Rochester Casino refuses to pay my winnings

[Thatchatch]

Under condition that I acknowledge the payment in public, Rochester has refunded my 500$ deposit to my Neteller account.

It's a move in the right direction, although there is still a long way to go (3040$, to be exact).

Good move mothergoosebump. Accepting a partial payment in no way nullifies the rest of the legitimate debt. Rochester now owes you your winnings!

Regards,

 

[caruso]

Having played and won, in order to recover just your deposit you need to post the fact here?? This is supposed to do what? Make the casino look good? They figure they'll get depositers on this basis?

"Play at Rochester Casino, and if you win you MIGHT get your deposit back if you grovel a lot."

Good f*****g grief.

 

[caruso]

The terms say that blackjack doesn't count towards the wagering requirement. This does not mean that blackjack play voids wins. If they want to say that, they must STATE it. They cannot state one rule and enforce another.

However, apparently they now DO enforce the "blackjack play voids wins" non-stated non-rule, as per a chat I just had:

Steven: Welcome Mr. John
Steven: How can I help you ?
john: I just found this casino. For the new player bonus, I know blackjack doesn't count towards the wagering requirements, but does blackjack play actually void wins?
john: Or can I play BJ as long as I play the "required" games as well?
Steven: No Black Jack does not count towards the wagering requirement
Steven: Is there anything else I can do for you ?
john: I understand it doesn't count towards the wagering requirement, but if I play blackjack AND the games that DO count towards the wagering requirement, is that OK, or does any BJ play void winnings?
Steven: Bj void's the winnings
john: OK, thanks.
Steven: your Welcome ....thank you!!!

It may even be that they don't understand the difference - English is clearly not their first language. However, at this point they've had plenty of time to change the wording, and the facts will have been pointed out to them, but they've done nothing. One assumes then that this is done intentionally to elicit risk-free deposits from all the blackjack players out there.

 

[johnsteed]

Caruso:

john: I just found this casino. For the new player bonus, I know blackjack doesn't count towards the wagering requirements, but does blackjack play actually void wins?
john: Or can I play BJ as long as I play the "required" games as well?
Steven: No Black Jack does not count towards the wagering requirement

This has happened to me before. I'd asked questions similar to this one, and they only answer half of the question. Therefore, if you never did repeat the important part of the question, one easily could have assumed that you could still play it. Perhaps he didn't pick-up on what point you were trying to make originally, but I highly doubt it.

I guess that's a must, wherein you MUST always ask specific questions twice to solidify that you're doing everything correctly. I got screwed-over by Magic Box about a year ago, based on my playing BJ. I'd asked the same questions, and I suppose only once (instead of twice like I ALWAYS do now), but again, they weren't absolutely clear and they voided my winnings.

 

[mothergoosebump]

Someone with ties to Rochester casino has very recently contacted a member of the Online Players Union (the OPU is working very hard trying to get me paid), telling them that my dispute has been resolved.

That is FALSE. There was no final resolution. My deposit was refunded and nothing else. Rochester still owes me 3040$ and there will be no resolution until they pay my winnings.

When they pay my winnings, I will immediately post about it.

For Rochester to DECIDE that the refunding of my deposit was a final resolution is just keeping in line with their old thieving position.

 

[bagofmaggots]

OPU Strategy

Someone with ties to Rochester casino has very recently contacted a member of the Online Players Union (the OPU is working very hard trying to get me paid), telling them that my dispute has been resolved.

That is FALSE. There was no final resolution. My deposit was refunded and nothing else. Rochester still owes me 3040$ and there will be no resolution until they pay my winnings.

When they pay my winnings, I will immediately post about it.

For Rochester to DECIDE that the refunding of my deposit was a final resolution is just keeping in line with their old thieving position.

Perhaps you could explain what the OPU is doing to help you?

 

[Thatchatch]

Solidarity

Hi Bag,

Ill try to answer your question as to what the union is doing. First theres the solidarity part, our members will not stand still while an innocent co-member is stiffed by rogues. Mothergoosebump was abused and alone in her ordeal. She turned many ways for help without success.

When she joined us we went out of our way to help her, in any way we could, and failed in diplomatic ways.

That left only one option: a strike. Whether this succeeds or not, it is our duty to use all thats at our disposal: Bad PR, spreading the word everywhere, giving them the reputation that they deserve, sending the rogues multiple emails, calling their toll-free line, hurting the gangsters operation as much as we can. There are 840 of us, our numbers are growing fast and hopefully we shall prevail.

We have to continue to do this until we are told to stop, or win for our member! A win meaning that she gets paid all that she is owed. We are tireless in our will.

We owe this to our member in need and we owe it to ourselves. The OPU was founded by players for players and the terms of membership dictate such measures.

Should you be a member yourself, and happen to have made a wrong choice and been ripped off, Im certain that you would appreciate the dedication of your fellow members that would go out of their way to side up with you all of the way.

I hope that you see what we try to do in a clearer way, and that you see some good in what we represent.

My regards to all,

Thatchatch
OPU Member 4113

 

[bagofmaggots]

Should you be a member yourself, and happen to have made a wrong choice and been ripped off, Im certain that you would appreciate the dedication of your fellow members that would go out of their way to side up with you all of the way.

No, you're wrong about that. I would not appreciate the things you are doing.

 

[slotchik]

you would not APPRECIATE if someone tried to get your winnings paid??? I hope you never have to have that happen to you then, Mr. BAG..

 

[bagofmaggots]

Not that way

you would not APPRECIATE if someone tried to get your winnings paid??? I hope you never have to have that happen to you then, Mr. BAG..

I would appreciate help, but not the way they are going about it. Prank phone calls will never work. That's all I'm going to say on the matter. I don't want to be attacked too.

 

[Thatchatch]

Hi again,

Calling a casino and asking when player mothergoosebump will be paid, whether its one member or 800, that's not crank calls!

Of course 'variations' can be used. Going on chat and pasting the same pertinent question...

Btw we got the manager out of his shell by doing this, and he's putting his feet in his mouth as we speak, uttering obvious lies and contradicting his last convo with one of us when he mentioned that the player had used a 'robot'.

As if meister himself could be accused of using Vortran.

Also, our thanks to the meister for having the topic on his 'radio' show, and his considerations for considering 'crookchester' for permanent 'roguedom'. This will not be soon enough in the minds of hundreds.

Regards all,

 

[Casinomeister]

I've been in contact with the manager as well. He claims that the player was given several chances to have this resolved. I'm still waiting for a response from him concerning this whole situation.

 

[mothergoosebump]

I've been in contact with the manager as well. He claims that the player was given several chances to have this resolved. I'm still waiting for a response from him concerning this whole situation.

Rochester's manager's statement is not false, but it is totally meaningless :
they have given me several chances of "resolving" by forfeiting my winnings for no valid reason. That is exactly what their "efforts" at resolution have amounted to from the very beginning.

They have been hammering the above statement again and again for a very long time, as if it was a proof of goodwill and generosity. It is nothing but empty rethoric.

 

[Casinomeister]

My magic crystal ball says the shit will hit the fan today.

My balls are usually right

 

[dominique]

My balls are usually right

Is that so?


I would like to see this shit hit the fan and will be standing by, out of range for it but within hearing distance.

 

[Casinomeister]

Rogued:

Rogued:

And listen to the webcast while you're at it:
Casinomeister's Podcast Archives 2005

WARNING: Suspected crappy-ass flawed software and/or manager doing bong hits.

 

[dominique]

Gotta love that screenshot!!!!

 

[caruso]

Guess where we can still find promo threads for Rochester?

They IP blocked me after I expressed my opinion of their association with Royal Dutch. I seem clear now, but I'm keeping it buttoned over there just the same.

 

[mgibson99]

A moot point, but notice the 2 different T&C for bonuses on the Rochester site:

All games are allowed, but only 25% of wagers on Roulette (any variation), Casino War, Baccarat, Blackjack (any variation) and 50% on Three Card Poker will count on the wagering requirements ​

Bets placed in the games of Roulette (all sorts of Roulette), or Blackjack (all sorts of Blackjack), or Casino War. Do not fulfill players obligations with regards to the minimum wagering requirements.​

Looks like they have it covered either way. If you happen to read the 1st T&C and play BJ to fufill a wagering requirement, they will just refer you back to the 2nd one where it is excluded.

 

[mothergoosebump]

Looks like they have it covered either way. If you happen to read the 1st T&C and play BJ to fufill a wagering requirement, they will just refer you back to the 2nd one where it is excluded.

That is exactly how they work.


Today, Nancy Hennessy, my contact at AST Gaming, confirmed 100% that AST takes ZERO REPONSIBILITY as to how their licensess operate.

For a while she fooled me by giving the impression that she could do something, but in the end what she did amounts to this : she SUGGESTED to Rochester management that they solve my issue.

Note that, even though she was informed of all the details, she didn't suggest that they pay me, she only suggested that they resolve. She didn't even get involved as far as to take a position in my dispute.

Nancy also is convinced that most software companies have a similar "zero responsibilities" policy. She says she learned that from what's posted on various online gambling-related forums.

 

[Casinomeister]

That is exactly how they work.


Today, Nancy Hennessy, my contact at AST Gaming, confirmed 100% that AST takes ZERO REPONSIBILITY as to how their licensess operate.

For a while she fooled me by giving the impression that she could do something, but in the end what she did amounts to this : she SUGGESTED to Rochester management that they solve my issue.

Note that, even though she was informed of all the details, she didn't suggest that they pay me, she only suggested that they resolve. She didn't even get involved as far as to take a position in my dispute.

Nancy also is convinced that most software companies have a similar "zero responsibilities" policy. She says she learned that from what's posted on various online gambling-related forums.

Apparently, this woman doesn't have a clue to what is happening in this industry. One of the reasons MG casinos are so successful is because of their staunch "grab the bull by the horns" policy concerning their operators. RTG has seen the light, and Playtech is getting with the program as well.

A software provider that takes a hands-off policy is doomed. Simple as that. And I'll assist the "dooming" process as much as I can.

"She says she learned that from what's posted on various online gambling-related forums."


I don't think I need to say anything more.

 

[jetset]

I couldn't agree more - if this is the official AST policy then I would strongly recommend that players stay the hell away from their licensees, for the simple reason that you cannot expect any support if you have a problem.

The days where software providers could throw their hands in the air and say "not my problem" have long gone - that's if they are reputable and professional companies.

 

[bonustreak]

Mothergoose I have never and would never claim to be good friends with a casino manager! I did not go crazy on this cheat off the bat, I gave him several chances to contact me, I emailed for weeks to get a response, I then warned all the other affiliates that promoted the casino about what happened!

Did you bother to read the thread at my site to see if i was keeping up with your problem? Did you post the entire thread here or just a snippet of the thread?

I have never claimed to be close friends with any casino manager, I maintain a polite business relationship with all my contacts and that is all!
Do you honestly think this man would have paid you reguardless if I was polite to him or not? He called me and told me your cashout was approved that was the last I heard, after that he would not call me again or answer my emails!

Here is the thread and you can all read for yourselves, as far as ez forums go we are not the norm and we do care about our players, we do not allow flame wars and we are very professional unlike most others out there!

 

[Bruce Hamilton]

Gotta love that screenshot!!!!

Yeah, I didn't know A9 was a bust.

 

[mgibson99]

Here is the thread and you can all read for yourselves

Completely off topic, but I think the music on your website is kind of cool