Resolved Slotastic Voids $4800 Win With Spurious Invocation of Rule

[mcd68024]

My original goal was to briefly resurface each past post and PAB in an attempt to establish each one as a legitimate issue to have brought up. Given the progression of the dialogue, I am going to let go of that ambition and handle things as they come on future postings. I said there would be no more PAB and I decided my original ambition would constitute a PAB in another form directed against Casinomeister. I've now a good sense how I will calibrate future postings. As far as "continued efforts to obfuscate the real issues", if you say so. Regardless of the response, this will be my last comment.

 

[jasonuk]

Is it significant that 70% of those cases were decided against you? Yes, I'd say it was, particularly since you made a habit of abandoning your PABs while we were still working on them for you.

My original goal was to briefly resurface each past post and PAB in an attempt to establish each one as a legitimate issue to have brought up.

One of the suggestions that came up in the PAB process thread was being more "obvious" with the reason for a PAB succeeding or failing - and personally I would like to see non-compliance reasons (posting on the forums, unresponsive or abandoned etc) split out from an actual negative ruling - that is one in favour of the casino.

If someone abandons the PAB process then Max isn't able to adjudicate on the issue at hand, only that the player abandoned the process.

 

[maxd]

@mcd68024 , whatever your intentions the bottom line is this: no future PABs will be accepted from you and any further Forum Rules violations -- with particular attention to items 1.17 through 1.19 -- will result in your Casinomeister membership being terminated. In other words you are one strike away from being shown the door: do with that as you will but you can't say you haven't been warned.

One of the suggestions that came up in the PAB process thread was being more "obvious" with the reason for a PAB succeeding or failing - and personally I would like to see non-compliance reasons (posting on the forums, unresponsive or abandoned etc) split out from an actual negative ruling - that is one in favour of the casino.

If someone abandons the PAB process then Max isn't able to adjudicate on the issue at hand, only that the player abandoned the process.

Excellent point. I've never thought of it that way because I've always seen it as "was the player successful?" vs "in whose favour was the case decided?" In truth though we do differentiate the different types of Closed cases -- "OP AWOL", "Ignored the Rules", etc -- behind the scenes because that info is important to the ongoing management of the PAB process.

As we proceed with the PAB revamp I'll make sure we look at possibly changing the Resolved / Closed binary to something like Casino / Player / Botched or something of that nature. @jasonuk , is that the sort of thing you were suggesting? Just want to be sure I've understood this correctly.

- Max

 

[ESCJAMIE]

Deposited $150 and redeemed slot coupon. Met rollover, got to ~$4800 and requested payout. Slotastic claimed I violated their max bet rule and reset my balance to $150. They claimed 3 of my ~3500 bets were over the $10 limit. All my other bets were $5 or less.

Do not remember making any bets over $5, but it is possible I made a few by accident. Many games, when you reopen or refresh it, reset the bet to maximum which you may not notice immediately. However, if I had to guess, I toggled from a second browser back to my slot game and, in doing so, accidentally clipped a pay-line marker. If you do this, it activates every pay-line up to that pay-line which could give you 3 consecutive $11+ spins without noticing.

Their rule is worded, "The maximum bet for all bonuses (including cashback) must not exceed $10. Any winnings, plus bonus amounts derived from bets higher than this limit will be voided". All 3 of my over-limit bets were losers and thus I "derived" no winnings from them. I told them I was, from the beginning, aware of their terms and conditions and of the max bet rule. I had played all previous coupons according to them. I mentioned the ways that higher bets could happen by accident. I told them, "The second sentence of your rule implies that the repercussion for violating a max bet of $10 is that it voids all wins on such bets as well as all wins which can be concluded to have been "derived" from bets made from the money won on those bets. The fact that the second sentence of your rule is clearly designed to clarify the first sentence, implies that just having a bet on principle above $10 does not void your entire balance above the original deposit."

I suggested that they should be happy enough that I gifted them 3 automatic losers by accident. Their response was "Whether or not winnings were had from the specific bet, if bets above $10 are made when a coupon is active, the winnings are voided." They then chastised my "playing style", i.e., the 3 accidental bets, reiterated numerous times that I be familiar with the terms and conditions, and invited me to play their hottest slots.

When I escalated a ticket here at casinomeister. Slotastic simply echoed their position. Despite my admonishments, Slotastic has shown no interest in updating the wording of their rule to reflect how they actually act on it. Doing so could eliminate any ambiguity. Any ambiguity should benefit the party that didn't write the rules. Rules like a $10 max bet are designed to protect casinos from people who want to collect bonuses while minimizing the action they give back. They are not meant to be an arbitrary way to say "gotcha". I don't care what anyone says. Slotastic is not justified here karmatically or by the wording of their rules.

Been there with £2500 win from £20 depo I hit spacebar to do my spins and this 1 game pressing spacebar makes it do max bet of £40 i didnt win nothing from it.
I never got paid

 

[hhhelllo]

Been there with £2500 win from £20 depo I hit spacebar to do my spins and this 1 game pressing spacebar makes it do max bet of £40 i didnt win nothing from it.
I never got paid

Swear to god, just as a matter of principal, I would buy a one way plane ticket to the nearest airport to visit these good buisness mans. And I would probably never be able to come back home. Finding Nemo

 

[ESCJAMIE]

Swear to god, just as a matter of principal, I would buy a one way plane ticket to the nearest airport to visit these good buisness mans. And I would probably never be able to come back home. Finding Nemo

Honestly they are bastards,

 

[hhhelllo]

Let's hide some mines in their garden so we can confiscate their vedgetables and accuse them of knowing how an explosion works.
Sorry our decision is final. Our hands are tied dear friends. No more tomatoes.

 

[jasonuk]

As we proceed with the PAB revamp I'll make sure we look at possibly changing the Resolved / Closed binary to something like Casino / Player / Botched or something of that nature. @jasonuk , is that the sort of thing you were suggesting? Just want to be sure I've understood this correctly.

- Max

Pretty much - Casino / Player / No Ruling seems the obvious split.

Perhaps No Ruling could be split slightly further into say Withdrawn (by player, e.g. inactivity, posting when they shouldn't), No Can Do (e.g. already gone to ADR) and possibly Unresponsive Casino (because that is important to know, even if you can't rule in favour of the player).

 

[maxd]

More excellent suggestions, thank you!

- Max

 

[Playforfun]

Great entertaining in this thread. honest.

keeping the balance in the account on principle + logging in occasionally to avoid balance removal. I'm sure our guy has read there terms diligently and he knows the timeframe + is login enough? etc lol.

I'm here to protest those denigrating our OP for "not contributing". he gave me a very hearty laugh.

to the OP. I feel your pain. alas, most of us aren't as principled about keeping big companies honest. we accept what we are given and go watch TV

 

[jasonuk]

I'm here to protest those denigrating our OP for "not contributing". he gave me a very hearty laugh.

You might have missed the age of the thread - those observations are from six months prior, where you can see their forum history (across 16 years) was almost exclusively to "brigade" complaints across multiple forums as some kind of attempted leverage. Admittedly their comedy act of recent weeks may have brought a smile to some, albeit more in the city of delusion than the land of reality.

to the OP. I feel your pain. alas, most of us aren't as principled about keeping big companies honest. we accept what we are given and go watch TV

They broke the terms, there is no ambiguity there. The casino offered half because they realised they'd not made the phrasing watertight and felt that was a reasonable settlement... the only way the player gets all of the money is a) they didn't break the terms or b) they can prove beyond reasonable doubt their interpretation of the rule is correct - neither of which is likely.

That nothing has changed in the past six months kind of confirms that...

 

[Subyzero]

For some reasons casinos aren't anymore fun. Their % of the revenue is a lot from denyeing player wins. We are in 2023 and all casino's ot there apart from a few don't want to implement the restrictions over player bets when he is playng with a bonus. They know some games , in example when you load them have the max bet automated selected and by pressing space even by mistake can trigger the round.
In a realistic scenario , what are the odds that a player who won like 5 k non breaking the rules , then he go and break them knowing that the casino will confiscate the money? We all know the answer.
The casinos always will say "terms and conditions" wich makes me directly go and flush the toilet. T&C are invocating always on confiscating, but when they stall winnings,delays and "accidentally" cancel windrawls there are no "T&C".
And remember that only a few will come here and complain, but the reality will show that actually the casino operators are the ones who break their own "T&C" much frequently then the players

 

[mcd68024]

My posting on Slotastic was a key catalyst to my account status getting downgraded. I am making my request from this location only as a convenience should any party want a quick refresher as to how things got to where they are.

If my memory serves me correctly (it has been a while), I am restricted to posting only with regards to your accredited casinos (or something to that effect). However, there is a casino outside that group which I feel warrants an exception given the scale of the situation. Since I figure you could always delete this post if you wanted to, I might as well just name the casino: This Is Vegas (TIV). TIV has confiscated $111,758 of my balance. I have written pages extensively detailing multiple allegations, among them that TIV fabricated tournament scores. This intersects the interests of other players at the casino. TIV just recently froze out my last $31,608 citing the clause: "termination of the player's casino account, confiscation of winnings and existing balances...Should at any time the casino discover an active or past complaint/dispute/criticism on a public forum or blog or any other type of website." That is the extent of the relevant context of that clause. Doesn't matter if what you write is true. TIV is claiming "negativity" and "slander" but won't specify how I am slandering them. I have extensively documented my positions elsewhere.

I do not expect any investment of yourselves on my behalf other than allowing the general public exposure to the situation to draw their own conclusions. Preventing me from posting would ironically be a way of rewarding a casino for having a fading reputation.

On a side note, if anyone wants to attack me for posting at multiple sites trying to get some leverage, feel free. It would be a welcome change from a site quickly extricating itself from the scale of my complaint by punting me off to yet another mythical "licensing board".

 

[mcd68024]

Just in case there was any confusion, the previous comment wasn't supposed to be a post by itself. I was literally just asking permission to post on This Is Vegas properly. I was doing this because, given my circumstances, I didn't want to be presumptuous. I was kind of expecting the request itself to be deleted (it doesn't belong in the Slotastic post) accompanied by some form of a "yes" or "no" answer.

 

[maxd]

My posting on Slotastic was a key catalyst to my account status getting downgraded.

Not true. As documented elsewhere -- see, for instance, posts #45 and 46 above -- your account status was downgraded because of your abuse of the PAB service (abandoning PABs) and repeated Forum Rules violations (item 1.11, "personal agenda").

If my memory serves me correctly (it has been a while), I am restricted to posting only with regards to your accredited casinos (or something to that effect).

Again not true. You were banned from the PAB service (see above) and told that you were added to the Moderated Users group, meaning your posts would have to be approved before they would appear on the forums AND any further "personal agenda" posts would be deleted without comment.

Preventing me from posting would ironically be a way of rewarding a casino for having a fading reputation.

Preventing you from posting is your way of seeing it, our perspective is that it's enforcing the "no personal agenda" section of the Forum Rules.

The bottom line as I see is it is that you are back, once again, with a beef against some casino and you want to use Casinomeister to help press your case against them.

I fully accept that you may have a legitimate complaint against TIV and to that end you are allowed ONE post in a new thread to make your case. In order to keep this from being another one of your "bully the casino" crusades the only subsequent posts you will be permitted there will be to answer questions people may ask about your case. If you subvert any such response into more thrashing of the casino that content will be deleted without comment. Present your case, answer questions, leave it at that. Mess about -- meaning cost us a bunch of time policing you -- and you'll be out on the curb, for good.

If there is anything that is unclear best to ask and get it straight now, exceptions down the road will be in exceedingly short supply.

- Max

 

[jasonuk]

Max has already corrected your misunderstandings on the previous warnings so I don't need to discuss that.

I might as well just name the casino: This Is Vegas (TIV)

Well that says it all...

• The site has no license
• They have some of the most predatory terms I've seen - $500/week withdrawal limit at the base tier, free chips taint cash balances, 10x withdrawal caps on modest deposits, $10+ withdrawal fees, balances forfeit after 90 days of inactivity.
• Pages and pages and pages of rules that they can use to take your balance, including one you mention "Should at any time the casino discover an active or past complaint/dispute/criticism on a public forum or blog or any other type of website." (and it doesn't even specify their own site in that clause, so any vaguely negative community feedback counts).

... and shock horror, when you won something they stole the money. It's not gambling, it's fraud... and you got done up like a kipper. If it's too good to be true...

(and while I haven't asked any questions, I will open a right of reply even though there isn't really anything to add - a scam casino robbed you, end of story).

 

[mcd68024]

Thank you for the responses. Comments noted. The clarification on the exact status of my account was helpful. As I said, it has been a while.

On a side note, I was not trying to imply there were not more important factors in my account getting downgraded. I was merely trying to say that Slotastic was one catalyst and a convenient reference point.

 

[mcd68024]

I am well aware that I have been restricted to answering questions only, and although I do not expect it would or should be granted, I would appreciate a dialogue about a few aspects of the This Is Vegas complaint. If you are worried about me trying to bully anybody around, I would be happy to have such a dialogue privately or in a manner that you feel is appropriate.

 

[maxd]

.. I was not trying to imply there were not more important factors in my account getting downgraded. I was merely trying to say that Slotastic was one catalyst and a convenient reference point.

Yes, well, that appears to be a pattern with your posts: you say something that isn't true -- usually claiming to be the victim of one thing or another -- and when you are corrected with supporting evidence you say "I was not trying to imply blaa blaa blaa".

I suggest that if you avoided the hard-done-by approach and sailed a little closer to the truth in the first place such "misunderstandings" would be a lot less frequent. Also, your time here would be a lot less fraught with the tensions that inevitably result from us having to constantly monitor your posts to counter your false claims and self-serving distortions of the facts.

I've told you before and I'll say it again: cut the woe-is-me bullshit and respect the Rules and things will probably go perfectly smoothly for you here at Casinomeister. But if you persist with the notion that you are the smartest person on the forums and can blag your way through the Rules things will never go smoothly. If you persist in the notion that we are here to be your platform to brow-beat your latest casino bête du jour things will never go smoothly. If you persist in the notion that your habit of spin-doctoring past events to absolve yourself of any responsibility is the way to go then things will never go smoothly. If you are here under any of those presumptions then you should really be asking yourself "why am I here?" because you would be profoundly mistaken.

And finally, to dispel the notion that your rebuttal to any of the above is called for I'm hereby locking the thread. If anyone has good reason for it to be re-opened feel free to contact me via Private Message and share your thoughts.

- Max