Royalpanda

[argentus]

Hi. I just thought by myself that i maybe should take a 24h cooling off period, that i have no temptation to touch my pending withdrawl.

When tried to do so i found out the term that they dont process withdrawls in that period.

In my opinion thats nothing a trustworthy casino should do. What do you think?

 

[steveh35]

It sounds a bit naughty maybe you should have changed your deposit limit to £10 per week or day rather than self excusion

 

[argentus]

@steveh35 I don't think a reverse will count as a deposit. So that's no probate solution.

 

[steveh35]

@steveh35 I don't think a reverse will count as a deposit. So that's no probate solution.

or could you have altered your limits so you could not have played with it for example a loss limit?

 

[pinnit2014]

Maybe not entirely relevant but- They normally process withdrawals in two hours now iv found for under a grand. For those over it’s around 24?

Is it not a cool off period that they would process?

 

[argentus]

or could you have altered your limits so you could not have played with it for example a loss limit?

Loss limit does not count on winnings. You see: There is no solution. Just not play. I can handle that, but i am sure out there are a lot who can't

 

[argentus]

Maybe not entirely relevant but- They normally process withdrawals in two hours now iv found for under a grand. For those over it’s around 24?

Is it not a cool off period that they would process?

Yes, 24. It's a middle 4 figure amount.

 

[pinnit2014]

Maybe Melvin will chip in - Mever used but I just presumed the pending period continued and therefore passed during a timeout...

 

[nikantw]

I think SE and mini SE (cool off period) should not be used as RG or BM (balance managing) tools. Those should be 2 completely different things.

SE is and should be taken very seriously by all, GC, casinos and the players. SE should mean "I never want to gamble again in my life", not "I just want to be sure I won't be tempted to play today".

To that end, I think a lock function for withdrawals (like the one Rizk has) should be forced in all casinos, as an important RG and BM tool but also eliminating the need to SE to simply protect a pending cashout.

 

[argentus]

To that end, I think a lock function for withdrawals (like the one Rizk has) should be forced in all casinos, as an important RG and BM tool but also eliminating the need to SE to simply protect a pending cashout.

I 100% agree with you.

 

[Spikie]

If you make a deposit on any casino it is instantly available , and can’t be reversed.

Withdrawals should be treated exactly the same . Once pressed the confirm withdrawal button , it should be treated as such.

No excuses , no reversals , no pending . Can’t see why they even need a lock function.

I can’t see why any responsible casino can’t do this.

 

[nikantw]

If you make a deposit on any casino it is instantly available , and can’t be reversed.

Withdrawals should be treated exactly the same . Once pressed the confirm withdrawal button , it should be treated as such.

No excuses , no reversals , no pending . Can’t see why they even need a lock function.

I can’t see why any responsible casino can’t do this.

I get that, but it is not the same. Withdrawals need SoW, RG, AML, BA, W, E, and other checks, so it can take some time, I get that too.
I also get that some may want to reverse sometimes. And because of all that there should always be a lock function for withdrawals.

 

[pinnit2014]

Is the pending period for the player or for the company to do these checks? I can't see how withdrawals 'need' RG/AML - One of the purposes of these are to make sure that the potentially 'dirty' money/money from SE, doesn't even hit the casinos account, so checking at W/D stage is a bit too far down the transaction relationship. Same for RG. Probably been down this rabbit hole plenty of times Appreciate that they may wish to check on patterns/bonus use. Though with all their wizardy checks a lot probably have inbuilt in their systems, I'd have thought this would be automated more.

Whole ethos of the UKGC's codes is problem gambler identification - unless you do at the start as a minimum I can't see how you can comply with it (and hence why we see all these, 'I was able to open an account when SE). As for RG - yep, may not been an issue at start but then person develops an issue, but again at the w/d stage? Nope.

Different casinos will have different levels of risk appetite i presume - you'll see some pay in minutes, even for largish withdrawals.

Back to the OP's initial post, still be interesting to know why the pending periods put on ice during the (pardon the pun Goatwhack) 'cool off'.

But as Nik's said - lock function would be the simplest and easiest solution to all this. Would probably take their IT guy a lunch break to put in

 

[Balthazar]

SE is and should be taken very seriously by all, GC, casinos and the players. SE should mean "I never want to gamble again in my life", not "I just want to be sure I won't be tempted to play today".

Then why are they (most casinos) offering SE periods of 30 days or 60 days?

 

[pinnit2014]

Then why are they (most casinos) offering SE periods of 30 days or 60 days?

Was going to mention this - 30 days for me is a cool off period - question is does that equate to a problem gambler as in 'i'm a PG, but i'll be fine next month' or simply 'i went a bit mad this month so I'm taking a break'

 

[nikantw]

Then why are they (most casinos) offering SE periods of 30 days or 60 days?

Exactly, SE should be 2 years minimum. On 2nd thought, very few take SE seriously ....
I am not a fan of the cool off period either, but at least it's not called SE.

It's simple, the following options should be available (and with the same name and easy access) in all casinos.
If you have a big problem: SE from all gambling for years.
If you feel you don't have enough control: deposit/play/bet/loss limits (as small as 0) that don't change for 1/7/14/30/60 days, lock function for withdrawals.
If you don't like a casino: close acc.

 

[Supababe]

@Melvin - Panda
Just making sure the rep doesn’t miss the thread.
Personally I’ve found Melvin very approachable and helpful. Maybe he can clarify their standing.

 

[SpinUk]

Hi. I just thought by myself that i maybe should take a 24h cooling off period, that i have no temptation to touch my pending withdrawl.

When tried to do so i found out the term that they dont process withdrawls in that period.

In my opinion thats nothing a trustworthy casino should do. What do you think?

View attachment 90866

Thats is 100% dirty, rogue term which I do not think would pass the scrutiny of the UKGC. Deposits yes - logically impossible under the colling off period.

But withdrawals? What possible reason for this would there be if not to entice players to reverse their withdrawal.

Never come across this term - for good reason - at any other UKGC casino, so they cannot even blame precendence for it.

I actually think the term is worthy of grey zoning them.

 

[SpinUk]

@Melvin - Panda
Just making sure the rep doesn’t miss the thread.
Personally I’ve found Melvin very approachable and helpful. Maybe he can clarify their standing.

- be intriguing to see what possible justification there is for this. My moneys on a so called “technical issue” stopping them. But they will look at it in the future etc etc.

 

[pinnit2014]

Maybe when Melvins here he can comment on if the Royal Panda offers are fizzling out : used to see more random cash drops and spins; hope those skinflints at Leo Vegas aren’t proving to be a bad influence

 

[LadyJelena]

There might be a public holiday so Royal Panda reps still haven't appeared. I'm sure they'll pop up tomorrow

 

[Melvin - Panda]

Hi All,

Sorry for the confusion, that's not how it is intended and never how it was applied either.

If you have requested a withdrawal before restricting yourself (either time out or self exclusion or account closure), your withdrawal will be processed as usual. 100% agree that anything else would be unethical.

I have no idea how this wording got in there, but from the fact that deposits are mentioned as well, I think it should say "Throughout the self exclusion period, withdrawals and deposits cannot be requested" which would make sense since you can't access your account.

That being said, self excluded players will still get their remaining balance sent back to them regardless of the fact if they requested a withdrawal or not, this is also required bye the UKGC.

Again, sorry for the confusion, it really is a wording issue and not how we intend it at all. I will have it amended shortly.

Maybe there are Royal Panda players on the forum who have in the past temporarily timed out for the same reasons? If so, please speak up about your experiences.

 

[AmGam]

In my opinion thats nothing a trustworthy casino should do. What do you think?

My reply is that I do not think that this practice is something any trustworthy casino would do - and I have my own reasons to stop considering Royal Panda a reasonable or trustworthy casino.

I noticed this unreasonable condition - thankfully just in time to stop getting into the same situation you did - and have therefore placed restrictions on my wagering and depositing instead because I am determined never to give them any more of my money after the way they are treating me.

You can see my other posts for details of the ridiculously long and detailed and unreasonable verification procedures they are currently putting me through.

I am afriad my experiences with them have forced me into the position where I have to say "BEWARE"!