Nifty29
Dormant account
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
Makes sense. Although, as mentioned just above you - will be fascinating to see how many 'illegal' actual spins happened percentage wise.
The whole thing is a bit barmy.
I'm usually right behind casino representatives in these sort of cases as I know some players are mental. There's just something niggling me about this that seems a bit off.
Both the tone and responses of the OP's in both cases, and the subsquent interaction with the Sloto rep.
I'm happy to be called wrong if these guys turn out to be blatant fraudsters - my money says they're not.
Based on.....the "tone" of the OP? Really? You should know that complainants VERY rarely disclose ALL relevant information that might point to them being in the wrong.
Let's see what the play logs say, and even whether the players decide to release them (would be a big red flag if they didn't)
The difference in 32Red is that they will check if you ask and if you only made few bets over the limits or/and if they deem them to be somewhat innocent mistakes they will waive the 100x. In the end the 100x is basically same as having the winnings confiscated.
And about my comment about Ms Sloto, also the player at GamblingGrumbles (the 17k dispute were they sited the classical bonus abuse and irregular play) says that she "lied" about his bets. And at that time they didnt even have the max bet rule in place.
Why would I trust the word from a rep from a casino that has used the standard rogue reasons to void substantial winnings?
So you still think she's lying i.e. "you don't trust a word". Nice one...that should help genuine players in the future who can't get access to reps because they get crap thrown at them when they politely post in a discussion.
You seem to take the whole thing very personally....??
@MsSloto -
Most of us appreciate your time and effort here at CM
Could you please tell us when the max bet term was added?