Why Doesnt E-Cogra offer player's insurance?

Talk is cheap. They can say all they want about safety and security. However if a player gets screwed and a site decides not to pay E-Cogra should have to shell out the cash for giving out a false sense of hope.

I mean really what good is a watchdog company if they can't guaranteed you get paid?

 

LOL - this is a joke right?

eCOGRA are a regulatory commission. They provide more research to help the player, but ultimately it is the player's decsion where to play and the player takes the responsibility. What eCOGRA will do is help you when you have a problem, and try to assist you in making the right decision.

Having been in to see how they work recently, they have a very thorough way of dealing with complaints and any of the casinos they seal who act out-of-hand would soon find their seals revoked. Interestingly, most of the issues from what i can gather come from fraudulent players, bonus abusers, or players who played a bonus without understanding the T&C's.

What they do is much needed in my opinion. We've seen this sort of post before from players who took a complaint there and had a ruling go against them (see above). I think most posters here would agree that the casinos on the eCOGRA list are reputable casinos. I dont believe any of them would not pay out unless they had good reason to suspect something wasn't right.

 

From what I have seen to date, players with a legitimate dispute have been paid by seal casinos after the intervention of eCOGRA's Fair Gaming Advocate.
If you have a legit complaint, that would appear to me to be an adequate safeguard.

 

I saw terms at Millionaire Casino that just astounded me. Let me quote them:

So, you are allowed to play Blackjack... but if you win, they will take your winnings, and if you lose, that's your tough luck. If the casinos are going to have T&Cs like that, they should at least provide a warning dialog in the software, saying "would you prefer to play a different game, or would you like to play playmoney blakjack?"

Letting players play a banned game, and keeping losses/not paying wins is an almost sickeningly unethical way to enforce it.

 

When you download any casino software, no matter what provider, it asks you before installation if you agree with their T&C. If you simply check the box without reading, well, tough luck. Same goes with bonuses. Their T&C are clearly marked (most of the time), and if you don't like the T&C for a bonus, don't take it. Bonuses are a privilege, not a right. I'll never understand the logistics behind the banning of certain games that have a higher house advantage, but still....it's a contract and you have to play by it, or they can do what's outlined in their T&C, like it or not...same goes for them...if you play by the rules and they don't want to pay you, you have every right to get paid.

 

Ok I never filed a complaint with them. Stop assuming. They arent a regulatory agency. They are a buisness that sells logos for other sites to put on their sites.

A regulatory agency would sue the casino on your behalf to ensure you get paid. Just like in Nevada and AC.

 

But Casinoplayer, what about a player who submits a fraudulent claim? Not all claims/grievances filed with ECogra are legitimate. As Simmo stated in an earlier post, a large majority of claims filed relate to bonus abuse, fraudulent play (ie. multiple accounts) and misunderstanding of bonus terms. Why in the world would an organization such as ECogra be responsible for providing insurance to players such as these? And can you imagine if reputable casinos were being sued every other day by fraudulent players? Microgaming casinos are one of the last few online casinos where you can almost guarantee you will be paid, if you played by all the rules. And from what I have read, I do believe that any and all legitimate complaints which have been filed with ECogra have been settled to everyone's satisfaction.

 

Just like insurance in the real world you would have to provide proof and an investigation would be conducted.

 

I'm not arguing with that. I'm just saying that it would be way more player-friendly to make their software pop up a warning if you're about to do something that lets them void your winnings.

As it stands, I'm afraid to get near online craps and roulette, even when I know I'm way past the wagering requirements.

 

That would be very nice - if they gave you a warning. But realistically I can't see that happening at any online casino.
We'll just have to keep reading those tedious T&C's.

I found a really weird Condition at a Playtech - keep an eye out for my new thread later...
(Today, if I get time!)

 

* Hey there. IS this about the group being fair, or is this about the group refusing to sue the casinos, but rather work with them in a quiet and agreeable manner?
As far as I know, eCogra will investigate ANY claims, they just dont run off to the court on behalve of the players. That would both be a waste of money, time and effort, especially in the case of bogus claims.

As far as I know, eCogra will also make sure that the players are not wronged by a casino carrying their seal - in the event that the player has a claim that is legit. Should the casino not comply, they are in breach of contract, and not only face their seal being revoked, but also hefty fines on certain issues.
So, WHY should eCogra pay for the indescretion of their seal bearers, they have their contracts, and procedures in place to deal with this.

NOW, tell me, what happens to the bogus claims against the casino, should those pple be made to pay eCogra then? **

 

What does this mean? What is bonus abuse? You distinguish it from fraudulent activity, so what is it? Anyone that takes advantage of a promotion is SOL?

 

Typically "bonus abuse" covers things like signing up more than once, using mulitple IP addresses or banned IPs to get extra bonuses not due, getting "friends" to sign up... etc etc. It doesnt cover legitimate misunderstandings relating to bonus terms or players using a bonus to try and win fairly.

 

Thank you Simmo, that's precisely what I meant by bonus abuse. I certainly didn't mean to use the term in the same manner that some of the shadier casinos seem to be doing these days, as a catch-all phrase to get out of paying legitimate wins.

 

eCOGRA is in the business of certifying online casinos and regulating them as far as they are able too, not to provide insurance policies. To ask eCOGRA to provide insurance to players certainly opens up a can of worms for them. I could see many players with fraudulent claims taking up their time in the chance that they could make some money.

Since you are asking for insurance Casinoplayer, I'm interested in how much you would spend on an eCOGRA policy? Since no insurance is free, what would it be worth for a player to know they are protected from any wrong doing on the part of the casinos eCOGRA represents?

 

Who runs the audits for Ecogra now?
If it is still PWC, why did ecogra systematically try to remove all mention of PWC from the site and why weren't the public informed of such.
If it is not PWC, why were'nt the public informed?

I am not getting into this Ecogra thing in depth again because it has become farcicle, so no worries for you Ecogra supporters.

Just a simple factual answer will do to an obviously important question, that should not be left for an idiot like me to ask.

 

You are all missing the point.

If E-Cogra is as thourough as they claim to be in approving casinos, offering insurance should not be a problem. They will never have to pay a claim if their standards are up to snuff, correct?

As for paying for the insurance.. You are already paying when you make a deposit.

 

AHAA!

why doesnt somebody open an online casino insurance company?Some clever lawyer could do it. Sell you a policy.You know, if we win I get 30%,if we lose I get 30%. Make terms and conditions a requisite for buying a policy.