1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Withdrawn: Slots Jungle bonus Terms persist after WR met.

Discussion in 'Withdrawn Warnings' started by maxd, Mar 8, 2011.

    Mar 8, 2011
  1. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    This situation came to light when a player reported the following:
    At this point the player's balance was fully withdrawable but they continued to play until their balance was back up to $1500. AGAIN the casino knocked the balance back to $750. In their words:

    In other words the casino is applying the bonus Terms long after the requirements have been completed and the Terms of the bonus fulfilled. As we see it the casino's actions acknowledged that the Terms were fulfilled because:
    1. the WR were met,
    2. they deliberately knocked the player's balance back to the "max win" amount and,
    3. they made the player's balance fully withdrawable at that point.

    What the casino is saying to the player by taking these actions is "all you get is $750", or to put it another way "this is your $750 per the Terms". So it's the player's money at that point -- "your $750" -- and the casino has no further claim on it because accounts have been settled per the Terms. What the player does with their balance after that has got nothing to do with the bonus or its Terms because the casino has already said by their actions "you have completed the bonus and we are now fully enforcing its Terms".

    You can't have it both ways: either the bonus is active and in play (in which case leave the player's account alone) or the bonus is concluded and finished (the only justification for confiscating monies per the bonus Terms). To retroactively re-apply bonus Terms at some arbitrary later time(s) because of a technicality (see below) is potentially very damaging to the player's balance and play experience. For these reasons this alert is necessary and justified.

    The bottom line is that if the player had withdrawn the full $750 the moment it became withdrawable and immediately re-deposited it the casino's later (2nd) confiscation would clearly have been unreasonable and invalid. Simply because the player didn't do the pointless withdrawal/re-deposit the casino feels they are within their rights to continue to confiscate any and all winnings in excess of the (now expired) bonus "max win" of $750.

    What if the player had deposited after the WR? Presumably any further winnings would have been thanks to both the free chip winnings and the player's fresh deposit so would those new winnings be valid or not? Would the casino prorate it or something equally suspect arguing the "max win" clause again?

    What if the player had continued to play for months or years after the WR was complete, assuming no withdrawal, deposits, etc? Would the casino have happily carried on confiscating winnings in excess of that original $750, all because "his earnings were based on free chip only"? Could they confiscate $1000? 10,000? More? At what point does this become ridiculous?

    The point is that these hypothetical scenarios pose the wrong questions because per the casino's actions the only reasonable conclusion is that the bonus is over. Its Terms no longer apply and the money in the player's account is his own. Until such time as he takes some other bonus and agrees to be subject to its Terms. Any other action by the casino basically means that they are choosing to interpret the Terms as meaning that once the player takes the bonus they are bound by its Terms as long as the casino sees fit, REGARDLESS OF THE WR, and the casino is justified in confiscating all subsequent winnings for as long as they like.

    Player beware: the player's only means to free themselves from these Terms is to withdraw everything so there are no "earnings based on free chip only" before they ever place another bet at the casino.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
    13 people like this.
  2. Mar 8, 2011
  3. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    I've updated the above because I thought the case I was presenting needed to be clearer. My apologies for any inconvenience caused.
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. Mar 18, 2011
  5. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    It has come to my attention that other casinos, some of them apparently on the Accred list, may have similar policies and practices to those Slots Jungle (SJ) has, as described above. This may or may not be true but as the Complaints Manager here at Casinomeister I haven't heard of such policies being implemented the way SJ did in this particular case. If and when I do I would respond as I did with SJ, namely warning players what to expect.

    If it can be proven that other casinos are dealing with players as SJ did then they would be included in this general alert. If needs be I'll list them all and the alert will apply to the lot of them. The point is that it's a casino practice that can seriously undermine a player's balance and therefore could have a major impact on a player's decision to play at the casino under these Terms. Since the casino makes no effort to warn players of what they're potentially getting into we need to alert players what to expect.

    But let's be clear: we're talking about a circumstance where the casino deliberately and without notice intervenes in the players account once the WR are complete, enforces the full Terms of the bonus (namely confiscating any winnings above the "max win" limit) and then continues to confiscate any winnings over and above the "max win" limit until such time as the player withdraws their balance. In other words the Terms of the bonus (confiscation) are applied long after the player's obligations have been completed and fulfilled.

    The bottom line as I see it is that there's a hidden clause in these bonuses that players are being held to:
    you must withdraw your balance upon completion of the bonus Terms in order to actually be free of the bonus Terms. If you do not withdraw your balance then the casino can and will continue to impose the Terms of the bonus as they see fit even though you have long since completed your bonus requirements.​

    If withdrawal of the balance is going to be used as a requirement of the bonus then it needs to be stated so in the Terms. If it is not so stated then it's not a valid Term of the bonus and cannot be used to justify continued application of other Terms of the bonus. Expecting players to somehow "just know" that the bonus has this particular unwritten requirement is neither fair nor reasonable.

    The casino argument that I've heard is that the money still in the player's account after the Terms are complete are "proceeds from the bonus" and as such are subject to the Terms of the bonus. I strongly disagree: if the Terms of the bonus are fully completed -- the "contract" has been fulfilled -- then the money in the account is the player's money, free and clear of the bonus Terms.

    I believe the casino is being disingenuous in saying "yes, but it's proceeds from the bonus". It's not "proceeds from the bonus" once the player has completed the requirements and fully met the Terms of the bonus. At that point those monies are the proceeds of gambling and no longer have anything to do with some past bonus. This attempt to say "those player winnings came from us so we have some claim over them" is dangerous and misguided. It is not an acceptable practice and is fully deserving of the alert as published.
     
    6 people like this.
  6. Aug 24, 2011
  7. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    I have heard, in detail, from the casino rep that the casino's policies have changed somewhat. As I understand it they now will not automatically withdraw funds from the player's account in excess of the max-cashout Terms of the bonus.

    That said the max-cashout Term will continue to be applied BEYOND THE STATED WAGERING REQUIREMENTS until such time as the player actually zeroes out their balance to free the account of the bonus Terms. Since the casino has and continues to apply this hidden Term the basic point of this Warning remains true, namely:
    The casino claims that because they are now not doing the automatic withdrawals this "Be Aware" notice should be withdrawn. I don't see why this should be done. The basic point has always been that they have a hidden Term -- that you must withdraw your balance after WR is complete in order to be free of the bonus Terms regardless of whether you have otherwise fulfilled all other bonus Terms -- and apparently that continues to be true. As such this "Be Aware" notice continues to be relevant and should not be withdrawn until the situation regarding the hidden Term changes.

    The real issue underlying all of this is that the casino is effectively saying "it is the player's responsibility to withdraw their balance and trigger the max-cashout Term once all the other bonus Terms have been met: if they do not then that is their problem but we are under no obligation to tell them any of this." That ends up being a trap to catch players who haven't read between the lines of the Terms and realized that they need to zero their account.

    If the casino is going to implement the Terms of the bonus BEYOND the stated requirements of the bonus then they should clearly state what responsibilities the player has, namely to zero the account by withdrawing their balance and thus (finally) triggering the casino's max-cashout Term. I can see no good reason for not making this explicit in the Terms especially given the disproportionately huge affect this hidden requirement can have on the player's end results.

    As previously stated if and when we become aware of other casinos, specifically Accredited casino, that implement the same "hidden Term" policy then they will be named here too.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2011
    7 people like this.
  8. Aug 29, 2011
  9. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    As I understand it the casino has recently updated it's Terms to make explicit the "zero the account" requirement (see You must register/login in order to see the link.):
    This is a laudable step forward and pretty much renders this "Be Aware" notice obsolete. I will mark this "Withdrawn" and move it to the appropriate sub-forum in a few days time.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2011
    2 people like this.

Share This Page