New Casino Rep QueenVegas Representative

[dunover]

Hi Dunover,

my name is David and as long as I'm waiting for an own account I hope you don't mind using Kate's for now.

First of all I truly understand the frustration of not being able to see what wager requirements every Slot has. We will try to see what we can do in this case to show it or even finding another solution for that.

Right now what I can say, that high volatile games are all not eligible for wagering requirements which are all BTG Games, Dead or Alive ect. .. i understand that this is not solving the issue.

I will keep everyone updated regarding any solution we can find even if we can't find one.



About ThePOGG :

We have contacted them few times to see if we can reach an agreement, as explained we did not run the Casino when the issue happened. We took over QueenVegas in 2016 and I hope that ThePogg can confirm that we are open and also helping, with any player queries he gets on his Website related to QueenVegas.. even we are blacklisted on his site.



Hi KK

It would be great if you could let me know what problem you had and I would be happy to assist you and resolve it.

Last Point, about Min Bet: as explained if you deposit €50, you can bet €5 all the time ... If anyone had / has a problem with not getting their winnings regarding this rule, I'm happy to assist and check the issue personally.

Hope everyone has a great day

David, QV Team

Thanks David! It may sound like you're getting a good roughing-up on here but if these terms remain in place it will lead to disputes and possible issues in future. I don't think any reader or casino player would say the way that this is set up isn't prejudicial to the customer.

 

[lockinlove]

Hi Dunover,

my name is David and as long as I'm waiting for an own account I hope you don't mind using Kate's for now.

First of all I truly understand the frustration of not being able to see what wager requirements every Slot has. We will try to see what we can do in this case to show it or even finding another solution for that.

Right now what I can say, that high volatile games are all not eligible for wagering requirements which are all BTG Games, Dead or Alive ect. .. i understand that this is not solving the issue.

I will keep everyone updated regarding any solution we can find even if we can't find one.



About ThePOGG :

We have contacted them few times to see if we can reach an agreement, as explained we did not run the Casino when the issue happened. We took over QueenVegas in 2016 and I hope that ThePogg can confirm that we are open and also helping, with any player queries he gets on his Website related to QueenVegas.. even we are blacklisted on his site.



Hi KK

It would be great if you could let me know what problem you had and I would be happy to assist you and resolve it.

Last Point, about Min Bet: as explained if you deposit €50, you can bet €5 all the time ... If anyone had / has a problem with not getting their winnings regarding this rule, I'm happy to assist and check the issue personally.

Hope everyone has a great day

David, QV Team

This seems very strange you cant make an excluded list of games like every other casino on the internet.

For example this is from one casino

Restricted slots:

1. Slots: Beautiful bones, Castle Builder, Castle Builder II, Cool Buck, Dragons Myth, Forsaken Kingdom, Peek-a-Boo, Scrooge, Stardust, Untamed Bengal Tiger, Untamed Crowned Eagle, Untamed Giant Panda, Untamed Wolf Pack, Blood suckers, Dead or Alive, Devil's Delight™, Eggomatic, Jack Hammer 2, Kings of Chicago, Mega Joker, Robin Hood, The Wish Master, Tomb Raider, Zombies, Eye of The Kraken, Tower Quest, Pearls of India, Tomb Raider 2, Big Bang, Jackpot 6000, Super nudge 6000, Vampire: The Masquerade - Las Vegas, Gem Rocks.

And here is another casino that shows what games wager which. it goes from 0%-50%-100%. I mean all it takes is for someone to do a little work and its done. Now blocking all HV games from wager is another conversation in itself so good luck with that.

 

[goatwack]

Because we all had such a blast with the iNetbet thread, please, let's have another

 

[QueenVegas_Kate]

Hi lockinlove

I'm sorry, but .....

That's how it is for now, as i said in my Post that we will try to find a solution .. which can be either list them or something different.


I understand the frustration from everyone, but let me come back with an answer first, not later as next week Monday.

 

[colinsunderland]

Hi lockinlove

I'm sorry, but .....

That's how it is for now, as i said in my Post that we will try to find a solution .. which can be either list them or something different.


I understand the frustration from everyone, but let me come back with an answer first, not later as next week Monday.

Ok, so why exactly in this post where I specifically asked 'Do all the slots contribute 100% to the wagering?' the reply was 'yes, 100% is required. Except Jackpots.'. Except now it turns out the answer is no. Why is Kate misleading your customers? You have a UKGC license? I don't know how as your bonus terms are not clear, in fact they are hidden, your staff mislead when asked about them, and you refuse to prove the terms (list of games).
Any reason why I shouldn't report you to the ASA now?

 

[dionysus]

thanks for the answers
but.....tbh it sounds like an excuse; I mean, someone on staff could knock that out in around 2 minutes - I assume even CSR knows how to type

anyway, at least some answers, of a sort

 

[goatwack]

So rules are open to interpretation, and payouts discretionary. If that's the case then what's to stop them saying "Nah" after playing the wrong game wowsers

 

[lockinlove]

Hi lockinlove

I'm sorry, but .....

That's how it is for now, as i said in my Post that we will try to find a solution .. which can be either list them or something different.


I understand the frustration from everyone, but let me come back with an answer first, not later as next week Monday.

No worries, not trying to hound anyone. I just dont get why you are saying its some big complicated job to list restricted slots is all. Its very basic and normal for all casinos to do this.

But glad you are going to find a solution.

 

[QueenVegas_Kate]

Ok, so why exactly in this post where I specifically asked 'Do all the slots contribute 100% to the wagering?' the reply was 'yes, 100% is required. Except Jackpots.'. Except now it turns out the answer is no. Why is Kate misleading your customers? You have a UKGC license? I don't know how as your bonus terms are not clear, in fact they are hidden, your staff mislead when asked about them, and you refuse to prove the terms (list of games).
Any reason why I shouldn't report you to the ASA now?

Hi Colin

We have a UKGC licence and Kate may was overwhelmed by the harsh replies she got .. she is just a human beeing as well.

If you want to report it, I couldn't stop you from doing so .. so that lies completely in your hands.

but.....tbh it sounds like an excuse; I mean, someone on staff could knock that out in around 2 minutes - I assume even CSR knows how to type

anyway, at least some answers, of a sort

it's not that easy, its a process and company policies to follow .. we need to follow certain guidelines
I hope you understand

 

[Jayjay231221]

Roshtein plays here so that's enough reason for me to stay away with his fake moneys

 

[QueenVegas_Kate]

So rules are open to interpretation, and payouts discretionary. If that's the case then what's to stop them saying "Nah" after playing the wrong game wowsers

I'm not sure what you mean why payouts are discretionary and why we would not pay Players their winnings ? I don't think we have any issue anywhere that we do not pay Players their winnings.

 

[QueenVegas_Kate]

Roshtein plays here so that's enough reason for me to stay away with his fake moneys

Guys .. your fights between streamers has nothing to do with us .. and as you may know its a free world, you can play wherever you like

 

[dionysus]

H
it's not that easy, its a process and company policies to follow .. we need to follow certain guidelines
I hope you understand

well, i dont really; there's a process to type out the excluded games in your Ts and Cs, of games you already know to be excluded? Members have pointed out discrepancies in the past to casinos and theyve been resolved in moments. It really rather seems youve overcomplicating this.

 

[KasinoKing]

Ok, so why exactly in this post where I specifically asked 'Do all the slots contribute 100% to the wagering?' the reply was 'yes, 100% is required. Except Jackpots.'. Except now it turns out the answer is no. Why is Kate misleading your customers? You have a UKGC license? I don't know how as your bonus terms are not clear, in fact they are hidden, your staff mislead when asked about them, and you refuse to prove the terms (list of games).
Any reason why I shouldn't report you to the ASA now?

You see I read her answer as "question dodging" - i.e. not directly and specifically answering the question you posed.
So I took her answer to mean "yes, 100% of the wagering has to be done on slots", and NOT "100% of the slots count towards wagering".
It's a bit like trying to get a politician to say "Yes" or "No"

KK

 

[dunover]

Roshtein plays here so that's enough reason for me to stay away with his fake moneys

Guys .. your fights between streamers has nothing to do with us .. and as you may know its a free world, you can play wherever you like

That is a fair point and I feel your pain in this case, as to some that's the casino equivalent of having Jimmy Savile advertising toys before Christmas.

 

[lockinlove]

Guys .. your fights between streamers has nothing to do with us .. and as you may know its a free world, you can play wherever you like

Alot of people dont look to kindly when casinos fund streamers with fake money. LeoVegas did it before too and so do others. So I think thats all that was meant. Do you understand why that is? It kind of tricks people into think hes really doing 100euro spins is all when most of us know he isnt.

So far I know all the comments seem negative and it seems kind of sucky but people here just trying to show you expectation levels is all

 

[goatwack]

I'm not sure what you mean why payouts are discretionary and why we would not pay Players their winnings ? I don't think we have any issue anywhere that we do not pay Players their winnings.

You mentioned that $5 bets could be placed even with a $50 balance, if a player is unaware of what games are restricted then it becomes moot surely, and you'll be inundated with players asking you look into it personally. So it becomes a guessing game in effect, unless every restricted game rule infraction is paid regardless?

 

[dunover]

This a frustrating subject, as to me it seems even harder than getting a straight answer out of J*r*my C*rbyn as to where he stands on Brexit. I think we've established the terms are lacking and unfair and David has told us they'll take a look at amending things. If that's the case then this forum has proffered up some good advice for them. Hopefully.

 

[goatwack]

Tip 1: Amend rogue terms

 

[brianmon]

To be fair to them, you can't actually play a restricted game with bonus money. Bonus money doesn't show in the balance of restricted games, only real money.

The point of the argument is that you have to deposit to get a bonus, to find out which games are excluded, by opening the game to see if your full balance shows or, just your real money balance.

Maybe, I should make a small deposit, with a bonus. Check all the slots, and write the list for them.
Maybe Bryan can then pin it to the top of the online casinos section, and maybe also add it to the reviews of the Accredited skill-on-net casinos, who have identical bonus T&C

 

[colinsunderland]

Hi Colin

We have a UKGC licence and Kate may was overwhelmed by the harsh replies she got .. she is just a human beeing as well.

If you want to report it, I couldn't stop you from doing so .. so that lies completely in your hands.

I hope that wasn't aimed at me, my responses weren't harsh and I just asked specific questions about your terms, I would expect a rep to be able to answer them pretty easily, I mean, lets be honest, you expect customers to be able to understand them so surely your own staff should be able to?

Can you tell me how you think having games that you cannot use with a bonus not listed, wouldn't be a significant term in the eyes of the ASA please?

Also, this term

1. Increasing the balance then changing the gaming pattern significantly (bet, game type, bet structure, etc) in order to complete the wagering requirements for that bonus.

What does significantly mean please? For example, normal play for me would be deposit £50-100, start spinning at £1, if I drop to £20 (on a 50 deposit) I'll usually drop stakes to 50p, however if my balance goes to say £150-200 I will sometimes go to £2-3 stakes. So would that void any winnings with you? ie a 50% decrease or 200% increase? What are the actual limits as I fail to see how you can enforce that term if you don't tell people what they are?

Thank you

 

[KasinoKing]

What does significantly mean please? For example, normal play for me would be deposit £50-100, start spinning at £1, if I drop to £20 (on a 50 deposit) I'll usually drop stakes to 50p, however if my balance goes to say £150-200 I will sometimes go to £2-3 stakes. So would that void any winnings with you? ie a 50% decrease or 200% increase? What are the actual limits as I fail to see how you can enforce that term if you don't tell people what they are?

I can answer that for you!
Nes... Yo... er... maybe!

KK

 

[pinnit2014]

I can answer that for you!
Nes... Yo... er... maybe!

KK

Sounds like the last Brexit debate

Westminster is calling you

 

[colinsunderland]

I can answer that for you!
Nes... Yo... er... maybe!

KK

Exactly The thing is @QueenVegas_David you might be a completely trustworthy casino and would never void winnings, but you having the term in, and more importantly, not specifying what it actually means, means that you can void winnings if you want. Players don't like clauses like that for obvious reasons, and if, like some reps have said, you have never used that term or intend to, then the question is, why haven't you removed it.

 

[bowki]

Exactly The thing is @QueenVegas_David you might be a completely trustworthy casino and would never void winnings, but you having the term in, and more importantly, not specifying what it actually means, means that you can void winnings if you want. Players don't like clauses like that for obvious reasons, and if, like some reps have said, you have never used that term or intend to, then the question is, why haven't you removed it.

If they handle it like the other casinos in the group they will void winnings and are not willing to look at it on a case by case basis if you unintentionally broke a rule or a real fraudster. Only casino I ever got my winnings confiscated even if i was a genuine player there.

I am not saying that they are going to do it, but with an unclear term like that they can basically do what they want.