Casino Room not paying 57,000 Pounds

RESOLVED
ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 19, 2015.

I won over 57,000 GBP in Casinoroom October the 28th 2014.

The deposit was 500 and the bonus was 500, it was an ongoing bonus offer.

I won big playing Dead Or Alive 18 a spin. Before the big win I won around 6000-8000 in slots name Thief or Jack Hammer(I can't recall the exact amounts and games)

The casino sent an email they are not willing to pay due to a max bet rule.

They say you can't bet over 30% of your current balance in a single bet

I remember I checked the terms and condition before and I couldn't find any max bet rule.

I went again to check the terms but still couldn't find any 30% rule

I checked the Promotion terms and it wasn't there (now they added it to the promotion terms, it was added after I emailed them it is missing and and they admit it wasn't there nor in the full terms or terms of service, the email below prove that fact)

I went to check the terms of service but still could find nothing.

I clicked inside the terms of service and clicked FULL TERMS and still nothing - no such term

I sent them an email asking where in the terms and condition it says you can't bet 30% of your total balance.

This is the link they sent:

http:/­/ww­w.c­asi­nor­oom.co­m/t­erm­sof­ser­vic­e/e­llm­ount/


I continued to check the terms and it took me around 20 minutes to reach this link, it is hidden to such an extent it is impossible to reach these terms

I don't want to waste anybody time and I will send the instructions of how to reach these terms but just for the challenge and for me to express and describe the issue here can I ask you to try and find it yourself in casinoroom, I wonder if it is only me who simply had no chance to reach this promotion rule.

Well here is the answer if you couldn't find, go to bonuses then click on Terms of service, then when you are inside terms of service click where it says FOR FULL TERMS PLEASE CLICK HERE, click on it, now you are at the full terms, you won't find it there but if you look for the word Ellmount you will find the click here link and only then you will see the 30% rule (now they changed it a bit and it says clearly terms and condition click here but back then it was just written in full terms - for Ellmount’s respective terms and condition click here and only then you would see this 30% of balance rule.)

Not only that this 30% is an ILLUSIONARY RULE because if you have a dollar in your account and you bet 0.4 it leaves them a reason not to pay, this rule is not valid anyway.

They added the rule to the bonus terms right after I let them know it is missing and this is what they had to say

"We have updated the bonus games page which doesn't change the fact that the terms that you agreed to when you signed up to Casino Room"

The full email:

Hello Krisna

the clause has always been present in the terms and conditions and this has to go through the LGA in Malta who has a copy of these terms.

This clause is included under "Gaming restrictions and jurisdictional issues" and it belongs to the games that you have played from NetEnt

These games are regulated and authorized by the Lotteries and Gaming Authority of Malta under the license issued to Ellmount Gaming Ltd and therefore while using these games your relationship is governed by the terms of service of this latter company. Your relationship with Ellmount Gaming Ltd and the use of these games is governed by the respective Terms and Conditions available here.

We have come to this decision after careful review of your game history. I am aware that you want to go all the way, but the situation is quite the opposite as it is you who is claiming winnings that were acquired through irregular gaming for bonus play-through requirement purposes.

We have updated the bonus games page which doesn't change the fact that the terms that you agreed to when you signed up to Casino Room have always been there and remain as the final and official contract between us.

I always like to provide the best possible solution and there's nothing wrong with going public, you have the right to do that, but we are not arguing about different opinions on the bonus system, it's all about facts that ultimately lead to our full terms, specifically the games governed by these terms http:/­/ww­w.c­asi­nor­oom.co­m/t­erm­sof­ser­vic­e/e­llm­ount/

Before any withdrawals are processed, Your play will be reviewed for any irregular playing patterns. In the interests of fair gaming, equal, zero or low margin bets or hedge betting, shall all be considered irregular gaming for bonus play-through requirement purposes. Other examples of irregular game play for bonus play-through requirement purposes include but are not limited to, placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of your total balance (including any given bonus) until such time as the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met. Should the Casino deem that irregular game play has occurred, the Casino reserves the right to withhold any withdrawals and/or confiscate all winnings and bonuses.

You cannot justify your conduct on the grounds that you were not aware of these rules.

I am willing to improve my offer, just for the sake of making this easier for us, if you agree I will give your total deposits back and please trust me this is by far the best I can do, considering I should not be offering compensation on the first place.

If you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact us.

This is what Steve Russo from Gambling Grumble had to sum which explain the situation better than I can:

"The Very Hidden Rule....Casino Room, however, presented a problem we have never before run across -- it is refusing to pay Krisna K of the UK the 57,000 GBP she won because of a rule that is almost impossible to find. ...

posted on January 20, 2015.

This rule has always been in our terms and conditions and it is common practice at online casinos to have restrictions on the maximum amounts you can bet when you have a bonus. In fact you can find this same rule at other operators. The rule is included under "Gaming restrictions and jurisdictional issues" which can be found in our full terms of service.

We are aware that information must be available to users in the best possible way and that's why we also included this information in the bonus page, but for questions and support we have FAQ and live chat available at all times. This information is also available there.

Customer satisfaction is extremely important to us, but this decision was not arbitrary. This account shows irregular play; if it had been a mistake or simply confusion then perhaps the situation would have been handled in a different way, but we must act according to the facts.

We are waiting for a valid government issued ID in order to complete the due diligence process in this account.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 20, 2015.

The rule was not in the bonus terms
The rule was not in the terms of service
The rulew was not in the sublink of the terms of service called click here for full terms, other words, the rule was missing also from the full terms link
The rule was in a sublink of a sublink, inside the full terms and condition it says click here for more terms and then it was there.

The rule itself is not valid - when you tell the player that if he place 30% of his balance you are not going to pay , it means there is no way you can be paid, because if you are left with lets say 0.5 in the account and you place 0.2 a spin in slots you are not going to be paid, is that a valid rule ?

If the rule was there clear and honest, why did Gambling Grumbles black listed your website under the subject "The Very Hidden Rule". Is he biased and don't know to read the terms ?

You added the rule to the bonus terms right after I sent you the screenshots which also tell you know your mistake by not putting the term at a reasonable place for a player to see the rule.

Again, the rule was in the terms of use
It was not in the full terms and condition and it was in the promotion terms and condition. It was in a sublink of a sublink and the rule it self is not valid

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 20, 2015.

Gambling Grumbles described the situation better than me, it can explain the situation better:

"Casino Room, however, presented a problem we have never before run across -- it is refusing to pay Krisna K of the UK the 57,000 GBP she won because of a rule that is almost impossible to find.

Am I exaggerating? Decide for yourself. The rule in question limits bets to 30% of your balance when playing with a bonus. It is not an uncommon rule and many casinos set various limits. When Krisna wrote to us she said that she was aware that there might be a maximum bet but could not find one in their T&Cs. After she won, she was told about the 30% maximum and even provided a link by the casino to the page on which it appears.

She was, eventually, able to find that page without going through the direct link given to her but she sent me a challenge to try it myself. As I read the T&Cs of many casinos to review before accepting a player's complaint, I felt I was experienced enough to be able to do so with this one. I was wrong. I couldn't find it and asked Krisna how she got to it. Here is her answer:

"I had to click 'Terms of Service' then inside terms of service, then for 'full terms click here' and then I looked for the word 'ellmount' using Control f; there is a small link to another page and there I found the words 30%."

Huh? Whoever would have thought of following such a path?

We asked Casino Room why this rule was so hidden and was told, "The terms that were disregarded apply to NetEnt games, this is the reason why this section of the terms is contained within our full terms of service and that particular section about gaming restrictions and jurisdictional issues has this information". "

http:/­/ww­w.g­amb­lin­ggr­umb­les.co­m/R­epo­rts­/Ca­sin­o-R­oom­_Th­e-V­ery­-Hi­dde­n-Rule

posted on January 20, 2015.

The terms and conditions constitute a legal agreement between us. The information has always been there and also through our FAQ and live support.

This decision was not arbitrary. You deliberately broke a rule, your account shows irregular play and we haven't been able to complete the due diligence process yet, meaning we haven't been able to verify your account.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 20, 2015.

It is not a question of account verification here, you wanted to return the deposit, and I want my winnings in full, you can keep my deposit I don't need it I fight for the big win at dead or alive you stole from me.

This is the reason I didn't send the extra documents I don't want the deposit back I want my winnings in full. Once you promise I get the winnings in full I can send you any verification documents you may ask.

There was no irregular play. I played by the rules, even if you consider the 30% rule valid, I didn't over bet the initial balance.

You took this rule as dynamic rule that at each of my balance you consider 30% valid bet and more as invalid bet. It should be on the initial balance only which was 1000 and if you consider 1000 as the balance I never over bet.

There was no irregular play, again if there was why did Gambling Grumbles black listed you , how come winning from 18 a spin at dead or alive of 60,000 is irregular play ? what is irregular play ?

Again, it is not a question of account verification, I will not send any document in order to get my deposit becuse the issue here is the big win not the deposit

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 20, 2015.

The hidden rule said 30% of balance , it means the initial balance and not dynamic balance otherwise if you have left with 0.1 you can't bet even 0.1 or if you are left with a dollar you can't bet even half. so the 30% rule apply to the initial balance which was 1000, I didn't bet at any point 300 or even 270 or 260... I didn't break any rule and not as you said. How can you say deliberately broke a rule ? how can you use this word when the rule was super hidden and also the hidden rule was never broken.

The initial balance was 1000 and I was able to play the bets I played and the big win came from dead or alive 18 a spin 60,000 win that you don't pay what is irregular here ?

If you think I played irregular can you show it to Askgamblers, I am sure he can see what I know , the initial balance was 1000 and I didn't bet 30% of that initial balance at any point

posted on January 21, 2015.

We don't put restrictions like €5 max bet per round, 30% the total balance including the bonus allows you to make quite big bets and if everything is played by the rules, then we pay, you can count on it.

In this case you have bet over the allowed limits 40% and 60% in the 3rd and 4th round, thus disregarding the terms and we have the game logs to prove this.

This happened in October 2014 and then we sent you the game logs showing the bets, you can share this information if you wish.

We also sent these logs to the LGA also who confirmed we could enforce the terms and following their recommendations we will change our rules to cap the amount that can be bet per spin rather than a percentage.

Also you have sent your documents for verification already, but these didn't pass our verification, this is the reason why we need a government issued ID that we can read with our MRZ scanner.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 21, 2015.

The 30% rule refer to the initial balance which was 1000 and not the running blanace therefore max bet allowed is 299 and I bet below that amount.

What you did is sending the log file yes but the bets were under 299.

You took the running balance that went down and said you bet 60% but this is not true, you can't take the running balance as the measure, because if I got down to 1 I can't bet even 0.5 and the rule refer to the starting balance.

the logfile show clearly that the max bet never exceed the 299 max allowed please your response to that statement before you blame me for breaching the rules check the logs again and what I wrote here and please reposnd

posted on January 22, 2015.

The rule is don't bet more than 30% your total balance when you have a bonus.

You can make quite big bets with 30% and a generous bonus. If you play according to the rules, then we pay, that is absolutely no problem. We are not limiting bets to €5 or smaller stakes, we have no problem with winners, that's part of the game, but we have a problem with rules being disregarded and this is what this is all about.

The rule is not hidden, it's in the terms, it has been there since 2011. It's also in the FAQ and we also have live support available.

We have the logs to prove that as early as round 3 and 4 you bet 40% and 60% the balance. So everything that happens after round 3 is what has brought us here. The initial balance was 893.97 GBP and your bets are 200 GBP. Round 3 you bet 40% and round 4 60% (twice as much as we allow)

We want to come to settlement to conclude this issue fairly but we have evidence to support that the rules were disregarded, bottom line this is very clear in the logs, but we want to demonstrate effective customer care.

This same rule applies at other casinos, it is not uncommon, or unfair, it's just a rule.

https:­//w­ww.g­oo­gle.co­m/s­ear­ch?­q=p­lac­ing­+si­ngl­e+b­ets­+eq­ual­+to­+or­+in­+ex­ces­s+o­f+3­0%2­5+o­r+m­ore­+of­+th­e+v­alu­e+o­f+y­our­+to­tal­+ba­lan­ce&oq=placing+single+bets+equal+to+or+in+excess+of+30%25+or+more+of+the+value+of+your+total+balance&aqs=chrome..69i57.495j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#q=placing+single+bets+equal+to+or+in+excess+of+30%25+or+more+of+the+value+of+your+total+balance

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 22, 2015.

There are couple of problems here

1. The rule was hidden, although you keep saying it was always there it wasn't there, not only it was hidden even your own live chat didn't know about this rule and said in the live chat (I have a transcript) that there is no max bet rule and any bet size is allowed, the rule was so hidden that even the casino didn't know about it, I have the chat transcript with me but this is not the point. If the rule was not hidden Gambling Grumbles would never blacklist you in his site.

2. The rule itself was put in a sublink of a sublink of the terms of use is not a valid rule, it is an illusory rule, an impossible rule because if you are left with a penny, bet the penny get lucky recover and win a 1000 you are not going to be paid. Asking a customer to calculate his bet in each hand according to the balance is impossible.

3. The biggest problem is the amount of win, I didn't imagine I am going to win so much, all the problems is because I won too much, I don't need this headache and I am not to blame of this win, blame your own Slots machines, the big win came from a small bet , I would prefer to win reasonable amount and get paid without issues, if you are willing to sort the issue in other ways than confiscation, give me an offer I can't refuse and I consider this case as close.

posted on January 23, 2015.

I agree that the terms need editing and you have a valid point that we could have made this easier for you, but this rule is not unfair or uncommon, it's just a rule and other casinos have exactly this same rule, that's why it's important to read the terms thoroughly and carefully if you are going to take your bets to such levels when you have a bonus.

We will take another approach following LGA recommendations and change this rule for a maximum bet amount instead of a %.

We want to come to settlement and conclude this issue fairly with you.

I will contact you on Monday with an offer, give me time during the weekend to come up with a solution and then we discuss it. I will contact you by email.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 26, 2015.

Casino room sent an offer to pay 6000, it is like laughing to me in the face.

Casinoroom proved again that they have no respect to their players, their slots and their winners.

No term was breached, the initial balance was around 1000 and the amount of bet never exceed 29% of the initial balance.

Very disappointing

posted on January 26, 2015.

You can share the game logs that I have sent you. Anything that happened after round 3 must be void, this is because the max bet rule has been disregarded and this is 100% clear. Every casino has their own rules and our rule is not unfair or uncommon, it's just a rule.

We have run this through the LGA who confirmed that we can enforce the terms, so this compensation that we are offering, is a huge amount of money and we want to come to settlement to demonstrate effective customer care.

Please think about it, we want to conclude this matter in a positive way.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 27, 2015.

This chat transcript is from October 2014, Live Chat confirm there is no max bet restriction. I have the full chat transcript with me, I received it from a player who tried to help with the Casinomeister complaint running on same topic.

Live chat confirmed there is no max bet because he was not familiar with the super hidden rule I couldn't find, Gambling Grumbles couldn't find and even the casino itself had no idea that exist and confirmed in chat clearly that there is no max bet rule

How many more people do you need to show you the simple and clear thing, the rule itself of 30% was not in the bonus terms, it was not in the terms of use and it was not in the full terms and condition, the casino chat also couldn't find it, I couldn't find it, Gambilng Grumbles who is Steve Russo couldn't find it.

Stop saying it was there, here is just another proof to show you how wrong you are

Pitxxx M 01:27:53 pm

how much is the deposit
i need to make
and 2nd, do you have any max betting rule when having a bonus?




Omar 01:28:43 pm

you can start with 10eur of course the more you deposit the better the bonus
and there's no restriction on the max bets




Pitxxx M 01:28:57 pm

ok
so if i deposit 20 E , i get 60 free spins as well




Omar 01:29:09 pm

exactly
just make sure you play the bonus in these games www.ca­sin­oro­om.c­om­/bo­nus­-games/




Pitxxx M 01:29:27 pm

oki

I have the full transcript with me.

The hidden rule is the reason you were black listed in Gambling Grumble, and this is the reason the chat confirmed there is no max bet.

Now to the rule itself. The rule is an impossible rule because if you apply it on the running balance if you are left with 0.5 and bet 0.5 and recover to lets say 200 and cashout you are not going to be paid.

As can be seen here, they applied the rule in the running balance while the rule should be applied on the starting balance (couldn't copy the log from email they sent but I am writing it here)

Starting balance was 893.97 bet was 200 total 22.37% of bonus which is fine then balance dropped
balance 693.97 bet was 200 28.82%
balance went down then to 493 then to 333 and bet was again 200 so they wrote 59.89% of balance.

This is again abusing their own hidden rule, the rule apply to the starting balance otherwise it is an impossible rule.

From every way you look it, the chat, the black listing in Gambling Grumbles, the fact threy added the rule to the bonus terms right after I let the know, the fact they abuse their own terms to their interest not to pay my winnings just show how wrong they did to me

posted on January 27, 2015.

http:/­/ww­w.c­asi­nor­oom.co­m/t­erm­sof­ser­vic­e/e­llm­ount/

The terms and conditions date from 2011, this constitutes the contract that you accepted when you signed up with us.

Given that your bets exceeded the threshold stipulated, we must enforce the rules.

Our rule is not a pick-and-choose rule, we apply it consistently, if we allow big bets with big bonuses, then we have to make sure the rules are followed.

You cannot justify your conduct on the grounds that you were not aware of these rules.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 27, 2015.

Here we go again, can you respond to live chat of Casino Room Chat Transcript saying there is no such rule, it is not me saying so, it is Casino Room saying so.

You say the rule was there since 2011 while you added the rule to the bonus terms right after I let u know it was missing.

In Casinomeister Forum you admit the rule is wrong and that you are going to amend the terms again very soon and here you say the rule is ok and I breached it.

You admit in Casinomeister forum it is an impossible rule for the player and that it is going to be change.

you ignore the fact the live chat confirmed there is no max bet rule.

you ignore the fact Gambling Grumbles black listed from this specific reason that the rule was simply impossible to find.

you abuse the rule by saying it applies on the running balance while in any casino and every casino 30% rule apply to the initial bonus or at this case balance.

Many casinos has 30% of bonus rule, but the 30% apply to the initial bonus credited and not 30% of the bonus at each minute of playing.

if bonus was reduced to 1 now player can play only 0.29 ?

you keep ignoring my points while in other forum you do answer other members saying yes the rule will be changed.

Please answer my points and not just repeat the wrong facts.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 27, 2015.

Imagine a casino that has a rule that max bet allowed is 30% of bonus. the player place many bets, some of them were of a dollar fifty. The casino sending an email sorry say we are not going to pay because the bonus balance went down to 2 at some point and you bet dollar fifty.

This is exactly what you did to me and you say I breached the rule ? how does it work for your casino ? inventing rules just in order not to pay me, this is the only way I can see it sorry.

ugla8m United Kingdom
posted on January 29, 2015.

The issue is solved they are going to pay

AskGamblers
posted on January 29, 2015.

Based on player's last comment, we consider this case as resolved and it is now officially closed.