The terms and conditions explicitly state... The Company reserves the right to cancel Player's account for any reason, and issue any balance in Player's account at the time of such cancellation. The Company also reserves the right, in its unfettered discretion, to void any winnings and refund the original purchase in your Casino account in any of the following circumstances:
If a Player has more than one active account within the group of casinos./QUOTE]
It does say that in the Superslots terms, but I notice on the English Harbour site the same clause reads:
# If a Player has more than one active account for the Casino.
So looks like you can play on site x and y at the same time but not on y and z, z and y or yadayah. It's getting to the point where you can't deposit at an online casino anymore without running it by a lawyer first.
It's ridiculous that clauses like this exist, furthermore that they're so heavily buried. But the inexcusable part is having a clause like this, then ADVERTISING the other sites on the initial site. People that post on forums like this are much more clued up I'd guess than the average casino user, and are still continually getting screwed by nightmarishly complex and vague terms - so I'd guess in that sense it's only the tip of the iceberg shown here and in other forums. And the irony is that this has to be about the only industry that guarantees a profit, someone gives you $1 you give them 96c back - when is that going to be enough?
