down to be fixed as someone has previously stated on this thread

I can't see how the RNG could be manipulated. The only error/fault that a machine/slot could have was if for eg. you were playing $0.01 per line, you hit 3 kings for a payout of $0.15 and the machine pays you $15,000. That is what the term "machine fault voids all pays" comes from. This appears to not be the case with OP as they have won the money in accordance with their bet size and machine payouts.

 

[ugaboga]

I can't see how the RNG could be manipulated. The only error/fault that a machine/slot could have was if for eg. you were playing $0.01 per line, you hit 3 kings for a payout of $0.15 and the machine pays you $15,000. That is what the term "machine fault voids all pays" comes from. This appears to not be the case with OP as they have won the money in accordance with their bet size and machine payouts.

And they would have picked out on that fault prior to paying him out

 

[Jakestar]

And they would have picked out on that fault prior to paying him out

Exactly

 

[lord flashheart]

I can't see how the RNG could be manipulated. The only error/fault that a machine/slot could have was if for eg. you were playing $0.01 per line, you hit 3 kings for a payout of $0.15 and the machine pays you $15,000. That is what the term "machine fault voids all pays" comes from. This appears to not be the case with OP as they have won the money in accordance with their bet size and machine payouts.

It would have nothing to do with the RNG, it would be the actual program / game itself. I'll explain further in a minute

 

[Jono777]

What a good start to a week, Monday morning ain't so bad after all.

I, along with every other person who has contributed to this thread I imagine are real keen to see how this plays out / final result.

However I can't help noticing its taken a serious lean towards my way of thinking as descibed in my first post on this thread.

Good to see I'm maybe not as island after all

 

[mimi26]

What a good start to a week, Monday morning ain't so bad after all.

I, along with every other person who has contributed to this thread I imagine are real keen to see how this plays out / final result.

However I can't help noticing its taken a serious lean towards my way of thinking as descibed in my first post on this thread.

Good to see I'm maybe not as island after all

what way is that?, I haven't noticed

 

[lord flashheart]

I'm not saying this is definitely what happened, however this is what part of the game rules say on the WH
WH

GARY'S BONUS TIME
After any bought spin, GARY the GORILLA may award a bonus prize of 50,100,150,300 or 100 multiplied by the bet OR entry into Gary the Gorilla's Feature Kingdom
GARY Goes BANANAS
After any bought spin GARY the GORILLA may eat a Banana
When no Bananas remain, GARY will ADVANCE by moving to a new area of the jungle. GARY will ADVANCE 3 times
Each time GARY ADVANCES the frequency of GARY's BONUS TIME is increased:

The important bit here is the last part.

If the frequency increases then there must be something set within the programming allowing this feature to occur within x amount of spins.


Someone also posted in this forum that if you change stake when getting bonuses, then the game will return a result relevant to the average stake played.

Let's say for this scenario that this averaging stake part isn't within the machines programming, it would therefore be possible to raise the stakes once reaching the higher level and gain a high return from the gary's bonus time feature.

Everything with the RNG would be correct and the actual fault wouldn't appear for a while until WH noticed an unusually high RTP.

Tried to keep this as simple as possible and of course this is just a possible theory from the information in this forum / rules of the game

 

[Jono777]

removed - point taken - apolgies

 

[mimi26]

see above

 

[Jono777]

what way is that?, I haven't noticed

I just meant that one or two had maybe had similar thoughts to myself that's all

Apologies If you saw my post as rude, I promise you it was not intended that way at all

Not to blow my own trumpet , but I'm one of the most decent people (or so I'm told) that you will never meet lol !!

 

[Simmo!]

So is the intimation here that we have another game where your chances of winning are improved during game-play and it doesn't stop you increasing your bet when you get closer to that point? Deja Vu

If, as has been suggested, the chances of the bonus increase as you go forward and the bet size can be changed then quite clearly it has been programmed to award less during the bonus round so it's not a "technical fault" as they claim. What it is in fact is deceptive in much the same way as that Blackbeard's Gold slot at Intercasino was.

 

[lord flashheart]

So is the intimation here that we have another game where your chances of winning are improved during game-play and it doesn't stop you increasing your bet when you get closer to that point? Deja Vu

If, as has been suggested, the chances of the bonus increase as you go forward and the bet size can be changed then quite clearly it has been programmed to award less during the bonus round so it's not a "technical fault" as they claim. What it is in fact is deceptive in much the same way as that Blackbeard's Gold slot at Intercasino was.

Seems possible that the machine would have programmed to give a bonus after x amount of spins once you reach the highest level. Could easily be possible that the programmers set this too low in relation to the minimum payout of this bonus and could thus be exploited via changing stake