Oy vey, getting some of my wires crossed here, will/have amended my posts accordingly.
Basically yes, I have had trouble with several of your casinos in the past -- primarily Mayflower, Casino Titan and Slots Jungle -- but at this point I'll stand down from the "unresolved issues" bit until I've had a chance to go over the records carefully to be sure of what I say.
They are also prolific spammers. There is NO way they could have legitimately gotten hold of my email address, let alone permission to send umpteen "newsletters" and other misleading offer material to it. Although likely to be affiliate related, the fact that it is so disproportionately bad with this one small outfit's brands demonstrates the lack of ethics on the part of their affiliates coupled with a lack of policing on the part of the program.
The only group to match them in sheer volume of content is Casino Rewards and their cross marketing, but at least they have a legitimate reason for having hold of my information, and it could also be argued that the offers are not necessarily spam since they are promotions to an existing player.
Affactive is not random spam either, as it comes to one specific email address of three, so they must have bought it somewhere (which means someone else was naughty by selling it), or it has been supplied to their affiliates in general on a "master mailing list" by someone.
There are numerous issues like this that don't seem to count because Affactive sees them as "normal practice", rather than issues that need to be addressed.
As for that max cashout argument, how come there WAS an argument in the first place, let alone problems coming to an agreement. It suggests the term was sneaked in under cover, rather than being made clear to the player from the outset, hence the player felt the term had simply been plucked out of thin air in order to "shave" his win, rather than a term that was being applied to everybody.
These max cashout rules cause more trouble between players and casinos than they are worth, and shouldn't even be necessary unless they were needed to limit the negative effects of some other "funkiness" in the way promotions were offered and applied that could NOT be catered for naturally by the house edge of the games.
Reputable softwares like Microgaming seem to get along fine with NO max cashout restrictions on ANYTHING offered to regular players, and no feature win caps on the slots either (unlike RTG which caps at around 2000x stake). Microgaming bonuses are cashable too, not phantom like the majority of RTG ones.
As a whole, this gives the appearance that these rules are designed to allow an RTG casino to run with a much lower float than statistically viable under the natural and uncapped variances of the games. Low weekly or monthly gross withdrawal allowances also serve to limit the short term downward "spike" in the variance applied to the float from a few big winners all wanting their money at the same time.
A well funded operation needs none of this short term "trickery" to protect it's float from running dry, as it has enough available to pay big wins in full, and make a steady return from the house edge over the long term.