If I didn't know better (from this and the other thread), I would see the sudden appearance of "whitebet" as being a rogue operation trying to trick players into trusting them by creating the impression they are connected to Redbet. I would think the same if a casino with a similar name to another respected operation suddenly appeared. "Can I also take this welcome bonus" would not be the FIRST question I would be asking, it would more likely be "who the hell are you lot?"
That's not the case - the player DID NOT get caught out... Actually the player tried to catch Redbet out - The player has a history of ONLY complaints due to Bonus abuse... If this is the player you are referring to - I suggest you read the thread again before making sweeping statements.Another player got caught out by this. It is obvious that this rule is not clear enough. Even players who are looking specifically for such an exclusion are having trouble finding it. Usually, unless specifically excluded in the terms, the default understanding is that you CAN treat each casino offered by an operator as an independent entity, hence you can be a "new customer" at each and take any relevant offers.
Clearly, it is as "clear as mud". Even their CS are giving the wrong advice to players. This is unsatisfactory, and would breach the standards for accreditation.I have an account at Redbet, and wanted to open one in Whitebet. I simply went to live chat and asked about bonuses before I opened an accout because as I was concerned about the link between the two sites and any bonus abuse terms and the agent in chat said "you are able to claim the welcome bonus in white bet as we are an independant brand from Redbet".
This was yesterday: The first question I asked was "Can I have an account with Whitebet if I have one at Redbet"
If you ask CS a specific question, and are given a wrong answer that would cause you to break a term, especially one you are asking about, this DOES place the player in a position of involuntarily breaking the terms.Operational Standards
•Must pay winnings in a timely manner.
•Must not disqualify any player from a payout if terms & conditions are met, except for situations of fraud (multiple-accounts, bogus ID documents, chargebacks, etc.,).
•Must not confiscate winnings for vague & unclear reasons, such as "irregular playing patterns" or "bonus abuse", without specific T&C violations.
•Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.
•No player shall be involuntarily placed into a situation which breaches the terms and conditions during the course of play.
•Must pay out progressive jackpot wins in full or in reasonable chunks, regardless of any terms and conditions limiting payouts.*
•Must remove any bonus and associated playthrough requirements at the request of the player if play has not commenced.
•Will not entice players to reverse cash withdrawals with bonuses or other incentives.
•Will not use outsourced support. Player support must be in-house.
Again you are misguided... Making a Mountain out of a mole hill... I had the exact same scenario - I was told I could claim it by live chat and did... I later found out it was an error on their part. It was still honored.Clearly, it is as "clear as mud". Even their CS are giving the wrong advice to players. This is unsatisfactory, and would breach the standards for accreditation.
This is the problem. CS are giving the wrong advice which leaves players open to involuntarily breaking the terms. Even if a "reserve the right" attitude is used, it still creates a problem where CS say yes, and management decide that the player is one that should not be allowed to claim the bonus. This example was one where CS didn't use a "reserve the right" discretion to grant the bonus, but erroneously stated that there was no problem because the brands were independent.Again you are misguided... Making a Mountain out of a mole hill... I had the exact same scenario - I was told I could claim it by live chat and did... I later found out it was an error on their part. It was still honored.
The way you are behaving as if Redbet is some clip joint intent on ripping off players - AGAIN blowing the whole issue outta proportion. That's why we have Reps on the forum. People make mistakes and IF... A BIG IF ... they did not honor the statement I am 100% confident Andy will make good on it.
Sorry dude... Your rant is unwarranted.
Yes - Again Redbet is NOT a clip joint (This is not Casino Rewards or 888). Mistakes Happen and when they do, it takes a STELLAR operation to stand up and honor or correct their mistakes - FWIW - Redbet IS all that!This is the problem. CS are giving the wrong advice which leaves players open to involuntarily breaking the terms.
This is so speculative - how do you know what Management will do?vinylweatherman;532688[/B said:Even if a "reserve the right" attitude is used, it still creates a problem where CS say yes, and management decide that the player is one that should not be allowed to claim the bonus.
If its NOT the reps job to assist with mistakes or queries - I would Suggest Redbet Andy closes his account here... We not dealing with Robots here... Even the BEST Casinos make mistakes...Poor CS seems endemic in the industry, and really needs to be addressed. It should not be necessary for reps to act as CS agents, or have to clear up the mess when CS get things wrong....
I don't want to deprive the vast majority of players of a bonus in an effort to protect ourselves from an extremely small minority so we're retaining the policy.
However, thanks to feedback from here we will update the T&Cs as follows. I think this makes it fairer.
It will be displayed in the Welcome Bonus terms not deep in the general T&Cs...
The Redbet group includes Redbet, Whitebet and Heypoker. We reserve the right to cancel a welcome bonus, and any winnings arising from it, if the player has already used a welcome bonus at one of the other brands. To get approval prior to using a second welcome bonus, please contact email@example.com
Can we assume that if prior approval is given, even if the CS made a mistake, any winnings will be honoured.
Is it not possible to automatically block the minority of players rather than have to confiscate after the fact. A simple time limited block should be enough. Applied to all who claim any one welcome bonus, it would ensure players had to wait xx days before being able to get one at another skin, which would deal with those players that sign up at all three in a short space of time purely for the welcome bonuses. Players not out to exploit the system will find no block if they sign up after a longer period to the other skins.
Another idea would be to have the block automatically lifted once a player has made their NNth deposit where they claimed the first welcome bonus. NN set to a value that favours loyal returning players who after a while fancy a change of scenery.
Confiscation after the fact due to a "reserve the right" restriction is always going to create bad PR when it affects a player able to "spin" their story in their favour.