Thanks but Goodbye VideoSlots (For a while)

Chipkin9

I'm not a Senior
Joined
May 23, 2013
Location
Tyrone, Ireland
I just received this Email from VideoSlots.

"Hi,

We are contacting you with regards to your previous withdrawal request(s), as we have noticed
You have failed for the 2nd time with meeting the minimum turn over requirement before requesting a pay out.

As a reminder:
Please bear in mind every deposit amount needs to be wagered at least one time in order to have your withdrawal approved and processed.
Without having the wagering requirement met we may not be able to fulfil your withdrawal request or if so an extra transaction fee might be applied.
Please note that according to our terms and conditions:

2.13 Videoslots reserves the right to charge a transaction fee on deposited amounts which were not used for wagering prior to being withdrawn.
The transaction fee will not exceed 3.95%, however Videoslots reserves the right to levy any higher or lower amount.

1.3 A person registering at Videoslots accepts and acknowledges:

* that Videoslots shall not be treated as a financial institutions
* that money deposit shall be used for wagering


Full text can be found on our page under link below:
videoslots.com/terms-and-conditions/mga-games-specific/


Furthermore we need to advise you that after the 3rd warning we may conclude with account closure, therefore we kindly ask you to comply with our Terms and Condition in the future."
 
Last edited:
Award winning Videoslots is reviewed by Casinomeister

Chipkin9

I'm not a Senior
Joined
May 23, 2013
Location
Tyrone, Ireland
Okay.

So this is what happened.

I withdrew £20 from Videoslots so I could go to the ATM and withdraw it using my Skrill Card.

What I forgot to take into account was that there is a £1.35 fee from Skrill, which means I would have only been able to withdraw £10 from the ATM, which wasn't enough for what I needed it for.

So I deposited the £20 back into VideoSlots to withdraw the other £4 I left in my account.

VideoSlots refused my Withdrawal and placed it back to my VS account.

That is all well and good; it was my own mistake for forgetting about the Skrill fee.

What I don't agree with is their strict stance and threatening Email to close my account because of it.

So people beware of this Term.

If you deposit £100 and your money keeps going down without a hit, and you decide to quit and take £50 out; then you will be unable to do so.

Videoslots are still one of the best Casino's around and offer the quickest payouts out of all the casinos; but I'm afraid I will be closing my account after this.

:(
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
You will find this clauses in the T&C's of pretty much every online casino as it is also part of the AML regulations. Nothing specific for VS.

Consider yourself lucky it has been VS, they warn you at least a few times, others just deduct the fee straight away the first time you withdraw without having wagered the deposit at least once.
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
I'm pretty sure its an anti money laundering based rule which most if not all casinos have in place.

Did you try contacting support to explain your situation, maybe telling them it was a 'one off' at the time.

I would have thought with all the sunshine thrown VS's way they would have made efforts to accomodate you.

The e-mail is a bit strong IMO, more so if you're a regular player/depositor there.

I'd drop Dan a PM before closing your account bud :thumbsup:

Edit: Posted same time as H, so sorry for duplicate info.
 

Chipkin9

I'm not a Senior
Joined
May 23, 2013
Location
Tyrone, Ireland
You will find this clauses in the T&C's of pretty much every online casino as it is also part of the AML regulations. Nothing specific for VS.

Consider yourself lucky it has been VS, they warn you at least a few times, others just deduct the fee straight away the first time you withdraw without having wagered the deposit at least once.

Indeed.

I am aware this is a clause everywhere...but the threat to close my account for it is absolutely ridiculous and unnecessary. I wouldn't have even minded paying the fee.

The warning Email is fine up until that point.

Perhaps something along the lines of:

"Hi, we regret to inform you that your recent withdrawal has been declined.

Please be reminded that all deposits must be wagered ONE time before a withdrawal can be approved.

Have a nice day :) "

That would have been perfect, but the account closure threat is way beyond unnecessary.

In fact no Email was even required, since they refuse to process the payment anyway, and I was happy to play it and lose it. So there was a mutual understanding already.
 

slotter999

Dormant account
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Location
UK
It's not to do with AML regulation at least not for UKGC. This is a myth peddled by the casinos.

The UKGC simply requires that a wager is placed. So if you deposit £100 and place a 1p wager in starburst and withdraw then you are compliant.

I suspect the motivation for casinos is more about giving them the opportunity to recoup the costs of the deposit transaction.
 

Chipkin9

I'm not a Senior
Joined
May 23, 2013
Location
Tyrone, Ireland
I'm pretty sure its an anti money laundering based rule which most if not all casinos have in place.

Did you try contacting support to explain your situation, maybe telling them it was a 'one off' at the time.

I would have thought with all the sunshine thrown VS's way they would have made efforts to accomodate you.

The e-mail is a bit strong IMO, more so if you're a regular player/depositor there.

I'd drop Dan a PM before closing your account bud :thumbsup:

Edit: Posted same time as H, so sorry for duplicate info.

Thanks Jon.

I contacted them to explain the reason; but the damage was already done with the 1st Email they sent. So I will proceed to close the account; I see no reason to contact Dan about it.

As soon as there was an over the top threat to close my account on the next occasion, the decision was made.

What if I forgot about the term in the future an find myself forgetting about the skrill fee again?

I'd like to add that there should be NO threat to close anybodies accounts under these circumstances; since they return your attempted withdrawal back to your account anyway and force you to use it; so why the need to close anyone's account over it?
 

Chipkin9

I'm not a Senior
Joined
May 23, 2013
Location
Tyrone, Ireland
It's not to do with AML regulation at least not for UKGC. This is a myth peddled by the casinos.

The UKGC simply requires that a wager is placed. So if you deposit £100 and place a 1p wager in starburst and withdraw then you are compliant.

I suspect the motivation for casinos is more about giving them the opportunity to recoup the costs of the deposit transaction.

OR to restrict you from withdrawing and using the money to deposit elsewhere, when you get that gut feeling after 50 spins that you are not going to have a good session there.
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
OR to restrict you from withdrawing and using the money to deposit elsewhere, when you get that gut feeling after 50 spins that you are not going to have a good session there.

That would be each and every one of my deposits then :p and never mind 50 spins more like 2 spins these days lol :oops:

If I don't get a bonus or a 50x win in the first 5 minutes, the moaning and the 'here we go again' kicks in automatically my end!
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
It's not to do with AML regulation at least not for UKGC. This is a myth peddled by the casinos.

The UKGC simply requires that a wager is placed. So if you deposit £100 and place a 1p wager in starburst and withdraw then you are compliant.

I suspect the motivation for casinos is more about giving them the opportunity to recoup the costs of the deposit transaction.

It is well part of the AML regulation, maybe not specific that the amount has to be wagered "x" times but any remote operator has to have effective procedures in place to prohibit ML.

You can read about it here, sorry, I was too lazy to find the exact paragraph/s: Old / Expired Link
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
Indeed.

I am aware this is a clause everywhere...but the threat to close my account for it is absolutely ridiculous and unnecessary. I wouldn't have even minded paying the fee.

The warning Email is fine up until that point.

Perhaps something along the lines of:

"Hi, we regret to inform you that your recent withdrawal has been declined.

Please be reminded that all deposits must be wagered ONE time before a withdrawal can be approved.

Have a nice day :) "

That would have been perfect, but the account closure threat is way beyond unnecessary.

In fact no Email was even required, since they refuse to process the payment anyway, and I was happy to play it and lose it. So there was a mutual understanding already.

Agree, the account closing sentence is way over the top since we are talking about GBP20.

Maybe standard template and procedure and it was used without much thinking.
 

Chipkin9

I'm not a Senior
Joined
May 23, 2013
Location
Tyrone, Ireland
Agree, the account closing sentence is way over the top since we are talking about GBP20.

Maybe standard template and procedure and it was used without much thinking.

Yep.

Not much thought put into it what so ever.

After some reflection and letting the mist clear a little; I realize my own reaction is a little overboard also.

Probably just a short self exclusion now, but hopefully someone from VS will see this and change their attitude towards how they word their Emails.

Since they reject the withdrawal anyway, what is the point in being heavy handed and threatening Closure...They have already penalized the player by rejecting it :confused:
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
Yep.

Not much thought put into it what so ever.

After some reflection and letting the mist clear a little; I realize my own reaction is a little overboard also.

Probably just a short self exclusion now, but hopefully someone from VS will see this and change their attitude towards how they word their Emails.

Since they reject the withdrawal anyway, what is the point in being heavy handed and threatening Closure...They have already penalized the player by rejecting it :confused:

LOL... a sentence comes into my mind my great grandfather told me some 40 years ago: "Count at least up to 3, better to 10, before you react!" :D
 

nikantw

Banned User
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Location
EU
The closing account threat was really bad. Really rude attitude IMHO.

Probably the rule is there for their protection from transaction fees. It is the price we “pay” for fast payouts. I don’t think it has anything to do with money laundering, it doesn’t make sense since the money go back the way they came in.

The “protection” is simple. I always look for ways to adjust my habits in a way that I will be protected against any possible rule, rather than reading all rules again and again in every login on every site. So against this rule you must always brake your deposit into min allowed dep amounts. Mindep-play- lose-repeat until you win.
 

syrus2

Banned User - repetitive trollish behavior
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Location
Netherlands
A warning IS NOT a threat NEITHER can be considered as one , in a court of law !!

PS : Diff people always have different interpretations regarding this matter .
 

goatwack

Get dunked, big buns!
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Location
Londonia
I take money laundering regulations very seriously so I always make sure I play my money down to zero every time
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
I take money laundering regulations very seriously so I always make sure I play my money down to zero every time

Not that we get much of a fighting chance or a say in the matter these days :(

Since the introduction of the new 'Advertise the TRTP 50% higher than it actually is' ruling and the 'Don't go any longer than 7 days without depositing (or should that be losing) with us unless you'll get a 'Visit' ' law, I've stopped worrying all about this AML.

There was some movement in the bushes opposite my house last night, sure It was because I took the 50% at Rizk and not my usual 40% Monday deal at Guts :eek:
 

nikantw

Banned User
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Location
EU
A warning IS NOT a threat NEITHER can be considered as one , in a court of law !!

PS : Diff people always have different interpretations regarding this matter .

The important question here is not the legal definitions, but whether or not one is a satisfied customer. The answer is not going to be decided in any court. Just the customer. :)
 

syrus2

Banned User - repetitive trollish behavior
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Location
Netherlands
The important question here is not the legal definitions, but whether or not one is a satisfied customer. The answer is not going to be decided in any court. Just the customer. :)

Nop ,

the important question is whether the customer is justified to NOT TO BE satisfied.
without a legal reason, his opinion is just a interpretation and in this case, subjective.

HENCE , the last part of my prvs statment ( diff people and diff interpretations ).
 

nikantw

Banned User
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Location
EU
Nop ,

the important question is whether the customer is justified to NOT TO BE satisfied.
without a legal reason, his opinion is just a interpretation and in this case, subjective.

HENCE , the last part of my prvs statment ( diff people and diff interpretations ).

If you want to sell something, customers opinion is all that matters, hence “the customer is always right”. :D
In that sense, all salesmen go far beyond legal definitions in order to keep customers happy. It’s just good business. Legal definitions are very useful in court, not so much in sales.
 

syrus2

Banned User - repetitive trollish behavior
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Location
Netherlands
If you want to sell something, customers opinion is all that matters, hence “the customer is always right”. :D
In that sense, all salesmen go far beyond legal definitions in order to keep customers happy. It’s just good business. Legal definitions are very useful in court, not so much in sales.

That would be his choice. If the salesmen decid to do that, then so be it. ( however , this is not always the case an aint happening every day ).

My post was due to the use of term: threat

The customer was not threatened here. He was designated what would be the consequences of his actions . This is a warning.
And in this case , My compliment to the casino.
What if they had removed his account already due to exceeding of T&C (without any warning ) ?


BTW, aside of that threaten part,, I do agree with him regarding the money part. Tacticly casino is right, but it's a bad policy, imo.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
The transaction fee will not exceed 3.95%, however Videoslots reserves the right to levy any higher or lower amount.

wtf does that mean, it won't exceed 3.95% but we reserve the right to charge a higher or lower amount, so they could charge 99% if they want?
 

spintee

Ueber Meister
webby
mm2
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Location
Northants
Sorry guys I only flicked over the thread quick, You have to look at it in VS POV, I can understand the way the OP was thinking as if short on a few quid than a swift withdraw is good,

But I am thinking in away with slotter999 as its not got feck all to do with money laundering or the U,K regs, BUT it is in just about every casino T&C & if thats the rules than what can you say?

I know Harry said its abit over the top for £20 but take note my friend its theses £20 which makes or breaks a casino, If it was 2k than I do not think the OP would of been worried about a few quid,

I believe VS has the most employers and so many reps, Not only do the reps know the score but also work around the clock, They come on here all time in the hour and streams etc, You cannot go nowhere related to a casino without seeing someone from VS to help you out,

I think it was a standerd template email, Casino are not banks and it cost them money with each transaction,

I not got much but I am sure if any one needs a little something I am sure we can put a few quid in the pot between us to help any one out, & not for gambling,

Oh this is a real kicker to the OP, Tesco or bank in town, You can take 5 note out, Unsure if same in Irland
 
Top