1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
  2. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by following.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Sister site to Casino Max launches

    Roaring 21 has just launched - sister casino to Casino Max, and they have a special promotion for you!! .They are in the Baptism by Fire - you can check them out here: Roaring 21 BBF and special promo.


    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

The RTG Montana "60 day" rule

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by caruso, Aug 10, 2005.

    Aug 10, 2005
  1. caruso

    caruso Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Casino apologist
    Location:
    England
    The RTG Montana Disputes claim procedure has the following "60 day" rule:

    You must register/login in order to see the link.

    This is bollocks - what can the justification be? All it does is give carte blanche to the various ripoff RTG operators still out there to jerk players around just long enough to invalidate any possible Montana investigation. There is no justification I can see, and players have apparently already fallen foul of it.

    What if one of the "payment plan" RTGs decides to pull the plug on a big winner after those two months? - or after one month, followed by a month's jerking around? - he cannot technically file a complaint!

    There are a million other possible scenarios.

    How does RTG justify this?
     
  2. Aug 10, 2005
  3. plonnin

    plonnin Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Construction
    Location:
    TN
    60? Playtech only gives you 30 days!

    Surely the dispute starts when the last non-payment occurred, and not when the player requests his first cashout.

    I agree with you though. After 2 months of "your money is coming soon, please be patient", the player has no recourse (I think that's the right word, anyway).
     
  4. Aug 12, 2005
  5. caruso

    caruso Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Casino apologist
    Location:
    England
    There is no way to verify or guarantee this, because defining the start of the "dispute" could be very subjective. The player might say it began when he emailed the casino with "I'm going to file a Montana complaint"; the casino can argue it began the moment he requested his "disputed" cashout. The casinos can use this tremendously to their advantage.

    The timeframe should be AT LEAST six months, but there is no reason why a legitimate complaint shouldn't be looked at at ANY future point: Casino Sweetiepie takes over Casino Fleapit and finds itself with a few debts to sort out; if Casino Sweetiepie wants a clean slate, those debts must be honoured, whoever ends up doling out the cash. There is no logical reason why casinos should be protected by a "Statute Of Limitations" style get-out clause. At least, no creditable reasons. In fact, I would guess this is why they have this rule - so that when ripoff operators take over other ripoff casinos, they can't be saddled with the previous ripoff owners' debts because more than two months have elapsed.

    Playtech is 60 days same as Montana, not 30. However, I didn't know this, and it's obviously no better.
     

Share This Page