| Posted by: vinylweatherman at January 18, 2008, 1:24 pm | | Topic: Were they right to do so? Forum: Casino Meister |
You have told 40% of the player community about their "great customer service".
The problem with eCogra is that they take no account of whether terms are fair or not, but whether the casino acted within them. Generally, eCogra will insist on a return of deposit if the term invoked involves the "voiding of winnings", as in this case. I the case of fraud however, eCogra may allow the casino to keep some or all of a deposit to cover it's costs.
Casinos have far more freedom than they would have if they were judged by domestic consumer contract laws in the player's own countries. This now includes the UK, where from September 1st 2007 gambling debts lost their immunity from enforcement through the courts. This could be one reason why casinos have gone for whitelisting rather than full UK regulation, the other being a saving in tax.
Casinos that have these currency rules have tried to claim they are to prevent bonus abuse, but this has proven not to be the reason behind them as players who do not take bonuses also have their winnings confiscated.
Had you lost, you would NOT have got your deposit back, the casino would never have told you that your play was invalid for fear that you would reclaim your losses.
The fact this term continues to be "buried" rather than prominently displayed by casinos that have it shows they are indeed using it as a means to boost profits by taking advantage of unwary players who do not bother to scrutinise the terms each time they open an account.
One way to help players is to highlight such cases each time they occur, in the hope that more and more players will learn that they CANNOT assume that what the registration software says you can do, is actually allowed.
Casinos have long benefited from rules unsupported by the software, and the software suppliers certainly have the resources available to them to fix this issue for the protection of players, but they choose not to. The design and implementation of just ONE new game, is more complex than designing a foolproof registration system that would prevent players from making wrong choices, yet they can churn out 5 such games each month, but have yet to address this issue. It's clearly not a case of "can't be done", but "we don't want to do it".
If the software DID prevent players from making mistakes with registrations and bonuses, casinos would NEVER be in a position to alidly use their "FU Clause" except in the few cases of genuine player fraud, over and above "bonus abuse fraud" which is the most common kind of "fraud".
|
|
Casino Classic
Get $500 free on the house!
Categories:
online casinos free online poker online poker poker bonus codes poker tips free gambling casinos poker chip sets casino chips play poker full tilt poker poker games online blackjack poker rooms baccarat poker tables online gambling poker tournament best casino blackjack
Links:
Movie Talks
Forum Extractor
|