Castle casino uses different excuses not to pay & took my winnings

posted on September 21, 2013.

I won at Castle Casino and them they removed my winnings, saying that I did not withdraw in a timely manner and they sent me the following email :

"Dear Peter,

I hope you are well.

Unfortunately due to the winnings you’ve accrued from a bonus provided at Castle Casino not being withdrawn the full balance will now be reverted back to the original deposit. You can view information on this in our terms and conditions which I’ve listed below for convenience:

11.8. Unless otherwise stated, all bonus money needs to be either used or the complete balance withdrawn within 21 days after being credited to the customer’s account. If these credits are not used, the full balance, including any winnings accrued, may be removed from the players account. No claim shall lie against the in the event the balance is forfeited in these circumstances.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to get in contact.

Thanks and best regards,

Alex Robinson"

I notified the casino that the system would not let me withdraw until they received my documents. And they sent the following email:

"Hi Peter,

Apologies for my slow response in this case.

I see your point here and in this case agree that the KYC delay was the reason for overstepping this timeframe which is fairly new, we need to refine our terms to ensure cases like this are taken into consideration. Given this circumstance, your account will be reinstated with its previous balance shortly and you should be able to withdraw without issues.

Enjoy the winnings and I hope to see you back at Castle Casino soon, we owe you a bonus on the house for the misunderstanding!

Kind Regards,

Robert Dunn"

After a few days my money was not returned to my account, I sent an email "Hi Robert

When can I expect my winnings placed back into my account? You said I would not have any issues with my withdrawal and yet the money has not been put back."

A few days later Robert Dunn emailed me with another excuse not to pay me. This was his email:

Dear Peter,

Thanks for your patience with my response.

The reason for the delay was that I noted your account was under investigation from our software team in a completely different scenario, therefore I had to delay this until it was concluded.

The investigation, which was to identify a group of players who have a set strategy to take advantage of special bonuses in order to cash out large amounts, has identified your account as that of a bonus abuser and therefore under term 11.1 all winnings will be voided and your deposit returned. You can see this term below:

11.1. All our promotions are designed for genuine players who may be interested in continuing membership and play at the casino and are happy to wager with and risk their own money. Promotions may be deemed void at any time to individuals or groups who are suspected to abuse or have a record of promotional abuse or fraud (charge backs) at or any of our affiliate merchants. Any winnings accrued by such individual or groups will be deemed void and withheld.

As you’ve previously mentioned complaining to the websites we partner with to provide these bonuses I’ve provided them with an outline of the game strategy used across yours and several similar accounts in advance. I’m happy to provide you directly with further information on our case if you’d like this.

Kind Regards,

Robert Dunn

They closed my account. This is a mistake and completely unfair!


posted on September 24, 2013.

Firstly let me state that the first part of the complaint, regarding the balance being removed after an unused bonus, is a completely separate scenario and which was resolved with this player and others it affected. This was a new term enacted just before the player joined and therefore there was a few errors (and I mean a few) in applying the rule which was enabled to be automatic due to acceptable reasons for delay (KYC documents), after these were discovered all balances were set back to the original state and paid (with this exception due to the given circumstance discovered), I can ask other players whom this was resolved for to vouch for this. This term is currently not being enforced and is being reviewed due to the error. Whilst I understand this issue was initially disconcerting for the player this is completely unrelated to the below.

With regards to the actual issue we've seen with this player, this was actually something which was brought to our attention after an audit from our software company which detailed a number of players whom shared several near identical patterns, as explained previously partially in the message from this player. These were claimed through exclusive deals on two sites in particular. Throughout a short period of time we experienced an above average number of new depositors claiming this bonus (based on previous rates), all using the same depositing method (irrelevant to the decision, but notable in my opinion), all claiming the same bonus and all with the exact same style of play, in terms of the betting ratio and volume of the board covered. These ratios would remain consistent not just throughout a few spins, but from the start to finish, with the broad explanation being high risk bets at the start (cutting personal risk using the bonus), then absolute minimal risk after this. I'm happy to provide specifics if requested.

Several players have won from these bonuses, several have lost, as with all exclusives we of course understand that we're exposed to a larger risk in exchange for a larger ratio of player acquisition, we will without doubt always honour payouts in that respect. However when events happen which provide calculable similarities, not counting anything aside gameplay despite the other factors, between a group of 5+ players in a short period of time using the same bonus, then there is clear enough signs of planned arbitrage and we have the right to take action.

If any members of Ask Gamblers have questions regarding this then I’m happy to address them.

Kind Regards,

Alex Robinson

posted on September 25, 2013.

Just excuses not to pay. Players read for yourselves at "http:­//w­ww.g­am­bli­ngg­rum­ble­s.c­om/­Rep­ort­s/C­ast­le-­Cas­ino­_A-­com­mon­-bu­t-w­ron­g-p­rac­tice"

"the accusation that some people shared information and then acted on it, is only one of the "bonus abuser" accusations that on line casinos use not to pay out winnings. Some say that the player is a "bonus abuser" because he only plays when bonuses are being offered. (That is like a department store refusing to give you what you bought because it feels that you only buy when it is offering sales.) Others call you a "bonus abuser" if you stop playing when you meet their required playthroughs. They set the rules -- if they want you to bet more then they should set higher playthrough requirements. If you live up to their rules, they have no real reason not to pay you.

Tomorrow, I could go to any casino in Las Vegas with 20 friends, have them all open players' club accounts, get whatever special offer is being made to new members, and hand each of them $1000 in front of the casino's Head of Security. All 20 of them could then go to the same kind of slot machine and bet the exact same amounts (or head to the blackjack tables and play with the same strategy). Nobody at that casino would complain or accuse me -- or any of my 20 friends -- of cheating. Those who win would collect their winnings and, win or lose, we would all be welcome back.

Try something like that on the internet and you will all be accused of being bonus abusers. Well, not quite. Only those who win will face that accusation and have their play declared invalid and their deposits returned. The casino will not write to anyone who loses and tell him that his play was invalid and it is returning his money. I know that, you know that, and the casinos know that. In the short term, the casinos are getting a lot of money from acting in this way. In the long term, they may well find themselves out of business because nobody will trust any on line casino enough to play there."

I continued to bet big, 100 per spin, even after I won!

posted on September 27, 2013.

We’ve spoken to the player directly and also dealt with complaints submitted through third party websites as per the partial extract posted in the last message, which is a that site editors particular opinion.

We’ll continue to respond any concerns which are raised by the player provides.

Kind Regards,

Alex Robinson

posted on September 29, 2013.

Alex you are not being honest when you say I play like other players. You can see I never placed a bet below 100 per spin, which is a large bet. I still had risk involved, you act like I played 1 or 2 per spin, which is not the case.

Tell me please, how was I to bet to make you happy and satisfy what ever term you said I broke?

How much per spin would I have had to bet for you have considered it risky, since you accuse me of "cutting personal risk"?

You do not agree that 100 per spin is risky?

posted on September 30, 2013.

Come on Alex are you serious? You did not address any of my questions to you. You only copied and pasted your previous response which is a bunch of BS, as is your reason for not paying me what I won playing fair, unlike you. It is obvious to me by your lack of response that you know you are wrong to keep my money!

posted on October 3, 2013.

I’m unsure what you mean by your last response, we haven’t copied and pasted any previous replies throughout this chain.

The amount placed per bet is irrelevant to this matter, although once again this is universal between the identified accounts. What we’re contesting is the actual percentage of the board covered and the specific bets placed in order to meet the requirements (as well as in the initial bet pattern) as mentioned previously, which are consistent amongst several accounts are what has drawn us to this conclusion.

We’ve paid all players who have won through this bonus with no question at all, however when calculable similarities provide a clear indication of planned arbitrage, which we believe to be the case, we’re within our rights to take action and this decision will not be reversed.

Kind Regards,

Alex Robinson

posted on October 5, 2013.

What are you saying??? That other people played like me and you paid them but you refuse to pay me? And what the hell do other people have to do with me anyway? I played fair, I bet fair, what does it matter how much of the board I played? You owe me that money!

posted on October 7, 2013.

That is incorrect, we’re saying that we have no problem paying out winnings when they’ve been won fairly. However in this instance we believe this is planned usage of a strategy between several different players was used in order to abuse the casino, which is restricted in our terms and conditions.

We’re currently liaising with The Players Online Gambling Guide, who has offered to be an independent adjudicator upon complaint from this player. After a non-disclosure agreement has been put in place we’ll be providing this party with all the information requested (aside sensitive information such as names etc.) on this network of players in order to help us analyse this situation and write a report. We believe the abuse here will be clear and hereafter will be offering this information to any sites that complaints are posted on.

Kind Regards,

Alex Robinson

posted on October 9, 2013.

your report means nothing! you know I won fair playing fair!