Sky Bet. Telling me pork pies (Lies)

keldow6608

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Location
Home as usual
Sorry Im new and complaining but I didnt know this place existed.

I signed up to Skybet on the 4th December 2007. There sign up bonus for the casino was dep 100 and bet 2000 then wager another 3000 and ask for 150. This 150 would be issued as withdrawable cash. I did this and when I asked for the 150 they credited it, but then said I had to bet another 3000. Er, no this isnt what I signed up to. Here are the email exchanges

Dear
Thank you for your e-mail.

All bonuses will be non-playable and will only be converted to withdrawable funds when the value of the bonus is turned over a minimum of 20 times using your own funds.

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

I hope that answers your query but if you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us.

Kind Regards,

Oscar de Villiers
Customer Care Team
Sky Bet l Sky Poker l Sky Vegas
T: 08000 724 777
From:
Date: 08/12/2007 19:25
To: help@skybetvegas.com
Subject: RE: <> - Service Request reference: 00044590

No you are wrong. The terms changed on the night after I had joined. I have a friend who recommended your site too me. This is the text of the email you sent to them on the 4th

Thank you for your e-mail.

After wagering the required amount for the second stage of the sign up bonus, your account has now been credited with the additional 150.00GBP as stated on the website.
This will now show as part of your balance and is available for withdrawal.

Kind regards,

Rayaan Alie


Customer Care Team
Sky Bet l Sky Poker l Sky Vegas
T: 08000 724 777

The service request reference is 00041889??

Please do not insult my inteligence. You may be able to change Terms and Conditions but Under the
The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 any changes after entering into a contract can be to the detriment to the consumer. Any additional wagering would be to my detriment.

Like I said, please change the bonus to withdrawable. When you do I will withdraw and close my account. The attitude that you can change the terms after I have joined and compell me to them stinks




Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 14:35:46 +0000
From: help@skybetvegas.com
To:
Subject: <> - Service Request reference: 00044590

Dear

Thank you for your e-mail.

I can confirm that the details of the Terms and Conditions have not been altered and the wagering conditions remain the same as they have always been. Notwithstanding this, it does state that Skybet can change the conditions of any offers at any time.



Kind Regards,
Phil

Customer Care Team
Sky Bet l Sky Poker l Sky Vegas
T: 08000 724 777
From:
Date: 07/12/2007 23:53
To: help@skybetvegas.com
Subject: RE: <> - Service Request reference: 00044107


Im sorry but that is wrong. When I signed up, the Terms and Conditions clearly stated that the bonus money would be withdrawable. You changed your conditions the night/morning of 5/6th December 2007. The terms applicable when I signed p are the ones Im bound to, so please make the bonus withdrawable



Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 18:46:50 +0000
From: help@skybetvegas.com
To:
Subject: <> - Service Request reference: 00044107

Dear ,

Thank you for your e-mail.

After wagering the required amount for the second stage of the sign up bonus, your account has now been credited with the additional 150.00GBP as stated on the website. This will now show as non-playable and will only be converted to withdrawable funds when the value of the bonus is turned over a minimum of 20 times using your own funds.

We thank you for using Sky Vegas and wish you the best of luck!

Kind Regards,

Michelle Petrus
Customer Care Team
Sky Bet l Sky Poker l Sky Vegas
T: 08000 724 777


I have highlighted some relevant points. One being Skybets insistance that they can change their terms and conditions whenever they want and I have to fall in line and the proof that there terms were as I stated in an email my friend received from them. I joined on there refer a friend and even listed my friends user id.

Now for my sins I am a solicitor but dont specialise in contract law but did a paper on it at University, hence the quote on the UTCC 1999.

Can any one help before I issue papers
 

cynthial

Boo
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Location
Albuquerque
Hi Keldow,

Welcome to the forum.

I am thinking that you do not have a screen shot of the original bonus offer. Is this correct? If it is, you may want to try one of the internet archive machines like Wayback. If they changed a page as you think they did, it will show with an asterisk on that date and you can perhaps get a screenie of the page as it was prior to the change.

Folks with much more knowledge than I about this type of thing will be along shortly to lend you a hand. You came to the right place for counsel.

Hang in there. :)

ps. Always get a screen shot for the future. :thumbsup:
 

keldow6608

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Location
Home as usual
Thanks for that I will have a look

Im amazed at their attitude. I have told them the person who told me of their offer, I have sent them the email that they sent him on the same day I joined with the 150 withdrawable.

I will be quite prepared to take them to court over this. I will be speaking to a colleague at work regarding the UTCC when I am in work on Tuesday. It owuld cost me 25 GBP to raise a claim which even if I lost, which I wont if I do raise, the cost are not recoverable by the other side as it would be allocated to the small claims court.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Thanks for that I will have a look

Im amazed at their attitude. I have told them the person who told me of their offer, I have sent them the email that they sent him on the same day I joined with the 150 withdrawable.

I will be quite prepared to take them to court over this. I will be speaking to a colleague at work regarding the UTCC when I am in work on Tuesday. It owuld cost me 25 GBP to raise a claim which even if I lost, which I wont if I do raise, the cost are not recoverable by the other side as it would be allocated to the small claims court.

Do their terms state disputes are handled under English law? Many casinos, especially the rogues, make it very hard to get justice in a court because they use odd licencing juristictions that have none of the consumer protection laws of the UK and EU.
If you CAN get a case booked, they may well not turn up, and then you should win by default provided you can show the terms had changed after you signed up. I doubt ANY casino would risk a court case going against them, and if they thought it likely, i.e, they are trying to pull a "fast one", they will settle at the last minute just like the banks did before they got involved in that "supercomplaint".
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
They're licensed in Alderney and regulated by the Alderney Gambling Control Commission (AGCC).

Also, you might want to make absolutely certain that there was a change in terms. If you compare their current terms (Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) )
to google's cache of December 4th (Outdated URL (Invalid)) you'll see that there's no change. And if you use web.archive.org to go back to August '07 (Outdated URL (Invalid)) again it's the same terms.
(Many thanks to Bryan for digging this stuff up)
 

keldow6608

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Location
Home as usual
Many thanks for that.

The terms I did not take great note of as such which I know is detrimental to me, however and as I said, the chap who refered me only that same day received the email highlighted and bolded in Red quite clearly stating that the bonus was withdrawable.

In regards law, as long as the company has offices in England, they would be answerable in an English court. As the perfect example you used being the bank charges scenario, for example, The Royal Bank Of Scotlands head office is in Edinburgh, however, people used the English courts as they had branches in England and English law suited their claim the better.

I have shown my colleague the emails, and after his shock regarding me playing at an online casino, he was confident that the email my friend received and his statement of account, would be sufficient to prove my case.

Another thing to bare is that in a civil case, which this would be, the arguement is not beyond reasonable doubt, but in all probability. So fo SKY to say no it isnt and for me to produce an email saying yes it is, they wouldnt have a leg to stand on.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
In regards law, as long as the company has offices in England, they would be answerable in an English court.

Doubtless that is true, but AFAIK Alderney is not "in England". Here are some quotes from
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
:

The Channel Islands have never been subject to the British Parliament and have always been self-governing units under the direct rule of the Crown acting through the Privy Council. According to constitutional custom, the Crown does not interfere in Island politics, save when some vital constitutional change is necessary, and never in local affairs. ...
Alderney is a self-governing, democratic territory and one of the principal islands of the Bailiwick of Guernsey. The island is outside the EC and is also a British off-shore finance centre to the larger islands.

The United Kingdom looks after the Channel Islands in the fields of Foreign Affairs, Defence, and the Islands' association with the European Union (EU).
 

keldow6608

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Location
Home as usual
There address on their website is

Central House
Beckwith Knowle
Otley Road
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
HG3 1WA

Its only the license that held in Alderny, not their head office.
 

tristan727

Banned user - violation of <a href="http://www.ca
Joined
May 31, 2006
Location
London
I really hate it when casinos do this- the problem often is lowly c.s. staff simply aren't trained or even aware of such retrospective & binding issues. And quite a few skybet staff are uniquely untrained in their job - their lack of knowledge of what's going on at the casino, or what a casino is - has left me absolutely dumbfounded sometimes. I think they just bring them in from the satellite or newspaper divisions for some kind of break. Fortunately some are quite good - it's really potluck who picks up the phone.

Personally, and I know you won't like it - I'd probably suck it in, and wager out the required, and save your ammo for worse disputes, like non-payment or double charging your card. Not that you should have to, but heh -you might win.
 

GrandMaster

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Location
UK
Do their terms state disputes are handled under English law? Many casinos, especially the rogues, make it very hard to get justice in a court because they use odd licencing juristictions that have none of the consumer protection laws of the UK and EU.
If you CAN get a case booked, they may well not turn up, and then you should win by default provided you can show the terms had changed after you signed up. I doubt ANY casino would risk a court case going against them, and if they thought it likely, i.e, they are trying to pull a "fast one", they will settle at the last minute just like the banks did before they got involved in that "supercomplaint".
The T&C state "These terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with Alderney Law". Skybetvegas is registered in Alderney, it may well contest the competence of the English courts. No idea how the English court would deal with this, but it would not be a small claims track case any more.

In regards law, as long as the company has offices in England, they would be answerable in an English court. As the perfect example you used being the bank charges scenario, for example, The Royal Bank Of Scotlands head office is in Edinburgh, however, people used the English courts as they had branches in England and English law suited their claim the better.
That's easy because under Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 you, as a customer may sue either in the country where he lives or where the company is based. Alderney is not covered by this and Skybet has no office in England as far I know.
 

keldow6608

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Location
Home as usual
Grand Master

SkyBetVegas
Central House
Beckwith Knowle
Otley Road
Harrogate
HG3 1WA



Found here

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

Therefore papers would be served here.
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
I took their SUB in September 2006, at the time the T&C's said this:-
1. Offer applies to over 18's only.
2. Offer is open only to residents of those jurisdictions where participation on skybetvegas.com is legal.
3. Offer applies to one customer only
4. Customers making an initial deposit of between 10 and 100 will automatically receive a one time 100% welcome bonus, up to a maximum value of 100.
5. Customers wagering over 5,000 on the qualifying games, over any time period, will be entitled to receive an additional bonus of 150. Please email us at games@skybetvegas.com when you have satisfied the wagering criteria and your free chips will be credited within 72hours.
6. All bonuses will be non-playable and will only be converted to withdrawable funds when the value of the bonus is turned over a minimum of 20 times using your own funds. EXAMPLE: You deposit 50 and claim a 50 Welcome Bonus. Therefore, in order to convert the 50 bonus into withdrawable cash, you must turnover a minimum of 1000 (50 x 20 = 1000) of your own funds.
7. Please note that stakes on Baccarat, craps, all roulette and multiplier will not contribute towards your staking requirements to convert the non-playable bonus to playable cash on any promotion.
8. All bonuses awarded have a 90 day expiration period (from date of grant). Bonuses that are not converted to cash within this time will be removed from the players account.
9.Skybetvegas.com reserves the right to withdraw or amend this offer at any time
10. Normal skybetvegas.com terms and conditions apply. Offer is effective from 22nd March 2006.
11. We reserve the right to withhold bonus payments at our sole discretion
I think this is the same as it is now.
I wagered the extra 5000, got the second 150 and was able to immediately cash out.
Although the T&C's are very poorly written I do believe that this was correct. You do the WR first, then get the bonus. It would be ridiculous to have to do the WR again afterwards - and I certainly would not have gone for such an offer if that was the case.

However I do agree that Sky Bet are the biggest liars on the internet!
Ever since I joined they have been posting blatant lies right on their hopepage - and they're still doing it now. Read these carefully & you'll soon realise it's total bollocks! :mad:
 

GrandMaster

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Location
UK
However I do agree that Sky Bet are the biggest liars on the internet!
Ever since I joined they have been posting blatant lies right on their hopepage - and they're still doing it now. Read these carefully & you'll soon realise it's total bollocks! :mad:
Report them to the Alderney Gambling Control Commission.
 

Fr05t3d

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Location
UK
My thoughts

I'd just like to comment on this as something seems to have been missed. For the record, I've never had an account at skybet nor do I promote them on my site.

The original post contained the following comment.

I signed up to Skybet on the 4th December 2007. There sign up bonus for the casino was dep 100 and bet 2000 then wager another 3000 and ask for 150. This 150 would be issued as withdrawable cash. I did this and when I asked for the 150 they credited it, but then said I had to bet another 3000. Er, no this isnt what I signed up to.

Now, it says deposit 100 and then bet 2,000. THEN wager another 3,000 and ask for 150. Would it not just say wager 5,000, rather than wager 2,000 then another 3,000 and then ask for the 150. Is it possible that the OP misread - i.e. he had to wager, then ask for the bonus, then wager a further amount?

Not wishing to defend or attack anybody, but I do find it unlikely that an organisation like Sky would set out to defraud or even mislead. Just my thoughts.

Cheers.
 

keldow6608

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Location
Home as usual
Frosted

No problem. If you look at my original post my arguement is substantiated with an email my referer received from Sky on the same day as I joined showing that their bonus had been credited and they could withdraw
 

Fr05t3d

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Location
UK
True!

I did see that, and it does add weight to your argument. Not hugely conclusive though as maybe they wagered the original requirement, requested the bonus by e-mail, then fulfilled the secondary requirement and informed support by e-mail and the e-mail you quote was responding to both. Do understand your frustrations though, and it certainly isn't clear cut either way.

Hey, I'm just playing devil's advocate - and it's awfully uncomfortable sitting on this fence!

Cheers.
 

SlotsWizard

Dormant account
Joined
May 11, 2006
Location
North of Antarctica
Does Skybet have the ability to increase the default bet size range for some players?
That would be the only thing which would make it plausible. There are several outcomes based on splitting, doubling, etc., and there's no way of knowing whether they consider the original bet part of the win, i.e., did he bet 6975 and win without a blackjack, did he bet 3487.50 and win without a blackjack, did he bet 2790 and get a blackjack, or did he bet 4650 and get a blackjack? Or was their splitting involved? Probably not, since they claim it was from a single hand (although even that might not necessarily mean that the hand wasn't split one or more times).

Whatever allegedely happened, the bet amounts required to make it are pretty strange.
 

Rob

Dormant account
Joined
Aug 1, 2007
Location
United Kingdom
Did you miss this glaringly obvious statement in the T+Cs

"6. All bonuses will be non-playable and will only be converted to withdrawable funds when the value of the bonus is turned over a minimum of 20 times using your own funds."

It was just only recently that they have started to enforce that rule for the second bonus.

And seriously, quoting legislation at them.. you are hardly going to take them to court over this are you !
 

keldow6608

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Location
Home as usual
Did you miss this glaringly obvious statement in the T+Cs

"6. All bonuses will be non-playable and will only be converted to withdrawable funds when the value of the bonus is turned over a minimum of 20 times using your own funds."

It was just only recently that they have started to enforce that rule for the second bonus.

And seriously, quoting legislation at them.. you are hardly going to take them to court over this are you !

Well whats the point in

A: Going to University for 4 years to study Law
B: Quoting the relevent legislation
C: It would only cost 25 for the court fee and I have sufficent evidence to support my claim so it would not be classed as vexatious and I would not be liable for their costs.
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
I'm glad Zoozie asked first :p

Yes, please give us a hint.
They say the players won huge amounts on ONE SPIN or ONE HAND = Impossible!

Shoot-out Hold'em; Table limit = 1,000 - so the max you can win in one hand is 10,000, not 13,975
Blackjack; Table limit = 1,000 - so how can you win 6,975 in one hand?
Price is Right fruity: The max you can win from 1 spin = 2,500. 5,328 is impossible.
Wheel of Fortune; I suppose technically 4,039 might by possible, but you could not do it betting the max of 10 or 5 / line because all wins would end in a 5 or 0, and not 9 as stated.
The only way to win 4,039 would be by betting 3/line - but it didn't say it was Slotster! :p

Actually this weeks lies aren't as bad as usual, but the September 2006 ones are clearly made up :mad:
 

Rob

Dormant account
Joined
Aug 1, 2007
Location
United Kingdom
Well whats the point in

A: Going to University for 4 years to study Law
B: Quoting the relevent legislation
C: It would only cost 25 for the court fee and I have sufficent evidence to support my claim so it would not be classed as vexatious and I would not be liable for their costs.

You still aren't going to take them to court :)
 
Top