Spin palace complaint: resolved

[frufrugirl]

EEEEEE! What an avatar! i love it!

Glad to see this is resolved but what about the statement sent to him that says betting high is bonus abuse? . Is this statement a mistake? -switch us to low bet mode when bonus awarded if you dont want us to bet high on and there wont be such a problem.


Qoute-Based on your initial betting being 2 bets on Video Poker for $100 and $50 with only a $150 bank roll and the number of bets on the two games played, as well as your bet size clearly indicates abuse. The clause is there to protect the casino from gameplay such as this.


.
.

 

[Tagdog]

Why did ecogra rule against the player initially

Hi all,

I have been in communication with Gamblingman regarding his problem.
The casino re-visited the case with eCogra and it was decided by both parties that the player will receive his winnings.

There was some miscommunication initially however once everything was placed on the table and clarity on certain terms established by eCogra we all felt it the right thing to do.

Please understand it is never our intention to block legitimate winnings. We will always do what is right and look after our players.
I am sure you all know from past experience on this forum and with our group we are completely above board.
Sometimes mistakes happen but we will always work to resolve them.

I think eCogra should also be thanked as their intervention in pointing out some facts which assisted in getting this matter resolved.

As always I am here for any comments and feedback.

Kind regards,

Darran
The Palace Group

Would you care to elaborate what exactly happened?
I'm specifically intrigued/worried as to why ecogra have ruled against the player, then have reversed this decision. How exactly did ecogra not have the full story? If the player stated his case truly (which I assume he has as he's been paid) then what exactly happened to make them rule against him in the 1st place, did they bother investigating anything or did they just accept the bonus abuser standpoint that the casino promoted without due attention to his case. I find it very difficult to believe ecogra are 100% impartial sometimes.

 

[gamblingman]

Thank you very much Casinomeister,Darran and Jetset for your help.

 

[sdaddy]

Would you care to elaborate what exactly happened?
I'm specifically intrigued/worried as to why ecogra have ruled against the player, then have reversed this decision. How exactly did ecogra not have the full story? If the player stated his case truly (which I assume he has as he's been paid) then what exactly happened to make them rule against him in the 1st place, did they bother investigating anything or did they just accept the bonus abuser standpoint that the casino promoted without due attention to his case. I find it very difficult to believe ecogra are 100% impartial sometimes.

Indeed, if the casino or eCogra don't tell us what these new facts are, I find it hard to believe that this ruling reversal was not simply due to the negative publicity surrounding this case. Be that as it may, I sincerely hope that we never again hear of retroactively defined "bonus abuse" as being cause for voiding winnings at an eCogra member casino.

 

[Palace Group]

Hi all,

As I mentioned eCogra ruled against the player due to incorrect information on our part.
It was a mistake which has now been resolved.
Once all the correct information was presented the correct descsion was made.

Unfortanetly mistakes to happen but we will always do our best to resolve them in a timely manner.

Regards,

Darran
The Palace Group

 

[vinylweatherman]

Carpet

Hi all,

As I mentioned eCogra ruled against the player due to incorrect information on our part.
It was a mistake which has now been resolved.
Once all the correct information was presented the correct descsion was made.

Unfortanetly mistakes to happen but we will always do our best to resolve them in a timely manner.

Regards,

Darran
The Palace Group

This probably happens in a few cases. Because of the secret nature of the eCogra process, how can players even know that they lost their case unfairly doe to incorrect information. Players are not allowed to see the evidence, so cannot appeal on the grounds that it is wrong. I wonder how many other innocent players of ANY eCogra seal casinos have been unfairly treated due to mistakes in information.

Although it is refreshing to see a casino actually ADMIT this happened, and surely might happen again despite the best of care, one point still remains, that of big bets, even on allowed games, is sufficient to land a player in trouble under the "bonus abuse" criteria. It does not matter if the layer has one, two, or more accounts, the terms make no distinction, and many casinos will even fire off offers for their other brands to players who have just signed up at one, and these offers will invariably be for the sign-up bonus. Palace Group are not particularly into this, but others like MiniVegas and Fortune Lounge pretty much ram it down your throat whenever you visit one of their branded websites.

 

[Tagdog]

Hi all,

As I mentioned eCogra ruled against the player due to incorrect information on our part.
It was a mistake which has now been resolved.
Once all the correct information was presented the correct descsion was made.

Unfortanetly mistakes to happen but we will always do our best to resolve them in a timely manner.

Regards,

Darran
The Palace Group

Now this is worrying.
I believe this was a genuine error by the palace group, but it shows that if a casino wishes to be rogue then they can tell eCogra whatever they like and eCogra will rule in their favour?
I'ld like eCogra to be open about their arbitration process, surely at the very least they could expand on the reasons for failed appeals (I know they have to be careful for Fraud cases) for example they could have at least told gamblingman that the casino had presented further facts contrary to his statement initially.