Videoslots withdrawl denied and Account blocked.

zreb

Experienced Member
PABaccred
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Location
currently in US
No, main SE identifiers are name, birth date, address, email address, phone number, credit/debit card numbers.

Many people are on dynamic IPs, so that can't be the single identifier to exclude everyone signing up from the same IP.

I don't disagree, but if an IP address is enough to trigger problems on cashouts or to violate the bonus terms (3.6), surely it's unfair of the casino not to throw up a flag during account creation and resolve it before a deposit is made?
 
Award winning Videoslots is reviewed by Casinomeister

Guntis

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Location
United kingdom
Maybe I missed some bit of information, but how about opening an account at Videoslots in public places like Starbucks, McDonald's etc, using public Wifi or the internet cafe?
Will the account be blocked and winnings confiscated if from the same IP somebody else has already registered?
 

zreb

Experienced Member
PABaccred
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Location
currently in US
To get this out of the way: I think most here would agree that the most likely possibility here is that OP and his self excluded "friend" are the same person and are just stringing us along here. But of course we don't know that 100% for sure.

But did many people here actually look closely at term 1.4? First of all, the formatting is so messed up that it's virtually unreadable (and really needs to be fixed), but ignoring that, term 1.4 is just a reservation of rights allowed to videoslots, including account closures, removal from promotional activities, etc. The point is, term 1.4 is not a term that can be violated by a player.

The relevant part is:
"Videoslots reserves the right, at its own discretion, to: ...
  • forfeit and/or confiscate funds available on an account and/or refuse to honour a claim, in the event that, directly or indirectly, these Terms and Conditions have been violated and/or other unauthorised"
(I didn't leave anything off the end, that's how it's written.)

So the point is, 1.4 allows videoslots to reserve the right to confiscate funds in case a term has been violated. But 1.4 by itself is never sufficient justification to confiscate funds, you would also need to point out the actual term violated.

*(There is some vague allusion to "illegal, fraudulent, or dishonest activities" connected to the statements about the right to account closure, but it isn't connected to the part about confiscation of funds, and any behaviors that are legal but "fraudulent" or "dishonest" should be defined elsewhere anyway. So the only real way to violate the term would be illegal activity.)


So what about shared IP addresses? If that's really what led to the situation, the only term I see which addresses that is this:

"3.6 Only one bonus per household/IP address can be used. In case of bonus abuse, said bonus will be forfeited and any funds on this account shall be frozen."

But if OP didn't use a bonus (specifically, one already used by his self-excluded "friend"), videoslots would actually need evidence of fraudulent identity or some other term to confiscate the funds. Maybe it's a case of "Whoops, we made a mistake only having that apply to bonuses so we're just going to point to our catch-all term 1.4 instead" (which doesn't actually cover the situation, since nowhere else in the terms do I see it being a violation to have a shared IP address without a bonus.)

So in summary: Yeah OP probably is bullshitting us, but from the information given I'm not sure confiscation is justified. This goes with the obvious disclaimer: there may be other evidence of fraud we're unaware of, but still, videoslots should be able to point the player to the specific term violated. 1.4 doesn't count for the reasons above, that's just the right to confiscate funds if another term is violated.

So many casinos seem to take the lazy way and just refer to their "catch-all" term when they believe a player has done something wrong, and in this case, I don't think that works.

And in either case, someone at videoslots should really go through and fix that term and its formatting, and probably rewrite it altogether.
 
Last edited:

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Maybe @Team.Videoslots can confirm, not in regard to this case, but in general, if you use an IP that has been previously used by another customer, bonus or no bonus, what will happen.
I still think, in this particular case, there is stuff we don't know. The OP has already been caught out leaving out some very relevant information, I would be surprised there wasn't more.
 

Timo0510

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2018
Location
Germany
This Topic growing up more and more. And a lot of Information coming up after his Account get closed.

We know the OP sign up there
He deposits €1.000,starts playing without Bonus
Win 10.000 + and want Cash out €10.000
His Account get full verified !

And after this,he wanna take a withdrawal and the Account get blocked and Closed.

I am Curious with what Information VS works to close this Account and say he breaks Terms 1.4.

All other Information,like he plays by a SE Friend,same IP / Household etc doesn't Count.All this coming up to the Story after the Disaster with the closed Account.On this Story must be more than OP or VS telling about.And more,VS paying everyday much Money instant to so many persons around the World.

I am really hopefully,that VS tell us more about this Story than say to OP to go MGA and stay quiet with this Topic.This is important for all Members in our Community here i think :)
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
Main thing is VS, a popular trusted brand have spoken up and stated that they will stand by their decision. Confidently offering involvement of an ADR.

Knowing that they are constantly spoken of on here and other forums, they will be 100% confident that any 3rd party will take their side. This being said I strongly feel OP has genuinely broken their term and that there is no middle ground nor grey areas to be found here.

Only outside and tiny hope OP has and it is tiny at that is that VS may accept a compromise with a view to fair play, giving OP a life line / second chance and great CS, nothing more.
 

Timo0510

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2018
Location
Germany
This being said I strongly feel OP has genuinely broken their term and that there is no middle ground nor grey areas to be found here.

I also believe that OP break the rules.But as u said,VS as a popular Brand and Trusted Casino by so many sites,cant go to the OP,send an E-mail u break Terms and your Money is lost.After many request´s from OP to the Casino,he still get no Answer what he did and why it happens.This shouldn't be the Way like a Casino like VS works.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
I also believe that OP break the rules.But as u said,VS as a popular Brand and Trusted Casino by so many sites,cant go to the OP,send an E-mail u break Terms and your Money is lost.After many request´s from OP to the Casino,he still get no Answer what he did and why it happens.This shouldn't be the Way like a Casino like VS works.

How do you know he didn't get more information?
 

stokes

Experienced Greenhorn
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Location
Springfield
Let's suppose the OP and their "friend" are the same person. What they wanted to gain registering another account at VS instead of choosing another from the thousands of the online casinos? Even if they wanted to play at a trustworthy site there are still at least hundred to select from. Did they SEd from all?
 

zreb

Experienced Member
PABaccred
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Location
currently in US
How do you know he didn't get more information?

OP claimed that all VS told him was that he violated term 1.4, and that they added later on that he violated 1.3. Term 1.4 has been described previously, term 1.3 is basically just an agreement that you need to keep up to date with the terms.

Whether or not that is a reliable account of the communication between OP and videoslots, no one here can know aside from the parties themselves.
 

Harry_BKK

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
We don't know what is associated with the ominous IP of the "friend".

OP says he SE'ed, but he might have attempted a SE fraud. We just don't know.

These stories with "friend" etc always turn out to be the same person. I have yet to see that it was indeed a friend ever since I signed up at CM about 3 years ago.

Fact is, there is lots of fraudelent stuff happening at online casinos and if VS is so confident to have authorities look into the case, then they better have solid proof, isn't it?
 

lockinlove

Staring into the sun
PABaccred
PABnonaccred
Joined
Jan 17, 2014
Location
Canada
Hard to believe. My friend would for sure tell me oh hey dont play there I closed my account there may be an issue.

Or any gambler knows, if you are at another gamblers house one of the biggest rules casinos have is only 1 account per IP address. I have been at my friends many times and opened up chat and asked them to check if there were any other accounts from that address to make sure.

So if the person in question didnt bother to do anything you have to ask yourself why. I see no answer to that.

But then you do have to ask the question, if he was trying to be sneaky, why would he create an account that he knows is excluded in the first place? He must know it can be insta checked, no? Also, didnt try to abuse a bonus because he risked his own cash.

Im no Sherlock Holmes but this seems like a strange one!
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
We don't know what is associated with the ominous IP of the "friend".

OP says he SE'ed, but he might have attempted a SE fraud. We just don't know.

These stories with "friend" etc always turn out to be the same person. I have yet to see that it was indeed a friend ever since I signed up at CM about 3 years ago.

Fact is, there is lots of fraudelent stuff happening at online casinos and if VS is so confident to have authorities look into the case, then they better have solid proof, isn't it?

Completely agree with this. I would usually give the player the benefit of doubt without evidence to the contrary, however there are certain times you just know something doesn't add up. This for me is one of those times.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Hard to believe. My friend would for sure tell me oh hey dont play there I closed my account there may be an issue.

Or any gambler knows, if you are at another gamblers house one of the biggest rules casinos have is only 1 account per IP address. I have been at my friends many times and opened up chat and asked them to check if there were any other accounts from that address to make sure.

Sorry but I completely disagree on that. Millions of people gamble, I would bet most don't even know what an IP address is.
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
Sorry but I completely disagree on that. Millions of people gamble, I would bet most don't even know what an IP address is.

Fair point, I wasn't too technologically savvy a few years back but from day one of online slotting I was aware of the one account per person / household rule and also had a large degree of common sense too.

OP is a failed opportunist IMO, hope I'm wrong but don't think I am.
 

lockinlove

Staring into the sun
PABaccred
PABnonaccred
Joined
Jan 17, 2014
Location
Canada
Sorry but I completely disagree on that. Millions of people gamble, I would bet most don't even know what an IP address is.

Doubtful in this day in age. The internet has been around long enough and so have terms. And anyone who gambles with their money, I would say most read the terms. I think your comment would be more accurate if you stated a small portion do not know what an IP is.
 

chiya

Senior Member
PABnononaccred
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Location
Earth
I don't see how duplicate IP's can be grounds to void winnings. I don't think that the IP itself should even exist in the rules even with as far as bonuses go. As has been stated before, many people have dynamic IP addresses. Meaning their IP changes. You know if I turn off my router right now and turn it on in 5 minutes, my IP's probably changed. Who's to say the IP I'm assigned next hasn't been used to play at Videoslots? And how am I supposed to know if it has or hasn't? How can you punish player for something that's way beyond their control? You could use IP addresses in conjunction with other proof but it cannot be the sole reason to void winnings.

I used to go to my mum's house a lot in the past before we moved further apart. We're both gamblers. I have my her wifi on my phone so if I went to her place I'd be automatically playing with an IP similar to hers, if not one of the IP's she'd already used in the past. You think that should be grounds to void my winnings if I would get any? I'm not part of her household.

Fact is we don't have all the facts about OP's situation so I'm not saying what I wrote should apply to their situation. Just saying in general that voiding winnings due to dupe-IP's is a stupid, unfair and a bullshit rule that should not exist in the first place.

I will say however about OP's case is that wasn't he verified? If he was successfully verified then he's not his friend, unless he just used his friend's details to get verified. However how can VS prove any of that? He's successfully verified, played without a bonus but from same IP. Again where's the justification to void winnings based on that alone?
 

Gaz237

Ueber Meister
MM
Joined
May 8, 2014
Location
chelmsford UK
The ISP can also show if the device is the same.

So at a guess, the op signed up in his friends details and played on the same phone, laptop ect.

The reason for not taking the bonus, was he could of only made a low max bet, on a 1000 Euro deposit.

Was probably peed off he lost and SE and thought, I gonna try and win it back.
 

Scott1baird

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Oct 16, 2018
Location
Isle of Bute Scotland
One more thing myself and my wife had a VS account at same time, Vs contacted me and said we couldn't have them both I was actually expecting both to be shut down immediately which would have been my own fault and my wife's, but to my surprise they only closed my wife's down after I resent my ID docs in again, two days later I got a cashout no problem. Wife plays at Leo Vegas now hee hee
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Doubtful in this day in age. The internet has been around long enough and so have terms. And anyone who gambles with their money, I would say most read the terms. I think your comment would be more accurate if you stated a small portion do not know what an IP is.

Really? Have you seen how many complaints on here alone are due to players not reading terms, simple ones a lot of the time relating to bonuses, let alone ones that aren't clear, relating to IP addresses? Apart from that, how exactly can you guarantee you are using an IP address that hasn't been used previously, or in the future, by a different customer?

Most people do not have any idea what an IP address is, some do, more do than would have 10 years ago, but stop 100 people in the street ranging from say 18-80 and I'll bet a large percentage have no idea what one is. Most people know how to open a browser on their phone, and type an address in, or open an app, and that is pretty much the end of their knowledge. Certainly that is the case in the UK.
 

robby811

Hottie Tottie Meister
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Location
Germany
Most people do not have any idea what an IP address is, some do, more do than would have 10 years ago, but stop 100 people in the street ranging from say 18-80 and I'll bet a large percentage have no idea what one is. Most people know how to open a browser on their phone, and type an address in, or open an app, and that is pretty much the end of their knowledge. Certainly that is the case in the UK.

Fyi @ anybody who didnt know what a IP is all about

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 

paul7388

Ueber Meister
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Location
glasgow scotland
Just thought i would mention something. I have accounts with a lot of places. My son stays with me and he knows i gamble but do not think he knows that i use several casinos as well as bookie sites.

Anyway i know he has accounts at some places same as me like WH Paddy power etc. Only place he uses i have not got an account is SkyBet as thats only place that ever locked my account. Anyway point is most places would not actually bother if two people from same house have accounts long as they are using them right. And also to prove the point that it is near impossible to know what accounts someone in your house uses.

I would never know if my boy decided to self exclude from places either.
 

nutnut

Meister of Infractions
Joined
Sep 11, 2014
Location
england
myself and my gf have a account at ALL casino sites including videoslots. we use same computers live at same address and obv have same ip. never had any issues.

so if banning him is due to a IP then that is utter bullshit. must be more too it
 
Top