Hi Steve Russo, so if you were told it was Royal Prive and that's what you are going by how did they come to the agreement to pay her? I am a bit lost.
It is a bit complicated, but here goes:
1. The dispute was with Royal Prive.
2. When the original complaint was sent in to me, the player had no idea of why she was not getting paid.
3. I contacted the casino's rep, who, at first was also in the dark. He guessed that it had something to do with the damage caused by the attacks but promised to look into it.
4. He and I were both traveling at the time and by coincidence we would both be in Tel Aviv. We agreed to meet for dinner.
5. At dinner, he told me the problem was because of multiple accounts (which I naturally assumed to be at Royal Prive). He also said that he had asked Risk and management to look more deeply into it and see if they might change their minds about paying her. The answer was that no damage had been caused by the multiple accounts and, in view of the Christmas season, they would pay her.
6. I wrote to the player, told her the results, and she told me about how there had been two accounts from her home computer at the same casino, one being from her boyfriend. She also told me that her boyfriend's account was locked and his deposit was returned.
7. When the question was raised here, I was still under the presumption that the dual accounts were at Royal Prive, but if it did not exist a couple of years ago they must have been at Diceland, where she plays quite often.
It is not unusual for a casino to refuse to pay out because of multiple accounts at another casino. In fact, I have dealt with complaints where a casino refused to pay simply because an unrelated casino had reported the player as being "high risk".
What is unusual is that Casino Prive changed its mind and agreed to pay the $7500 -- hence, my deeming it a "miracle" in the report that I posted.
Shakes head and says wtf. 
