Perplexing Terms of Use at ClubWorld

spiderman

Dormant account
I got this from ClubWorld's T of Use:

18. In cases where players are participating in strategies or patterns of play that CWCUSD in its sole discretion deems to be abusive we reserve the right, prior to closing the account, to deduct any processing costs associated with the account from the value of the final payment. You will be notified in advance of any deductions of this nature being made.

What exactly does that mean?

Also, I am perplexed on what they would deem "abusive" play other than using some kind of bot or software which isn't even mentioned.

This is not from the bonus T & C; this is straight up play.
 

P.V.

Senior Member
webmeister
I got this from ClubWorld's T of Use:

18. In cases where players are participating in strategies or patterns of play that CWCUSD in its sole discretion deems to be abusive we reserve the right, prior to closing the account, to deduct any processing costs associated with the account from the value of the final payment. You will be notified in advance of any deductions of this nature being made.

What exactly does that mean?

Also, I am perplexed on what they would deem "abusive" play other than using some kind of bot or software which isn't even mentioned.

This is not from the bonus T & C; this is straight up play.
It's a term that could be used against you when requesting a withdraw.

Such a loose term becomes ambiguous, a debatable issue.

Not a good thing in my opinion.

A pattern of play could be as simple as you playing $1.00 bets 10 times in a row and then changing to .50 cent bets 10 times in a row and then back to $1.00 bets.

What advantage would you have doing this with random software? I've yet to understand why this type of term exists.

Ask them like Max said and post the reply.
 

Andrewjon0075

Dormant account
No Idea

Hello, I have honestly no idea what ever do those abbreviations mean. It seems that many groups have their own Jargon to describe the same things.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
CAG
MM
This term has been used in the past to recover processing costs from players deemed to have made too many transactions for the amount of play made.

For example, if a player repeatedly deposits $1000, plays a few $1 spins and withdraws, repeating this every day, CW will often charge the player for the costs of this "churning", arguing that the player didn't need to deposit so much just to "try a few spins".

This has often been charged retrospectively, charges being applied to transactions that were made BEFORE the player was told their pattern of transactions was not acceptable.

There is a danger that this kind of term can be misused, or can be applied to a player that was NOT engaging in something "dodgy", but merely had a mistrust of leaving money overnight in a casino account, even if they knew they were going to play the next day.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
CAG
MM
They hit bonus hunters with these costs. Of course they dont mention in advance how much they will charge and if its applied to past transactions too. Shows what a classy outfit they are nowadays...

Here is a thread about one "victim":http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/casino-complaints-non-bonus-issues/38865-manhattan-slots-104-withdrawal-fee-neteller.html

The odd thing is - they already have a way to deal with bonus hunters, the codes do not WORK on an account deemed to be "bonus hunting".

It is the retrospective nature of application to events before formal notification that I find troubling, rather than the charging itself.

They should inform a player that any FUTURE withdrawals will incur a charge if insufficient play has taken place on the deposit, and this should ONLY be a recovery of costs for THAT deposits, and not those made before the warning. Only when told they are doing wrong can a player know that they need to change their habits, or leave.
 

gaydave

Banned User - complete PITA
absolutely correct VWM. Casinos take WAAAAAAAY too many liberties with OUR money. There needs to be better standards, especially for an accredited casino. To apply things retroactively is horrible. Where do they get off thinking this is in any way acceptable? If they are going to take money with no questions ask then they better damn well start paying like that too. There are way too many instances of confiscations and loopholes found to not pay people or not pay them correctly.

That cannot be acceptable for accredtied casinos can it?
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Has anyone bothered to contact the casino rep asking him to explain this term (which in turn fosters communication between players and operators), or is this just another bitch and moan session?
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
CAG
MM
Has anyone bothered to contact the casino rep asking him to explain this term (which in turn fosters communication between players and operators), or is this just another bitch and moan session?
This term has been discussed in another thread, and the rep participated. The term was applied to recover processing costs from a player who "processed" more than they could reasonably need (in the view of CWC) given the amount of play generated.

The retrospective element was that some of the charges were levied for deposits and withdrawals that were made BEFORE the player was notified that their behaviour warranted the imposition of such charges.

The term itself is vague, and players cannot know that their particular transaction activity is covered until they receive notification of the intent to deduct charges from their withdrawal.

This was revealed when the player argued that the charge was way too high for the withdrawal on which it was notified and levied, and the rep said that the figure represented charges for past withdrawals, and not just the one which generated the notification.

The impression was that there is no warning given, the charges were assessed and applied before the player had a chance to reconsider their behaviour so as to modify it in order to avoid the charges.

A change in the way such charges are administered would lead to a clearer term explaining it.
 

spiderman

Dormant account
Has anyone bothered to contact the casino rep asking him to explain this term (which in turn fosters communication between players and operators), or is this just another bitch and moan session?
As a matter of fact, I PM'd the rep the exact post here.

To me it seems kind of like a cryptic preemptive reprisal for anyone, other than slot players and recreational players, who prefers to use the creative thought process, as futile as it may be, to try to gain an edge short or long term, which in turn keeps upper tier management from sweating too much. Maybe it's just me.
 

spiderman

Dormant account
This term has been discussed in another thread, and the rep participated. The term was applied to recover processing costs from a player who "processed" more than they could reasonably need (in the view of CWC) given the amount of play generated.
Which thread exactly if you can remember?
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
CAG
MM
That's one instance of this term in use.

The opening tale was:-

I made $80 Neteller deposit to Manhattan Slots and got $28 Play Bonus. I managed to get my balance up to $1200 after fulfilling wagering requirements. They state in their website to process withdrawals by the next working day. However, it took 8 days and several emails them to process it. I can't find anywhere from their website that they have withdrawal fees. But they had taken $104 withdrawal fee. Their email support completely ignores my emails, I got the information of the withdrawal fee from their CM representative.
In short, an $80 deposit and $28 bonus. Player won from this offer, and withdrew $1200. The charge was $104. This was more than the DEPOSIT, but as the tale unfolded, it became clear that the charge included a considerable RETROSPECTIVE component because the player had made many such similar "plays" on the account.

Here is the contribution from the rep explaining why the fee was charged.

Hi Guys,

We do not pass any processing costs on to players apart from in situations covered by point 18 of our terms of use:

18. In cases where players are participating in strategies or patterns of play that CWCUSD in its sole discretion deems to be abusive we reserve the right, prior to closing the account, to deduct any processing costs associated with the account from the value of the final payment. You will be notified in advance of any deductions of this nature being made.

The OP has successfully cashed out many thousands of dollars in profit, and so I am surprised that he is so averse to contributing $104 towards the processing costs. Regards
Tom

The justification appears to be that the player has won "thousands", so should not moan at being made to contribute $104 to cover all these earlier withdrawals from the one in question.

The suggestion is also that he won this money "abusively", yet this seems to have been nothing more than simply taking the bonuses offered on the website, and a reply the OP managed to get from CS makes it clear that all accounts they have with CWC were assessed for this charge, and that the profit was the overall lifetime position averaged over all the casinos.

No explanation was ever given for why it is "abuse" to take up what you are offered by way of bonuses. That thread also links to other threads detailing instances where players have had sums deducted under this rule from a final withdrawal, but assessed retrospectively on past deposits.

There is nothing to suggest that play broke any specific rule, but the clear impression given was that taking every single bonus offered is "not in the spirit" of the promotional program, which may be why this "abusive strategy" term was applied to players who consistently took EVERY bonus, and played them in a well disciplined manner.

CWC can easily block "abusive" accounts from receiving any more bonuses, so they made the choice to allow the players to repeatedly redeem bonuses, and the FIRST action they took was to assess a charge on their final withdrawal, rather than to say "enough is enough", and cut the player off from further bonuses BEFORE it got anywhere near the stage of having to retrospectively charge processing fees.

I went ahead at Club World, and got bonus banned, but I was NEVER charged under this rule for past deposits. I got paid, and then no more bonuses. I can't see why this was not done in these cases, the PR damage of " I got bonus banned for winning $8000 off them" is nothing compared to the PR damage of retrospective application of charges using a vague term about "patterns deemed to be abusive".

The impression given is one of play being deemed "abusive" simply because it results in an overall win for the player, and would NOT be considered "abusive" were the player to have LOST with the same pattern of play. The other suggestion is that players are not allowed to play at all the CWC properties, yet there is NOTHING in the terms about this.
 

spiderman

Dormant account
As from the above posts and this response, it does have to do with bonus capitalizing

Re: Perplexing Terms of Use at ClubWorld

Hello,

We offer some very generous bonuses at our casinos and so by employing certain strategies / styles of play it is possible for a player to almost guarantee a significant profit. If we determine that a player is playing in this way we will still pay the withdrawal but will recover our processing costs from the account balance before doing so. Then, obviously we will close the player account.

I hope that this clarifies the matter.

Kind Regards
Tom
*It should have been under the Bonus T & C section which it was not but this clarifies it.

Pretty much in the spirit of WVM's above post. What do you guys think?
 

baldidiot

Webmeister
webmeister
I really don't like this term. Fair enough if you want to impose something for new deposits/withdrawals but the player needs to be informed first. Applying it to previous deposits is messed up.

The term is also far too vague - what's next, administration costs?! :rolleyes:
 

Nate

Well-Known Member
webmeister
CAG
'18. In cases where players are participating in strategies or patterns of play that CWCUSD in its sole discretion deems to be abusive we reserve the right, prior to closing the account, to deduct any processing costs associated with the account from the value of the final payment. You will be notified in advance of any deductions of this nature being made.'

Since 'Abusive Play' is never clearly defined by the operators, how easy is it for Clubworld to confiscate 'processing costs' because they deem your play to have been abusive - Or perhaps you participated in a 'strategy' that you thought was perfectly normal slot play which they then deem abusive...

Needless to say it is a vague and predatory term. It can be used on anyone using a bonus just like the 'Student Term'. We cannot expect or even trust them to apply this term uniformly as I do not even see any mention of 'Students' who lost having being refunded.

It is clear that the intention of Bonuses at RTG are so that you are tied down to the WR. God forbid you clear this, or make a profit... This is NOT what the Casino wants you to do. They do not want you to act responsibly and lower your bet, they want you to continue until you lose... in this way, YOU will never be classified as a bonus abuser or have part of your WD confiscated for 'Processing Costs'. What about players who use a 'Strategy' and lose - Do they get to pass the 'Processing Costs' back to you?

Totally Lame ClubWorld.

Nate
 

3mptyseat

Quit Gambling
PABnonaccred
I would love to know of a pattern...

What a joke...

To me there must be something going on that is behind a statement like, "
so by employing certain strategies / styles of play it is possible for a player to almost guarantee a significant profit.
"


Like for example, there is a betting pattern written into the non-random rng code which when activated and utilized correctly will result in an unusually high RTP...

Thats just an example, by no means am I suggesting that is specifically whats at work here...

But what patterns or strategies could gtd. profits period at any RTG ever? Or in any random casino environment with typical RTP settings?
 
Top