Har du modtaget nogen begrundelse fra casinoet for, hvorfor din saldo blev konfiskeret?
De hævder, at jeg overtrådte følgende vilkårlige, skjulte klausul:
"7.1.9. Du kan ikke foretage en ny indbetaling, gøre krav på en bonus eller indløse en gratis kampagne, før du har gennemspillet din nuværende indbetaling, bonus eller gratis kampagne. Din saldo skal være under $/€/AUD 1, før en ny indbetaling, bonus eller gratis kampagne kan foretages, gøres krav på eller indløses."
Denne klausul begrundes ikke. Da jeg kontaktede deres chat om, hvorfor min første udbetaling blev afvist - og fik at vide, at jeg skulle indbetale for at få min udbetaling - gjorde de ikke eksplicit denne bizarre politik klar. En klar forklaring blev tilbageholdt.
Derudover blev jeg TVUNGET til at indbetale - angiveligt for at hæve - efter at have vundet mine bonuspenge ... og derfor tvunget til at blande mine bonusgevinster med mine indbetalingspenge.
På min konto fik jeg på intet tidspunkt en "saldo med rigtige penge", hvor min saldo fra bonusgevinster blev vist som adskilt fra min "saldo med rigtige penge" ... Hvis "rigtige penge" er forskelligt fra "bonusgevinster", så burde de simpelthen opbevares på separate konti, ikke sandt? Hvorfor er det spillerens ansvar at finde ud af dette esoteriske og straffende systemiske problem? Det synes at mangle enhver logik ud over at blive brugt til at fratage spillere deres gevinster. Kort sagt, hvorfor ellers skulle det være der?
I øvrigt havde jeg annulleret udbetalingen for at hæve et større beløb. Hvis jeg havde indset, at de ville annullere hele min gevinst - og returnere den oprindelige indbetaling på 20 dollars - så ville jeg naturligvis ikke have annulleret udbetalingen. Men ganske enkelt virker denne påståede regel som vrøvl, der blot er designet til at forårsage misforståelser og annullere gevinster. Faktisk forstår jeg stadig ikke rigtig reglen - ville mine gevinster være blevet annulleret, hvis jeg ikke annullerede indbetalingen, fordi jeg simpelthen havde hævet - eller ville de være blevet annulleret for at have haft den frækhed at spille min indbetaling, før udbetalingen gik igennem?
Hvis det på en eller anden måde er problemet at annullere udbetalingen - og jeg forstår stadig ikke hvordan eller hvorfor det er - er den mest retfærdige løsning så ikke at genoprette de 50 og eventuelle gevinster efter den annullerede udbetaling? Blot at annullere de gevinster, der blev vundet på væddemål med "blandede midler"?
Det lader ikke til, at målet var retfærdighed - på nogen måde - og det lader ikke til, at denne regel har en rimelig, legitim grund til at eksistere. Den blev heller ikke ordentligt fremhævet af chatten FØR jeg foretog min indbetaling for at hæve mine penge. Jeg fik ingen grund til, hvorfor reglen eksisterer. Den virker fuldstændig vilkårlig. Som jeg påpegede, hvem ville ønske at spille på et casino, der behandler sine tilsyneladende værdsatte kunder så lurvet - og uærligt?
De genindbetalte min indbetaling på 20 dollars, men det er ikke tegn på god tro. I betragtning af at Casino Brango har et højt minimumsbeløb for udbetaling (50 dollars), var jeg tvunget til at spille - og efterfølgende tabe - den oprindelige indbetaling på 20 dollars i stedet for bare at tage mine penge og forlade deres casino.
Derudover er det en dobbelt fornærmelse at annullere både bonussen og mine lovligt vundne penge, hvor kun én fornærmelse ville have været slemt nok. Hvordan kan det koste mig hundrede dollars at annullere en udbetaling?
Har du selv kontaktet casinoet og bedt om en forklaring?
Ja, der blev ikke givet nogen tilfredsstillende begrundelse. Bortset fra endnu en gang at påpege denne vilkårlige klausul, der er begravet i deres formuleringer, og som ikke forklarer årsagen til klausulen.
Har du adgang til din konto? Kan du logge ind?
Ja
Hvilke spil spillede du for at omsætte bonussen? (spilleautomater, live spil, sportsvæddemål)
Spilleautomater
Hvilke spil spillede du efter omsætningen af bonussen var fuldført?
Spilleautomater
Kunne du venligst dele din kommunikation med casinoet med mig? Send e-mails eller chattransskriptioner til min e-mail på eller post skærmbilleder her
Jeg sender dig interaktionen videre med det samme. Tak.
Have you received any justification from the casino about why your balance was confiscated?
They claim I was in violation of the following arbitrary, buried clause:
"7.1.9. You cannot make a new deposit, claim bonus or free promotion, until you have played through your current deposit, bonus or free promotion. Your balance needs to be below $/€/AUD 1 before a new deposit, bonus or free promotion may be made, claimed or redeemed."
This clause is not given justification. Also, when I reached out to their chat about why my initial withdraw was denied - and told I had to deposit to get my withdraw - they did not make explicitly clear this bizarre policy. Clear explanation was withheld.
Further, I was FORCED to deposit - ostensibly in order to withdraw - after winning my bonus money... and therefore forced to mix my bonus winnings with my deposit money.
In my account, I was given a "real money balance" at no point did my balance from bonus winnings show as separate from my "real money balance"... If "real money" is distinct from "bonus winnings" then they should simply be kept in separate accounts, no? Why is the onus on the player to figure out this esoteric and punishing systemic issue. It seems to lack any logic outside of being employed to strip players out of their winnings. Simply put, why else would it be there?
Incidentally, I had cancelled the withdraw to withdraw a larger sum. If I had realized they would void my entire winnings - returning the initial 20 dollar deposit - then I obviously would not have cancelled the withdraw. But, quite simply, this alleged rule seems like nonsense designed simply to cause misunderstandings and void winnings. In fact, I still don't really understand the rule - would my winnings have been voided if I didn't cancel the deposit because I had simply withdrawn - or would they have been voided for having the audacity to gamble my deposit before the withdrawal went through?
If cancelling the withdraw is somehow the issue - and I still do not understand how or why it is - then isn't the most fair resolution to restore the 50 and any winnings subsequent to the cancelled withdraw? Merely cancelling the ones that were won on bets with "mixed funds"?
It does not seem that fairness was the goal - in any shape or form - and it does not seem that this rule has a fair, legitimate reason for existing. Nor was it properly highlighted by chat PRIOR to making my deposit to withdraw my funds. I was given no reason why the rule exists. It seems to be completely arbitrary. As I pointed out, who would want to gamble at a casino that treats it's ostensibly valued clientele so shabbily - and dishonest?
They did restore my 20 dollar deposit, but that is no sign of good faith. Given that Casino Brango has a high minimum withdraw (50 dollars), I was forced to gamble - and subsequently lose - the 20 dollar initial deposit instead of just taking my money and leaving their casino.
Further, voiding both the bonus and my legitimately won money is a double insult where only one insult would have been bad enough. How does cancelling a withdraw cost me a hundred dollars?
Have you contacted the casino yourself and asked for an explanation?
Yes, no satisfactory reason was given. Except, once again, pointing out this arbitrary clause buried in their terms that doesn't explain the reason for the clause.
Is your account accessible to you? Can you log in?
Yeah
What games did you play to wager through the bonus? (slots, live games, betting on sports)
Slots
What games did you play after the wagering of the bonus was complete?
Slots
Could you please share with me your communication with the casino? Send emails or chat transcripts to my email at tomas@casino.guru, or post screenshots here
I will forward you the interaction right now. Thanks.
Automatisk oversættelse: