Bonus Complaint suomikala87 vs Redbet

Would be really great to hear redbets explanation here. Sure, they have this rule but considering your case and player history it really looks like redbet was looking for ANY reason to deny your big payout. Looks cheap, so i hope they can explain on which grounds they decided that.

Hopefully the rep shows up here soon..
 
Would be really great to hear redbets explanation here. Sure, they have this rule but considering your case and player history it really looks like redbet was looking for ANY reason to deny your big payout. Looks cheap, so i hope they can explain on which grounds they decided that.

Hopefully the rep shows up here soon..

This happened 2½ months ago but was just posted so no need to hurry.

I hope they don't post until they have good news for the OP and some clear changes to the rules.
Either you're allowed to use them or not, no exceptions, and clearly written when people take the bonus.
Also which casinos it is for.
 
I knew that some players would take the casinos side which is fine but now I do not get your reasoning. Something is not correct about me reading the rules and understanding them? Could you elaborate what you think ¨reserves the right¨ means as I already summed up my view on the opening post. I hope you don't mean that I should take it literally and just keep my fingers crossed after every deposit for the casino to decide how are they going to use the term this time around.

Also it is clear that the casino is using the term just as I described it and allowing players to play bonuses on both casinos. After they do that it certainly doesn't mean they should be able to pull a switcheroo and use the term the other way around when a player has won.

edit: never mind....apparently I'm being mean per some people, and I see where this is going. Don't feel like being honest today.
 
....
 
I'm just wondering...if in fact that term was there before but they didn't enforce it, is it possible that Redbet bent the rules for long term players before and now with the UK license they have to be more strict? I'm noticing that their terms were updated November 18th.

@the OP - do you still have the emails that you received with the bonus info? Was there any fine print about it only being good for one casino?
 
I am a pretty lazy guy and wont bother reading the rules at Redbet especially since they don't allow me to deposit via Ecopayz. Whilst we cannot say the casino is wrong for merely sticking to its own terms I wonder whether it had been specifically stated that at Whitebet you cant claim the same bonus you claimed at Redbet and vice versa. Simply stating a player cannot claim the same bonus within the same group doesn't wash with me. If they had stated exactly what I wrote above sorry the OP is SOL but if not I reckon he has a case. Remember this OP is not some newbie bonus hunter. He is a loyal player who loves bonuses just like KK.
 
.
@the OP - do you still have the emails that you received with the bonus info? Was there any fine print about it only being good for one casino?

Yeah, I have the emails and no - there isn't anything special about these such as being only good for one casino. The standard bonus rules mentioned if you will.
 
I've had a similar incident at Redbet and sister casino's have it in writing that they allow it and in the end still get my winnings voided

app. €1900 got my €250 original deposit back from a 100%offer was a VIP and a loyal player .

I know it is in their rules so in the end didn't even try to PAB as they pointed out it was in their t&c's.

Ended up closing my accounts at their group and moved on !
 
I've had a similar incident at Redbet and sister casino's have it in writing that they allow it and in the end still get my winnings voided

app. €1900 got my €250 original deposit back from a 100%offer was a VIP and a loyal player .

I know it is in their rules so in the end didn't even try to PAB as they pointed out it was in their t&c's.

Ended up closing my accounts at their group and moved on !

Not sure how much more formal things are in-writing, but on the phone, sales-rep (not necessarily Redbet but many online gaming sites) will say almost anything. My gf was promised by a sales-rep (not from Redbet) that if she deposited that day then she would be 100% gauranteed to come out a winner!

I think I recieved an email promo from vegaspartnerlounge (my fav group btw) that mult-millionairres are created every month at their casino!
 
So in the rules or T&C section it says on 7.9 "our brands", does it name anywhere what the name of the brands are, i mean in the rules?
 
In order to avoid further misunderstandings, and whether some are allowed while others aren't, it's been decided that no bonuses are allowed to be used on more than one of our brands. This will from now on be included in the promotional terms & conditions (e-mails/promo pages).

The rule applies to Redbet, Whitebet and Heypoker where the offers usually are the same, and communicated simultaneously.

Furthermore we will look into the possibility of connecting equal bonuses to each other - making it impossible to claim a similar bonus on more than one brand.

Alex
 
So in the rules or T&C section it says on 7.9 "our brands", does it name anywhere what the name of the brands are, i mean in the rules?

Yes, it's in the first term: 1.1. Redbet, Whitebet and Heypoker.

Alex
 
In order to avoid further misunderstandings, and whether some are allowed while others aren't, it's been decided that no bonuses are allowed to be used on more than one of our brands. This will from now on be included in the promotional terms & conditions (e-mails/promo pages).

The rule applies to Redbet, Whitebet and Heypoker where the offers usually are the same, and communicated simultaneously.

Furthermore we will look into the possibility of connecting equal bonuses to each other - making it impossible to claim a similar bonus on more than one brand.

Alex

I noticed that you left out mentioning if the OP will get paid or not.
I can assume he won't get his winnings and you avoid mentioning it for some reason, or the decision isn't final yet.

I hope for the latest because it doesn't look good to let someone break the rules for years but then suddenly, when he wins, it's denied.
The fact that for loyal players it has been ok to claim the bonuses in more than one place before, makes the op's case valid for payment.

I must say I'm so disappointed in Redbet. I have held you really high earlier. I can't say I do anymore.
This is my opinion of course. I'm sure others see it differently but I had to speak up.
 
In order to avoid further misunderstandings, and whether some are allowed while others aren't, it's been decided that no bonuses are allowed to be used on more than one of our brands. This will from now on be included in the promotional terms & conditions (e-mails/promo pages).

The rule applies to Redbet, Whitebet and Heypoker where the offers usually are the same, and communicated simultaneously.

Furthermore we will look into the possibility of connecting equal bonuses to each other - making it impossible to claim a similar bonus on more than one brand.

Alex

Hi Alex,

For the purpose of clarity and for the benefit of everyone here:

Does this include Free Spins - Many Players have accounts at all 3 brands (Like Myself). When New Games are released, does this mean that the Free Spins cannot be used although they have been issued to your account?

Nate
 
Free spins issued to the account, for new game releases as in your example, will not be affected by this rule.

Alex

Hi Alex,

For the purpose of clarity and for the benefit of everyone here:

Does this include Free Spins - Many Players have accounts at all 3 brands (Like Myself). When New Games are released, does this mean that the Free Spins cannot be used although they have been issued to your account?

Nate
 
Good change to the rules :thumbsup:

But as I stated earlier in this thread Redbet claimed that the rule 7.9. was ironclad and they were reading and using it as (and I quote) ¨you are only allowed to use the bonus on one of our brands¨. In my case it was speculated that I merely slipped trough the cracks somehow and it wasn't their intention to let me play like this. Though in this thread there are others too who have voiced that they were allowed to do this so it is clear that the casino used the rule both ways. So yeah - still waiting to get paid.
 
Don't wait for the payment as i only got my deposit back .

Turned away from this great casino (Too bad) and never looked back.
 
In order to avoid further misunderstandings, and whether some are allowed while others aren't, it's been decided that no bonuses are allowed to be used on more than one of our brands. This will from now on be included in the promotional terms & conditions (e-mails/promo pages).

The rule applies to Redbet, Whitebet and Heypoker where the offers usually are the same, and communicated simultaneously.

Furthermore we will look into the possibility of connecting equal bonuses to each other - making it impossible to claim a similar bonus on more than one brand.

Alex

Until this is all in place, there is still some scope for confusion whilst it remains possible for players to claim and play with a bonus they shouldn't. You only mention three brands, but others have listed more than this that would still qualify as "our brands".

If players can only use the bonuses on one skin, why not only HAVE one skin, then all this confusion would be a thing of the past. This is something all operators should look into. Some have spawned so many skins that it's impossible to keep track as a player, especially as when marketed they are marketed as though they are completely independent of anything else, with the truth being in the general terms, licence numbers, etc.

Even when players think we have the right picture about which brands are connected, say through platform provider or licence number, we have their reps eager to tell us they are "completely independent" of the other brands they are connected to. Cassava is probably a worst offender of note, but the same can be said of others. Everymatrix/Oddsmatrix, for example, seems to have a confusing stance on the issue. Sometimes they are merely the platform provider, with the individual brands being independent, then when it suits them they are all connected, and any term that applies to "our brands" applies to EVERY casino that uses the Everymatrix platform.
 
Until this is all in place, there is still some scope for confusion whilst it remains possible for players to claim and play with a bonus they shouldn't. You only mention three brands, but others have listed more than this that would still qualify as "our brands".

If players can only use the bonuses on one skin, why not only HAVE one skin, then all this confusion would be a thing of the past. This is something all operators should look into. Some have spawned so many skins that it's impossible to keep track as a player, especially as when marketed they are marketed as though they are completely independent of anything else, with the truth being in the general terms, licence numbers, etc.

Even when players think we have the right picture about which brands are connected, say through platform provider or licence number, we have their reps eager to tell us they are "completely independent" of the other brands they are connected to. Cassava is probably a worst offender of note, but the same can be said of others. Everymatrix/Oddsmatrix, for example, seems to have a confusing stance on the issue. Sometimes they are merely the platform provider, with the individual brands being independent, then when it suits them they are all connected, and any term that applies to "our brands" applies to EVERY casino that uses the Everymatrix platform.

We know that it's still possible to break the rules. Just like it's possible to bet more than the max allowed while using a bonus. Not ideal of course, but we're looking at solutions for this.

The three brands affected by this rule are treated equally in a way that the other brands aren't. As mentioned, bonuses are almost always the same, communicated at the same time, identical promo pages/e-mails etc.

Throughout the terms & conditions you will find how these three brands are connected and how rules apply across these brands, and not the other ones mentioned in the thread - even though they're part of the same group.

Alex
 
We know that it's still possible to break the rules. Just like it's possible to bet more than the max allowed while using a bonus. Not ideal of course, but we're looking at solutions for this.

The three brands affected by this rule are treated equally in a way that the other brands aren't. As mentioned, bonuses are almost always the same, communicated at the same time, identical promo pages/e-mails etc.

Throughout the terms & conditions you will find how these three brands are connected and how rules apply across these brands, and not the other ones mentioned in the thread - even though they're part of the same group.

Alex

It might be easier to just say that players can only have a single account over all three brands. The brands could then be configured such that a single sign-in works for all three. This should then make it easier to develop a solution that prevents the same bonus being taken more than once, as by merging the back ends, the system should see the first bonus taken, and then mark all three as "taken" for that particular sign in.

Casino Rewards have had a system that does this for ages. They have some 30 skins, but an offer only works the once, and in the first skin the player deposits in. This is despite not having a single sign-in system. instead, all the accounts are connected through the loyalty rewards system, and bonuses are managed there, rather than in individual casino skins.


Maybe for now each of the promotional emails should have in bold print "This offer may only be taken once in either Redbet, Whitebet, or Hey Poker. You could also display a "marketing code" on the mailers, which will be the same for all three offers that are considered "the same". This would enable players to check these codes across all mailers so that they can positively identify which promos are connected in this way, no matter how creatively different the marketing is for each skin.
 
I decided to bring up this thread from earlier this year due to recent threads on ¨online casinos¨ section about Redbet and Lucky247. Especially the one about Lucky247 reminded me of my case and how Redbet jumped to confiscate my winnings quoting a vague term with the phrase ¨reverves the right to¨. I remember the rep promising to change the term:

In order to avoid further misunderstandings, and whether some are allowed while others aren't, it's been decided that no bonuses are allowed to be used on more than one of our brands. This will from now on be included in the promotional terms & conditions (e-mails/promo pages).

But looking at the site they still have the same rule in place:

7.10 Gaming Operator reserves the right to void bonuses and winnings if the Player or any person in the customers household has previously received a similar or equal bonus on one of our other brands. This applies to both sports betting and casino bonuses.


So yeah, nothing has been done. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were allowing players still to play bonuses on multiple casinos and then swooping in to take the winnings if the player hits it big.

By the way I lost the PAB and ultimately Bryan didn't overturn the decision and as such I never got my money. Irks me some that the casino got a way with it by plainly lying and stating that they didn't allow such bonus play. You can check the first page of this thread (Miiisooo's post) to see that I wasn't the only one allowed to play this way :rolleyes:
 
I still agree that you should have been paid here. It was really bad of them and I can easily say that everything they do is not perfect.

I also saw that that wording still was there and it should be changed so it was clear that it was now forbidden.
What they changed after your case was that they now write in all emails they send out that the players is not allowed to use any similar bonuses on any of their brands.

That wasn't there when you were denied so they should do the right thing and pay you.
Have I said that earlier in this thread maybe? :D
 
I'm not worth €2900/month but I for one won't be playing or joining anything from this group. Shame on you redbet.
 
I decided to bring up this thread from earlier this year due to recent threads on ¨online casinos¨ section about Redbet and Lucky247. Especially the one about Lucky247 reminded me of my case and how Redbet jumped to confiscate my winnings quoting a vague term with the phrase ¨reverves the right to¨. I remember the rep promising to change the term:



But looking at the site they still have the same rule in place:

7.10 Gaming Operator reserves the right to void bonuses and winnings if the Player or any person in the customers household has previously received a similar or equal bonus on one of our other brands. This applies to both sports betting and casino bonuses.


So yeah, nothing has been done. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were allowing players still to play bonuses on multiple casinos and then swooping in to take the winnings if the player hits it big.

By the way I lost the PAB and ultimately Bryan didn't overturn the decision and as such I never got my money. Irks me some that the casino got a way with it by plainly lying and stating that they didn't allow such bonus play. You can check the first page of this thread (Miiisooo's post) to see that I wasn't the only one allowed to play this way :rolleyes:

And instead of just saying 'one of our other brands, why can't they list what the other brands are then there's even less chance of problems !!!!!!!!!!
Are customers expected to do a companies search to find out what other brands a casino might or might not own??
Or is there only a 'problem' if a customer wins??

They're basically just as bad as Cassava Enterprises
 
And instead of just saying 'one of our other brands, why can't they list what the other brands are then there's even less chance of problems !!!!!!!!!!
Are customers expected to do a companies search to find out what other brands a casino might or might not own??
Or is there only a 'problem' if a customer wins??

They're basically just as bad as Cassava Enterprises

Something I've been badgering Bryan about to get put in the terms of the accredited sites. A full, patent and straight list of linked casinos.
2 lines of html in the terms - very difficult apparently.....:rolleyes:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top