Schankwart Vs. Cirrus Casino

[schankwart]

Ok... Thanks for posting the email and "transcript" here!

As I previously said I certainly would NOT have deposited a single cent had I been told that I was NOT eligible for this offer! As many know here I am quite an experienced player and have been through enough c*** to not commit suicide and throw my money away! I am in very good standing (VIP) with pretty much -all- reputable RTG Casinos (Shark, Inetbet, BoDog, SciFi, ...) and they would be able to definetely confirm that I am a fair player.

Just as I did before I also abide all rules when playing the offer I generated my $5200 win from and I certainly will not settle for anything less than this. Cirrus has always been treated respectfully by me before (I used to be a "VIP" there too) and I of course always accepted any losses that I had there! Had Christine REALLY told me that I was not eligible for ANY bonus over 30% I definetely would not have played this offer but she DID NOT! This transcript is bs!!

Additionally, as Jinnia mentions above, Cirrus had blocked ME PERSONALLY from certain offers before so I definetely know they can do this if they want!
They however chose to send me the email, let me redeem this code and play (for quite a while).

I do not know how their acting can get any more obvious???
No matter if it has been done purposedly or not, I expect them to pay me my legit winnings of US$5200 still!

 

[jinnia]

Lanidar and Jinnia - sorry for you two to have had your chains yanked on this one. In your shoes I'd be pissed off.

Sorry, my chain hasn't been yanked. I have not been told one thing by either party involved. Just reading posts that's been submitted and trying to draw a reasonable conclusion from what I'm reading.

 

[Casinomeister]

I should mention that Schwankwart did not initiate any threads in Casinomeister's forum about this. I believe it was limited to WOL. I only got involved when I was working on another Cirrus issue, (another German player BTW) and I saw his WOL post. Thinking they may be related (the source of the problem), I offered Schwanky to get involved. I have helped the guy in the past - in fact he's one of the few players who has actually purchased things for me on my wish list.

I thought it odd that he didn't contact me right away - I guess no DVD for me this time

 

[jetset]

In view of the additional information now posted I would have to support the following:

QUOTE: I agree that if the chat's genuine Schankwart was very foolish to try claiming these bonuses, but if the bonuses were credited then Cirrus is also in the wrong denying the withdrawal. Some compromise might well be the only sensible solution (and a complete overhaul of the bonus system to prevent this happening in future).UNQUOTE

 

[lanidar]

Lanidar and Jinnia - sorry for you two to have had your chains yanked on this one. In your shoes I'd be pissed off.

I belive that if ANYONE is "yanking my chain" it would be Cirrus.

I believe Schankwart. These "CHATS" can be altered by Cirrus. Who is to say they were not. I don't believe anyone in this group of casinos... why should I believe them now?

One other thing...Christine phoned me late last week. I was unable to accept her call due to personal reasons.
But, I did email her explaining why I did not accept her call and I would be phoning her today about noon time EST.
Let's see where this goes.

 

[jinnia]

that if the chat's genuine

I do have my suspicions they were altered.

I'm just not in the mood to be arguing with some by saying so, but what the hell, the day is young!!

But that is beside the point. Main point, to me, is: Cirrus previously blocked TWO 100% deposit bonus coupons. But allowed the third one to be redeemed?

Perhaps they decided to do a bit of gambling themself, hoping he'd lose?

 

[schankwart]

Well Bryan... I did not post a thread in your forum nor contacted you by myself simply because I did not want to become a "pain in your arse".
I am well aware of your help to me in the past and did not want to overstretch this by bitching too much to you.

I very much appreciate Jinnia's and Lanidar's support here and would like to publicly thank them for this once more!

I am trying to ignore Caruso's posts by the way as that person is just on a personal crusade against me and has nothing better to do than listening to his inner voices all day.

 

[caruso]

Insofar as I'm on a "personal crusade" against all cheats - casinos and players - that is to an extent true.

That the chat transcripts are doctored is virtually impossible. Look at the player's idiosyncratic English - did the casino fake that? That would be an extraordinary feat. I'm confident they're genuine.

If a player is told specifically that he may not play 100% coupons, and he goes on to play a 100% coupon, to what is he entitled? His deposit back - which he got. If he were NOT so informed, and played a coupon he had no reason to know he wasn't entitled to, he'd have a case.

Bryan will recall the case of "Maxmax" from the Angelciti debackle: this character jumped on the bandwagon with his own case, a coupon which redeemed but the winnings from which were withheld because he did NOT receive the Email. In this Cirrus case, the email was received but the player was specifically excluded. The Angelciti case was debateable, since the player wasn't specifically excluded even if he DIDN'T receive the email, and my own take was that he should be paid - though Bryan disagreed, as I recall. In this case, the player was specifically excluded, and I see no wrong-doing on the part of the casino in disallowing the winnings.

EDIT: found it. Coupon redeemed but winnings withheld because of ineligibility. What's sauce for the goose...etc etc.

https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...thousands-of-dollars-of-players-winnings.454/

 

[funeralparty]

I dont see how Schankwart can make the following statement....

"Had Christine REALLY told me that I was not eligible for ANY bonus over 30% I definetely would not have played this offer but she DID NOT"

....when we all saw on the transcript that she clearly stated this??


Im not sure why he was so eager to have the transcript posted before, and now that its here for all to see, its now "BS"


I think I have to agree with caruso here...

 

[m249a]

Just a small observation here.....I noticed that the first chat log showed Schankwarts name listed as "player"

The other two chat logs showed his full name.

I have chats with online casinos on pretty much a daily basis. I save those chat logs for future reference if needed. Just for the fun of it, I went back thru some 20-30 logs I have saved. Not one single group of chat logs showed my name in one session, and player/customer in a subsequent or prior session...........EVER. It is always one or the other. Never both, never changes. In fact I have chat logs from casinos I have no account with, but the chat server remembered my ip (i guess) and had my full name displayed. Then there are those that I have to enter my acct #. Then there are those that my name is displayed as "player" or "member" and they know who I am before I even type a greeting. (ip again I guess).

So my question is this.

Why are they different on these?
Am I looking for something that isn't there? Or does this small observation show something more sinister?

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm.........

 

[funeralparty]

The first chat log was the one that Bryan presented to us, and the second 2 were ones that Christine presented via emails.....so im assuming that on the casinos end, all chat logs will have the players name shown, however from the players end, it will still show as 'player' or 'member' or whatever.

I could be wrong though?

Unless of course Bryan got the chat log directly from Christine?..

 

[schankwart]

@ Funeralparty... I of course do not mind the "chat" to be posted but say that its bs if I can not recall the wording to have been there before!
Of course this chat -did- take place but if thats what Christine "seriously" told me I certainly would have never played the deal! mhhhhhhh




...Good observation m249a...! I dont know if this will show anything though.

 

[m249a]

The first chat log was the one that Bryan presented to us, and the second 2 were ones that Christine presented via emails.....so im assuming that on the casinos end, all chat logs will have the players name shown, however from the players end, it will still show as 'player' or 'member' or whatever.

I could be wrong though?

Unless of course Bryan got the chat log directly from Christine?..

Hmmmmm.....I was under the assumption all of the chat logs were presented by the casino, to Bryan, via email.

So, how would that change anything? Skank never sent any chat logs to Bryan. The entire lot of intel seems to be questionable, at this point.

 

[schankwart]

...Point is... I deleted the questionable chat-logs as I did not think I would need to save a conversation about a promo that I never even played.

 

[Casinomeister]

...Point is... I deleted the questionable chat-logs as I did not think I would need to save a conversation about a promo that I never even played.

This is a point that I have openly criticized Schankwart about - he is a VERY experienced player and he knows damn well NOT to discard or NOT to copy chat logs. Especially true when discussions over bonus ineligiblity or bonus limitations are taking place.

This blows my mind - why would Schankwart NOT keep a copy of this?

So, herr Schankwart - are you stating in front of God and everybody that these chat logs have been doctored to cover the casino's fourth point of contact? (old paratrooper term)

And yes, this material was given to me by the casino - it did not come from Schanky. I have removed IP addresses and other identifiers to protect the player's privacy.

 

[m249a]

And yes, this material was given to me by the casino - it did not come from Schanky. I have removed IP addresses and other identifiers to protect the player's privacy.

But you didn't alter the user name in the first series of chat's.....did you?

 

[Casinomeister]

But you didn't alter the user name in the first series of chat's.....did you?

Only where his name was used I replaced it with Schankwart.

At the chat sessions at Cirrus, you enter whatever user name you wish to enter (as far as I can tell). I can check with RTG or perhaps other operaters and see whet they receive on their end. And I'm not sure if RTG or Montana receives copies of chat records. I can check tomorrow.

 

[schankwart]

"This blows my mind - why would Schankwart NOT keep a copy of this?"

...I usually do save my chat transcripts only when I "think" I might need them again. In this scenario I did not file it because we only talked about a bonus that I did not claim anyway.

"So, herr Schankwart - are you stating in front of God and everybody that these chat logs have been doctored to cover the casino's fourth point of contact? (old paratrooper term)"

I have no sort of proof for my claim but know that I am not mentally retarded to NOT learn that I was no longer eligible for any promotion "over 30%" in the future!
I recall most phrases in the chat but NEVER read that she was restricting me from "any bonus over 30% in the future"! I would have had to be on LSD to not understand what she is telling me but... that was not the case. And yes, stupid and/or unlucky me did not save this chat back then.

I have heard about the famous "30% rule" for the first time after I asked Cirrus why my winnings got voided.

Christine and I had quite a sum of longer conversations in the past. She indeed once informed me that I was not eligible for all promotions anymore and I also realized that some coupons got automaticaly rejected when I tried to redeem them.... -Not so with this one.
It was being sent to my mailbox and I did not have any problem when redeeming the advertised coupons on there and playing the deal (which also took me quite a due to the high wagering requirement of US$50.000).


YUCK!

 

[m249a]

IMHO....once Bryan or lanidar confirms what is displayed on the casinos end for "live help" chat..........you will be rewarded, and yet another operation will be exposed for trying to pull a fast one.

This will be very interesting to watch unfold.

Good luck schankwart. I hope it ends up in your favor.

 

[jinnia]

m249a, I also questioned that in my mind, I noticed that. I used live chat twice last week at two different casinos, and they didn't know who I was until they asked for my account number, looked it up, then came back and said, Hello Deborah.

Was the entire chat log sent to Bryan as a file? Or just a copy/paste of it?

 

[schankwart]

Lots of patience will still be needed with this case probably. I am prepared for it though.

 

[JohnGalt]

My gut feeling is that the chat log is genuine but that that's not the end of the story by any means. Things can easily be misunderstood in a chat. It is unacceptable for casino operators to make up T&C in a chat with a player and then expect the player to abide by them even when they send no confirmation email and then continue to send them bonus offers in contravention of the new T&C.

It is the casino's responsibility to ensure that the terms with regard to a player are laid out. Where is the email where they specifically state that he will continue to get promotion offers to which he is not entitled and that their system will allow him to redeem them, but that if he uses one of the bonuses he will not be entitled to any winnings?? Isn't that a very important point? Isn't that something you'd want the player to know? Isn't it quite clear from the chat log that she did NOT make this clear to the player at all but only mentioned in passing that he would not be eligible for offers over 30%? DOn't you think it's quite possible that when he received an offer a couple days later he thought nothing of it, and upon its successful redemption assumed that he was entitled to it?

It's clearly not acceptable for any reputable business establishment to mention something orally or in a chat log in passing and then expect for it to be perfectly understood. A written confrimation MUST be sent, WITH DETAILS. Otherwise there is a huge amount of room for mistake, mistake the casino could easily have avoided. Maybe it thought that it was now in a win-win situation where if the player lost it won and if the player won they got to keep the winnings, or maybe they were just incompetent. Either way, he should get paid. Let this be a lesson to Cirrus to improve their customer service/communication.

 

[lanidar]

I have attempted to negotiate a settlement between Schankwart and Cirrus Casino.
I am sorry to say that after many cordial conversations with the manager of Cirrus Casino, Christine Jennings, we are at a complete stand still.

Christine Jennings has offered Schankwart 30% of the $5200.00 equaling $1560.00.
The 30% that Christine wishes to give to Schankwart represents any of the other 30% bonuses Schankwart could have accepted which were offered in the email Cirrus Casino sent to Schankwart.
Schankwart believes that he is entitled to the full amount and will not settle for less.
I must admit that Christine tried very hard to come to a settlement.
Yet, I still believe, as Schankwart does, that he is entitled to the full amount.

I must now proclaim that I have made every attempt to settle this and that the two parties involved cannot come to an agreement and there is no more I can do to resolve this issue.

I am no longer going to negotiate between these two parties unless one party asks me to contact the other with a possible new proposal.

I feel very badly that this has not come to a conclusion.

 

[caruso]

That's an extraordinarily generous offer from the casino, and it sets a very bad precedent.

Superb piece of extortion. Let's have a few more like that. Easy money.

LOL.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Caruso - IMO you are being overly harsh on schankwart. The casino sent him an email with bonuses on it. The casino allowed him to redeem the bonus coupon and play. As soon as they did this they should be tied into the terms of the offer - as should the player.

If a casino told me I'd been excluded from certain promotions (not ALL promotions) I certainly wouldn't expect them to then send me offers via email and allow me to redeem and play them if I was excluded.

It is the casinos responsibility to only send email offers to the player that he is eligible for - and especially their responsibility to only allow him to redeem and play these offers. As soon as they allow the player to stake his first $ after redeeming a bonus then they are tied in IMO.

Imagine what would happen if a marketing department of a company sent out a special offer to certain clients, including some they didn't want to receive the offer. The client that they didn't want to receive the offer then placed their order and paid for it.

Would it be OK for the company to renegade on the deal? Of course not, as soon as they took the payment they are tied in to the deal.

If the casino hadn't emailed the player the offer or allowed him to redeem it then I'd be on their side. However they've done both AND let him wager with the funds.