Terms and Conditions - unenforceable

[LeonardV]

Looking at the Gambling Commission and OFT rules, it seems to me that virtually half of the terms and conditions on many online casinos are highly dubious as to enforceability. I am new to online casinos but have done a lot of research and this website is absolute gold dust in pursuit of info that is lacking on nearly all other "review" websites that appear to be nothing more than affiliates disguised as something else. This is the one and only site I have found which offers independent assessments and kudos to Casinomeister for that!

The question is whether OFT rules on unfair terms and imbalance of obligations are enforceable in practice, as almost all the casinos are offshore and very unlikely to consider themselves bound by such rules.

I have to say the bonus implementations of nearly all online casinos are breathtakingly confusing and misleading and I wonder why anyone would want to take advantage of them, so riddle are they with get-out clauses, clear manipulation, obfuscation and plainly onerous requirements. Consistent with many opinions expressed here I found that 32Red seems to have the most transparency about these terms and conditions, but even they opt you in to a starting bonus unless you email them and specifically opt out. I just cannot see why, given the run-around tactics, that anyone would accept any bonus scheme at all. But even 32Red has a very strange clause in its T&Cs that says any winner must make themselves available to "attend" a promotion after receipt of substantial winnings. Are they seriously suggesting that one is obliged to travel to a designated location and have their privacy breached by a compulsory attendance? This is ludicrous!

Can anyone recommend a UK online casino that offers new account holders a simple, plain, NO BONUS membership, pays out without hurdles, is honest, is straightforward and does not apply ridiculous terms and conditions? Thanks again for a great website.

 

[bigjohn]

Looking at the Gambling Commission and OFT rules, it seems to me that virtually half of the terms and conditions on many online casinos are highly dubious as to enforceability. I am new to online casinos but have done a lot of research and this website is absolute gold dust in pursuit of info that is lacking on nearly all other "review" websites that appear to be nothing more than affiliates disguised as something else. This is the one and only site I have found which offers independent assessments and kudos to Casinomeister for that!

The question is whether OFT rules on unfair terms and imbalance of obligations are enforceable in practice, as almost all the casinos are offshore and very unlikely to consider themselves bound by such rules.

I have to say the bonus implementations of nearly all online casinos are breathtakingly confusing and misleading and I wonder why anyone would want to take advantage of them, so riddle are they with get-out clauses, clear manipulation, obfuscation and plainly onerous requirements. Consistent with many opinions expressed here I found that 32Red seems to have the most transparency about these terms and conditions, but even they opt you in to a starting bonus unless you email them and specifically opt out. I just cannot see why, given the run-around tactics, that anyone would accept any bonus scheme at all. But even 32Red has a very strange clause in its T&Cs that says any winner must make themselves available to "attend" a promotion after receipt of substantial winnings. Are they seriously suggesting that one is obliged to travel to a designated location and have their privacy breached by a compulsory attendance? This is ludicrous!

Can anyone recommend a UK online casino that offers new account holders a simple, plain, NO BONUS membership, pays out without hurdles, is honest, is straightforward and does not apply ridiculous terms and conditions? Thanks again for a great website.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha, Man, you aint kidding that you are new to online gaming!

Seriously though, you got to watch everything they do and rest assured they are watching everything you do in relation to T&C's. Online gaming is not for the faint-hearted or the careless folks. The whole thing is a challenge, a test of your mental acuity.

Do your home work.

After a while you will get the hang of it and you will be able to spot the 'red flags' that tell you something fishy is going on. Here, at CM, you have the accredited list. Does that mean if you play at those sites you will never have a problem? No it does not, but if you do run into trouble at least you have another avenue to use for possible resolution.

The world is full of people who will try any hair brained scheme to get one over on these casinos and that is why you have all these seemingly ridiculous terms.

Edited to add;

The term you are referring to from 32Red probably concerns people who win a large amount that 32Red might want to use for publicity. Almost any contest has a rule like this. If, say, you win a million pounds they might want a picture of you holding the giant check to use in their advertisements.

 

[LeonardV]

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha, Man, you aint kidding that you are new to online gaming!

Seriously though, you got to watch everything they do and rest assured they are watching everything you do in relation to T&C's. Online gaming is not for the faint-hearted or the careless folks. The whole thing is a challenge, a test of your mental acuity.

Do your home work.

After a while you will get the hang of it and you will be able to spot the 'red flags' that tell you something fishy is going on. Here, at CM, you have the accredited list. Does that mean if you play at those sites you will never have a problem? No it does not, but if you do run into trouble at least you have another avenue to use for possible resolution.

The world is full of people who will try any hair brained scheme to get one over on these casinos and that is why you have all these seemingly ridiculous terms.

Edited to add;

The term you are referring to from 32Red probably concerns people who win a large amount that 32Red might want to use for publicity. Almost any contest has a rule like this. If, say, you win a million pounds they might want a picture of you holding the giant check to use in their advertisements.

Yes good advice. I have done my homework....being super cautious. You're right to laugh as I didn't think it was possible to find many casinos up to the honesty I was dreaming about, and yes the accredited list here is very useful.

Europe wide data protection and privacy laws guarantee everyone anonymity if they so wish it. For example you can opt to be completely anomymous if you win a large lottery prize and the lottery company must adhere to that. I reckon any European based casino would have to adhere too, whatever their terms and conditions say.

 

[KasinoKing]

The question is whether OFT rules on unfair terms and imbalance of obligations are enforceable in practise, as almost all the casinos are offshore and very unlikely to consider themselves bound by such rules.

You got it in one!

After playing online casinos for 13 years I would NEVER expect any laws in any country to protect me - I just reply on the casinos being honest in sticking to their own T&Cs. (For me at least, after 260+ casinos tried, I have never been "ripped-off" by a casino).

Regarding bonuses: Some people hate them, others like me love 'em! If the Wagering Requirements aren't too onerous, they give you more play-time for your deposit and, in some circumstances, a better chance of cashing out a profit. This does demand though on which types of game you play; I saw in another thread that you play Blackjack - if that's the ONLY game you play, I would definitely recommend you DON'T take bonuses as the WRs are usually insanely high for that game - and for most other "table games" too.
At ANY Accredited casino (and most non-accredited) you can ask to have any automatic bonus removed BEFORE you make any bets.

Welcome & good luck!
KK

 

[paul7388]

Leonard you are so right about bonus rules as they are often very complicated reason being there are so many to cover different things. Sometimes safest way to play is just never to take a bonus at all. As for 32reds clause that winners must attend a promotion etc. that is a clause that is in most casinos somewhere. As you are in uk even all the bookmakers sites here like William Hill Ladbrokes etc. all have that same clause somewhere in there terms about being available for publicity if you win a significant amount. Would not imagine they would force you if you won millions as that would give them negative publicity but don't think I will ever win enough to find out.

 

[dunover]

Looking at the Gambling Commission and OFT rules, it seems to me that virtually half of the terms and conditions on many online casinos are highly dubious as to enforceability. I am new to online casinos but have done a lot of research and this website is absolute gold dust in pursuit of info that is lacking on nearly all other "review" websites that appear to be nothing more than affiliates disguised as something else. This is the one and only site I have found which offers independent assessments and kudos to Casinomeister for that!

The question is whether OFT rules on unfair terms and imbalance of obligations are enforceable in practice, as almost all the casinos are offshore and very unlikely to consider themselves bound by such rules.

I have to say the bonus implementations of nearly all online casinos are breathtakingly confusing and misleading and I wonder why anyone would want to take advantage of them, so riddle are they with get-out clauses, clear manipulation, obfuscation and plainly onerous requirements. Consistent with many opinions expressed here I found that 32Red seems to have the most transparency about these terms and conditions, but even they opt you in to a starting bonus unless you email them and specifically opt out. I just cannot see why, given the run-around tactics, that anyone would accept any bonus scheme at all. But even 32Red has a very strange clause in its T&Cs that says any winner must make themselves available to "attend" a promotion after receipt of substantial winnings. Are they seriously suggesting that one is obliged to travel to a designated location and have their privacy breached by a compulsory attendance? This is ludicrous!

Can anyone recommend a UK online casino that offers new account holders a simple, plain, NO BONUS membership, pays out without hurdles, is honest, is straightforward and does not apply ridiculous terms and conditions? Thanks again for a great website.

For a start OFT doesn't deal with online casinos, that's the domain of the UKGC, a QUANGO set up to regulate such and regarded as the monitor. It sounds like you've been reading lots of Vinylblatherman's 'Rumpole' posts too where he hypothesises regarding legality of various terms and tenets of online gambling. He makes a few salient points but these are only theoretical as they have yet to be contested in court and become 'case laws' and as you point out much of the industry is based offshore to avoid more stringent UK regulation.
You ask if there is a casino which doesn't use the bonus system - ONE that I know of: xxxhttp://www.nobonuscasino.com which gives cashback and other fripperies but you never have any WR there. Unfortunately I can't vouch for it as they are Netbent-only so I had no interest in joining.
You bemoan a 32red term but they are probably one of the best sites for honesty and integrity, so if you're looking for alternatives we can vouch for up there with them on the trustworthiness scale and have their games, try bet-at.uk, Guts, Casinoluck, Betsson or Skyvegas. Most of those have bonuses you opt-in for at deposit stage, or a 'forfeit' button if you do get it and change your mind.
Remember onerous obfuscation in terms is not confined to online casinos; these are present in terms ranging from Paypal to banking and insurance products too, although regulated obviously by a more popular and accountable QUANGO the FSA/OFT.

 

[vinylweatherman]

For a start OFT doesn't deal with online casinos, that's the domain of the UKGC, a QUANGO set up to regulate such and regarded as the monitor. It sounds like you've been reading lots of Vinylblatherman's 'Rumpole' posts too where he hypothesises regarding legality of various terms and tenets of online gambling. He makes a few salient points but these are only theoretical as they have yet to be contested in court and become 'case laws' and as you point out much of the industry is based offshore to avoid more stringent UK regulation.
You ask if there is a casino which doesn't use the bonus system - ONE that I know of: xxxhttp://www.nobonuscasino.com which gives cashback and other fripperies but you never have any WR there. Unfortunately I can't vouch for it as they are Netbent-only so I had no interest in joining.
You bemoan a 32red term but they are probably one of the best sites for honesty and integrity, so if you're looking for alternatives we can vouch for up there with them on the trustworthiness scale and have their games, try bet-at.uk, Guts, Casinoluck, Betsson or Skyvegas. Most of those have bonuses you opt-in for at deposit stage, or a 'forfeit' button if you do get it and change your mind.
Remember onerous obfuscation in terms is not confined to online casinos; these are present in terms ranging from Paypal to banking and insurance products too, although regulated obviously by a more popular and accountable QUANGO the FSA/OFT.

The main problem is that in order for a UK player to exercise the rights granted in law, they have to take the offending business to the small claims court. Many consumers don't have the stomach for this, and many businesses know this, so try to wear down complainants in the hope that they give up. What often happens is that when a consumer calls their bluff and a court summons lands on their desk, the company is the one that does the quick U turn and seeks to settle the matter. The problem with enforcing rights against online casinos is that nearly all of them are based offshore, so taking them to court is much more complicated and expensive.

I am expecting this to change after December this year as casinos serving the UK will have to have a UK licence. The law also states that the gambling takes place at the user's device, not the casino's servers, so the jurisdiction governing the bets will be that of the player's country of residence, rather than the country of the server's residence. If the player wins their case, but the casino refuses to pay up, they will be putting their UK licence at risk as they will have an unsatisfied court judgement against their name, and they may no longer be seen as "fit to offer gambling services" by the UKGC. Placed in such a situation, casinos will probably only fight the case if they believe they are likely to win, this is most likely the case if they can show the court evidence that proves the player has cheated in some way. Multi account fraudsters could even face police prosecution for fraud. One UK based casino and betting group took a "gnomer" (multi accounting using fake ID) to court, and a criminal prosecution for fraud and identity theft resulted.

 

[LeonardV]

For a start OFT doesn't deal with online casinos, that's the domain of the UKGC, a QUANGO set up to regulate such and regarded as the monitor. It sounds like you've been reading lots of Vinylblatherman's 'Rumpole' posts too where he hypothesises regarding legality of various terms and tenets of online gambling. He makes a few salient points but these are only theoretical as they have yet to be contested in court and become 'case laws' and as you point out much of the industry is based offshore to avoid more stringent UK regulation.
You ask if there is a casino which doesn't use the bonus system - ONE that I know of: xxxhttp://www.nobonuscasino.com which gives cashback and other fripperies but you never have any WR there. Unfortunately I can't vouch for it as they are Netbent-only so I had no interest in joining.
You bemoan a 32red term but they are probably one of the best sites for honesty and integrity, so if you're looking for alternatives we can vouch for up there with them on the trustworthiness scale and have their games, try bet-at.uk, Guts, Casinoluck, Betsson or Skyvegas. Most of those have bonuses you opt-in for at deposit stage, or a 'forfeit' button if you do get it and change your mind.
Remember onerous obfuscation in terms is not confined to online casinos; these are present in terms ranging from Paypal to banking and insurance products too, although regulated obviously by a more popular and accountable QUANGO the FSA/OFT.

I take your point, yet theoretically the OFT should cover any contract, but I agree in practice it hardly ever does and I realise that other bodies cover gambling. OFT specifically states on its website that it doesn't field individual complaints. In fact it HAS to if you force the issue. Generally speaking it responds, by its own admission, to solely mainstream media-led campaigns, or other problems where it is forced to act through sheer numbers of complaints. I haven't seen a declaration in any OFT regulation which specifically says "we do not handle gambling" and it can't really do this anyway because casino terms and conditions ARE axiomatically acknowledging a contract exists. But I also agree this is all academic.

Thanks for the tip about nobonuscasino.com. I will check them out.

 

[LeonardV]

The main problem is that in order for a UK player to exercise the rights granted in law, they have to take the offending business to the small claims court. Many consumers don't have the stomach for this, and many businesses know this, so try to wear down complainants in the hope that they give up. What often happens is that when a consumer calls their bluff and a court summons lands on their desk, the company is the one that does the quick U turn and seeks to settle the matter. The problem with enforcing rights against online casinos is that nearly all of them are based offshore, so taking them to court is much more complicated and expensive.

I am expecting this to change after December this year as casinos serving the UK will have to have a UK licence. The law also states that the gambling takes place at the user's device, not the casino's servers, so the jurisdiction governing the bets will be that of the player's country of residence, rather than the country of the server's residence. If the player wins their case, but the casino refuses to pay up, they will be putting their UK licence at risk as they will have an unsatisfied court judgement against their name, and they may no longer be seen as "fit to offer gambling services" by the UKGC. Placed in such a situation, casinos will probably only fight the case if they believe they are likely to win, this is most likely the case if they can show the court evidence that proves the player has cheated in some way. Multi account fraudsters could even face police prosecution for fraud. One UK based casino and betting group took a "gnomer" (multi accounting using fake ID) to court, and a criminal prosecution for fraud and identity theft resulted.

I absolutely agree with you about the "wear down" strategy of nearly all corporations. Through delays and diversion tactics they quite deliberately exhaust the patience and energy of consumers to the point where, unless a large sum is involved, the consumer just gives up. But this is also not helped by virtually all the regulators who are under-staffed and themselves spend half their daily work staving off complaints about themselves handling complaints! The two examples coming to mind are the Information Commissioner's Office which typically is behind on tens of thousands of cases, many of which are complaints about the ICO itself. The system is broken and regulators as whole are lurching ever more on the side of the corporations and abandoning consumers. In fact a senior official of the OFT recently stated, in response to accusations that it raised virtually no fines against any corporation in the last year, said, incredibly: "Our policy is to persuade rather pursue." That's like the police telling you that thugs who beat up and rob people are better handled by asking them politely not to do it again!!

 

[Nifty29]

as casinos serving the UK will have to have a UK licence.

No, they won't. Not in practice.

Just wait and see

 

[quber]

Can anyone recommend a UK online casino that offers new account holders a simple, plain, NO BONUS membership, pays out without hurdles, is honest, is straightforward and does not apply ridiculous terms and conditions? Thanks again for a great website.

If you don't want to be tied into a bonus BetVictor have an 'After Wager' bonus, on this type you you just play as normal then after a certain amount of wagering you are awarded a bonus which is withdrawable at that point, it is paid out in three tiers.

You don't get extra money up front but if you want to play without a bonus this is the way to do it as your money in the account is always yours to withdraw at any time.

Kasinoking stated that you play Blackjack and all their Live Casinos (they now have 5) count 100% towards wagering.