Tivoli casino - winnings confiscated :-(

[maxd]

... I'm pretty sure it would be a waste of time and effort to progress. ...

Fair enough, your call. Under the circumstances though I'm going to have to ask you to let this ride. Since you've already said your piece and don't wish to pursue settlement through the PAB process it wouldn't be fair to use this thread as a stick against the casino.

 

[slotter999]

Fair enough, your call. Under the circumstances though I'm going to have to ask you to let this ride. Since you've already said your piece and don't wish to pursue settlement through the PAB process it wouldn't be fair to use this thread as a stick against the casino.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'let it ride'? Let what ride?

Also your comments about "wouldn't be fair to use this thread to use this as a stick against the casino" - are you suggesting I should be more fair towards the casino? If so I'm slightly lost for words as I point at the thread where they confiscated £2100 of my money.... quite unfairly.

 

[dunover]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'let it ride'? Let what ride?

Also your comments about "wouldn't be fair to use this thread to use this as a stick against the casino" - are you suggesting I should be more fair towards the casino? If so I'm slightly lost for words as I point at the thread where they confiscated £2100 of my money.... quite unfairly.

He means as you've accepted you took the series of bonus offers and acknowledge the terms (however stupidly applied) were broken then your position is clear - you have accepted your fate. Therefore further repetition of the same old story to bash the casino with serves no good purpose.

Remember you broke their terms, however stupid they are in when applied in conjunction with the size of your deposit.

So we all know the score now:

*The terms are there and were broken.
*Tivoli are an accredited casino with standard terms for bonuses.
*We can all see they are not prepared to use discretion in this case (and yes, I can safely say that in similar circumstances there are sites which would.)
*Most of us feel a tad sympathetic here.

Anyone reading this thread can draw their own conclusions.

 

[Stewiethecrazy]

He means as you've accepted you took the series of bonus offers and acknowledge the terms (however stupidly applied) were broken then your position is clear - you have accepted your fate. Therefore further repetition of the same old story to bash the casino with serves no good purpose.

Remember you broke their terms, however stupid they are in when applied in conjunction with the size of your deposit.

So we all know the score now:

*The terms are there and were broken.
*Tivoli are an accredited casino with standard terms for bonuses.
*We can all see they are not prepared to use discretion in this case (and yes, I can safely say that in similar circumstances there are sites which would.)
*Most of us feel a tad sympathetic here.

Anyone reading this thread can draw their own conclusions.

Pretty much sums it up!! (I feel a little bit more sympathetic than a tad but on the other hand there were some interesting comments from the OP....I am not twisting the knife here just saying.)

 

[maxd]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'let it ride'? Let what ride?

He means as you've accepted you took the series of bonus offers and acknowledge the terms (however stupidly applied) were broken then your position is clear - you have accepted your fate....

Pretty much what dunover said. You accepted the Terms, you broke them, you've brought your issue up here on the forums and you've declined to PAB it. End of story.

The point is that you've said your piece and since you're pretty much in the wrong to begin with there's not much else to say. So leave it and move on.

 

[hedgehok]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'let it ride'? Let what ride?

Also your comments about "wouldn't be fair to use this thread to use this as a stick against the casino" - are you suggesting I should be more fair towards the casino? If so I'm slightly lost for words as I point at the thread where they confiscated £2100 of my money.... quite unfairly.

I would put my personal pride away for the time being and consider to submit a PAB if I where in your shoes. Max was kind to offer it to you because I can imagine he believes that you are a honest player and might see some chances with Tivoli who appear to be rather open in recent PAB processes.

Yes technically you've broken the rules but what can you lose? It would also give us more insight under which circumstances the casino decides whether to confiscate winnings or not.

 

[slotter999]

The reason I saw no point in a PAB (I still haven't read the FAQ fully because it won't display on mobile) is precisely for the reasons MaxD and Dunnover mentioned - it's a textbook breach of their terms and conditions - I should have known better etc.

I get the sense that some of my posts have provoked irritation so probs best I leave it at that.

I would politely ask that this thread is left open a little bit longer so I can make one more post in the next week with a conclusion to this episode.

Thanks to all for your input.

Regards

 

[Tirilej]

What surprise me about this thread is that none of the reps have read it yet. Maybe they have a vacation over the holidays both of them.
I at least hope they have been noticed about it. (Sorry for not reading back from the beginning what was said about them).

What the outcome can be from a PAB you'll never know until you've made one.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Since the terms use "may", hit them with the UK law, the Consumer Protection ones. One of the items is that consumers "must be treated fairly", so you should argue that you have not been treated fairly in this respect, the application of a discretionary term in your particular circumstances. Even an absolute "will" term can fall foul of this law, as many businesses have found out the hard way. These laws are relatively untested in the online gambling situation, but they HAVE been tested in other online situations, and apply just as much online as they would in store. An earlier change to gambling law made gambling debts enforceable, so now casinos can be pursued through the courts for winnings just as much as any business can be pursued by a consumer who is owed money, or feels they are. It was operators who got this change implemented so that they could pursue unlucky gamblers who refused to honour their losses where credit was offered, or who reclaimed their stake via the bank after losing the wager.

 

[spintee]

Since the terms use "may", hit them with the UK law, the Consumer Protection ones. One of the items is that consumers "must be treated fairly", so you should argue that you have not been treated fairly in this respect, the application of a discretionary term in your particular circumstances. Even an absolute "will" term can fall foul of this law, as many businesses have found out the hard way. These laws are relatively untested in the online gambling situation, but they HAVE been tested in other online situations, and apply just as much online as they would in store. An earlier change to gambling law made gambling debts enforceable, so now casinos can be pursued through the courts for winnings just as much as any business can be pursued by a consumer who is owed money, or feels they are. It was operators who got this change implemented so that they could pursue unlucky gamblers who refused to honour their losses where credit was offered, or who reclaimed their stake via the bank after losing the wager.

Your right yet again, The word may should be banned it self and will put in

We do not know the full story but for sure if the OP is on the level than this rule should of nether come into affect, I only fort the RTG sites done this, It goes to show what casino's have been doing a long time,

I have been stung twice in my time, First was of a bingo site and as I not deposit in ten days I was not aloud, 2nd was tropic& and as not played ten games

I am a small roller so it really does not affect me albeit if I win big and get stung it will hurt, But can certainly feel the pain for big gunners and deposit big

 

[vinylweatherman]

Your right yet again, The word may should be banned it self and will put in

We do not know the full story but for sure if the OP is on the level than this rule should of nether come into affect, I only fort the RTG sites done this, It goes to show what casino's have been doing a long time,

I have been stung twice in my time, First was of a bingo site and as I not deposit in ten days I was not aloud, 2nd was tropic& and as not played ten games

I am a small roller so it really does not affect me albeit if I win big and get stung it will hurt, But can certainly feel the pain for big gunners and deposit big

The use of "may" when they actually mean "will" is going to backfire now that consumer law applies. Terms are judged on what is written, not what the company policy is. With a discretionary term, the business can be challenged to provide the reasons why in a given circumstances it was applied, they can't just say "It's a fixed term that is always applied".

However, the player will need to call their bluff on this, they will not just give in, they need to feel that they are going to have to justify the application of this rule to a judge, and if they feel that this is a likely consequence of standing their ground, and their legal team advises that there is a significant risk that they will lose in court under UK consumer protection laws, they will start backing down and may settle out of court without admitting liability. Following this, they will reword the term to make it more watertight under UK law, or get rid of it altogether in favour of something else.

 

[spintee]

The use of "may" when they actually mean "will" is going to backfire now that consumer law applies. Terms are judged on what is written, not what the company policy is. With a discretionary term, the business can be challenged to provide the reasons why in a given circumstances it was applied, they can't just say "It's a fixed term that is always applied".

However, the player will need to call their bluff on this, they will not just give in, they need to feel that they are going to have to justify the application of this rule to a judge, and if they feel that this is a likely consequence of standing their ground, and their legal team advises that there is a significant risk that they will lose in court under UK consumer protection laws, they will start backing down and may settle out of court without admitting liability. Following this, they will reword the term to make it more watertight under UK law, or get rid of it altogether in favour of something else.

There is the trouble, What player is going to take it to court? If and when they do maybe casino will chage rules untill than the U.K gov is eating into our money,

95% of the moans your hear is players fault, & Yes this is where the judge should come into affect and say that rule is silly

 

[vinylweatherman]

There is the trouble, What player is going to take it to court? If and when they do maybe casino will chage rules untill than the U.K gov is eating into our money,

95% of the moans your hear is players fault, & Yes this is where the judge should come into affect and say that rule is silly

It's happened, but usually it's settled out of court with a "gagging clause", so that we don't get to hear about it.

After the farce of a few years ago, UK players have been taking Betfair to court, and so far Betfair have caved in every case and offered to settle out of court, but with a gagging clause that means those players can't share the details of their success. In particular, it was when the money was confiscated after it had been withdrawn to the sportbook, which was under UK regulation at the time. Now ALL UK licenced casinos place players in the same position as those who had money confiscated from their Betfair sportsbook, and since the Betfair case, consumer laws have been tightened even further in favour of consumers.

It is likely that players with a decent case will only have to go as far as the "letter before action" before the casino begins to negotiate a possible compromise, and if they hold out, bring the case to court. It will be worth it if the potential outcome is greater than the costs of taking the matter to court, and if it can be dealt with through the small claims system, this is even better for the player.

To strengthen the case, a player should go through the motions of submitting a formal complaint to the casino, and then via the ADR specified in the terms. Even if both are lost, the player can still take the matter to court, and if they were to win, it would make the ADR system look bad, and neither casinos nor the UKGC would want to see that happen. A casino would therefore only allow the court to hear a case they were pretty confident of winning.

 

[asm]

I used to be a member of tivolicasino and I had good experiences from there. If the OP is absolutely 100% honest in his story and I still were a member of tivolicasino, I definitely would never play there again and I'd seriously advise everyone to not play there either.

The guy deposited a thousand pounds for a whopping 5% bonus (I wonder did that make the entire 1050 as WR). Obviously these rules are in place to prevent someone abusing bonuses, this player if honest, probably didn't pony up 1k to get 50 to play at .1 on starburst in hopes of making 15 pounds.

It's the casino completely hiding behind a rule that doesn't really even fit that well, to avoid ponying up the money.

No one should play here until the rep tells how it is, and if this decision is final and the player is honest in his story, show some solidarity and stop playing there completely.

 

[chris87]

I tend to agree with asm. As I said earlier in the thread I have some concerns about Tivoli, withdrawals being returned to my balance due to "processing faults" and general payment delays.

I do hope the OP gets some kind of resolution, but I have the feeling that this is unlikely.

Chris

 

[Keith Hathaway]

Hi Slotter999 and everyone else who has joined in this thread,

Firstly I would like to sincerely apologise for the lack of response to date. This is due to the festive season for sure as our two Affiliate Managers who look after the day to day activities (Lucas and Karolina) were both off from before the post was made till today. I assume they were also swamped under a pile of emails and Karolina has today been doing our affiliate commissions, that this hasn't been seen.

Luckily KasinoKing has shown me this thread so I will step in! (the boss is finally made to work for his living!)

Joking aside I would like to apologise for the experience here as it is certainly not what we want for our players. I head up the affiliate team and was in no way involved in this decision, but I will on the players behalf raise this tomorrow with the Casino Manager who made this decision. As you have all said it is in many ways clear cut, I cannot promise anything at this stage more than I will aim to fight your corner here but I will certainly aim to keep you happy here!

Slotter999, please send me a PM with your username so I can follow this up and if you want to give me any other contact details do so there.

Apart from that I would like to wish you all a very happy new year from myself personally and the whole team at Tivoli!

 

[slotter999]

So the small development I mentioned in a previous post is this. I used my returned deposit of £1000 to take another stab at recouping my losses (which I think is a fair description of having my winnings confiscated). The long and short of it is I managed to turn that £1000 into £3280 bagging myself a profit of £2280. I didn't want to say anything sooner because I thought it unwise to antagonise them until the money hit my account because you can bet your house that they went over everything I did with an ultra fine tooth comb looking for 'something'.

The money actually landed this morning despite being requested on 26th Dec so draw your own conclusions.

At the time it felt like quite the small personal victory but typing out this message I just feel more annoyed then ever by their actions.

I thought this would be the end of the matter but VinylWeatherman's messages were quite inspirational and I now need to decide what I'm going to do about it. The easy option is do nothing but in my mind this is part of a bigger issue of fairness in the relationship between casino and customer that just keeps getting more and more skewed against the player which appears to be going completely unchecked. I'm going to take some professional advice and take it from there. If anyone is interested in the outcome of that let me know and I'll provide some updates (which I expect will be a slow process).

Anyway that's in from me for now - over and out.