Rushmore Casino doesn't pay and ignores e-mails

RESOLVED
posted on May 12, 2010.

Dear AskGamblers team,


I have a serious issue with Rushmore Casino which started in December 2008.


You can find the detailed description of the problem here:

http:/­/mb.wi­nne­ron­lin­e.c­om/­sho­wth­rea­d.h­tml­?t=­39248


There is a discussion about my issue in these two forums:

http:/­/ww­w.g­amb­lin­gin­dus­try­ass­oci­ati­on.c­om­/fo­rum­s/s­how­thr­ead.ph­p?t­=2584

http:/­/ww­w.g­pwa.or­g/f­oru­m/r­ush­mor­e-c­asi­no-­ste­als­-74­44-­no-­ade­qua­te-­exp­lan­ati­on-­giv­en-­188­956.html


I have also used the mediation service at gambli­ngg­rum­ble­s.com, the casino was contacted by Steve Russo but Rushmore was still not willing to solve the issue. As a result, Steve has removed Rushmore Casino from the Recommended Casinos list.


Here is Steve's report:

http:/­/ww­w.g­amb­lin­ggr­umb­les.co­m/R­epo­rts­/Ru­shm­ore­-Ca­sin­o:N­o-p­aym­ent­-bu­t-f­or-­a-d­iff­ere­nt-­reason


Also, two other webmasters have issued a warning about Rushmore Casino because of my issue (one of them advised me to post a complaint here at askgamblers.com):

http:/­/on­lin­e_c­asi­no_­new­s.h­und­red­per­cen­tga­mbl­ing.co­m/2­010­/05­/ru­shm­ore­-ca­sin­o-t­hef­t-w­inn­ing­s-w­ith­-no.html

http:/­/ga­mbl­ing­-mo­jo-­cas­ino­-co­mmu­nit­y.s­oci­alg­o.c­om/­mem­ber­s/p­rof­ile­/1/­blo­g-v­iew­/bl­og_­36.htm


If you need, I can also send my ID and address proof documents.


Thanks for your time and let me know if you need any more information.


Best regards,

Balazs

posted on May 18, 2010.

Hi,



The meeting with management and the CEO has taken place and I have been updated as to the outcome of the talks and re-assessments of the situation.



Along with the reports from our investigators, just as importantly, the players casino account was looked into again to assess if we had made the correct decision in not paying this player.



The final decision has been not to pay this player - As mentioned previously, the player had been refunded his deposits back to him in order that as per our terms and conditions, his winnings were voided, but deposits returned to him.



In regards to the player not residing at the address which was given upon sign-up at the casino - This is a problem which as per our terms and conditions, means that we have the right to void all player's winnings and ban his account. This can be seen in term 5 at: http:/­/ww­w.r­ush­mor­eon­lin­e.c­om/­Ter­msA­ndC­ond­itions



Rushmore Casino reserves the right, in its total discretion, to void any winnings and withhold any balance in Rushmore Casino account under any of the following circumstances: ... If you provide false and or misleading information used to open Rushmore Casino account.



Regardless of the player stating that he had to sign up with his mother's address due to the law in his country of not being able to register a rented address, there were many other concerns we had about his account, so even if we could get this verified that this is true, it unfortunately, wouldn't mean that he could be paid out.



At the time of sending the private investigators to a dozen or so players in Europe, we also had our tech and anti-fraud team look in to these suspicious players to see if there were any further connections or similarities on top of what we had noticed between them in the beginning.



The similarities we had noticed in the beginning were: These players signing up within the same time frame as each other, using Moneybookers to deposit and withdraw via, redeeming the same bonuses as each other, playing only blackjack, depositing the exact same amount as each other, winning exactly the same amounts as each other with no exceptions and being in exactly the same age range as each other (within a range of 6 years).



Further investigations by our tech and anti-fraud team discovered that also these players had extremely similar game play as each other such as betting increments and number of bets, also on each log on to the casino, they showed these similarities.



We have deemed that this is a fraud ring which was operating which is either and/or using some sort of software and/or bonus abuse technique in order to accumulate the same winnings each time - With each log on to the casino, nearly exactly the same amount of bets were placed in almost the same time-frame of log in session on the casino.



We feel that the outcome of the various investigations that have taken place give us a solid basis in not paying the player and we hope that you understand that this is our final decision.



Kind regards,

Louise

posted on May 20, 2010.

Dear AskGamblers team,



First, I would like to point out that the response of Rushmore is in contradiction with their previous responses. Here is an earlier response of the casino:



"This player was investigated and the address was visited that he had provided on sign-up. He did not reside at the address which he had indicated, due to this we refunded his deposits rather than paying out the winnings. He was certified with us also but due to several accounts in the region coming back as having used stolen identities we had to rely on private investigators to check the addresses provided. If a player did not reside and an address they had provided we considered the account fraudulent and did not proceed further with investigating them."



Here they admit that they didn't investigate further after the address issue which means that they don't have any other reasons of not paying. They specifically state here that the reason is the address problem and that they didn't investigate further.



Moreover, they have not mentioned in the past that they also have other reasons, they have always kept repeating that the reason is that the address is not mine. Also, Steve Russo, the mediator at Gambling Grumbles informed me that it is clear that they were just making up the part about connections with other players because they have not mentioned this to him until he pointed out that the address issue is a weak excuse. Then they suddenly came back with this other "reason".



As for the address issue: "the player stating that he had to sign up with his mother's address due to the law in his country of not being able to register a rented address" - this is total nonsense. First, this has nothing to do with the law in my country, I have never said anything like that. Second, the address is _my_ permanent address and not just my mother's. I have not provided "false and misleading" information because the address that I used when I registered at the casino is my permanent, official address since 1992, it is registered at every official place, written in my government ID and it is verifiable anytime. My identity and address was verified by the investigator when I met with him face-to-face in October 2009.



As for the "similarities", the bonus was blackjack bonus and it was time-specific. So, obviously the other players who claimed this bonus must have played at the same time and same game. As for the other similarites: I encourage Rushmore that they should show my gameplay history to you, because I played independently and I don't know anybody who played this bonus. There might be a "fraud ring" but I was not part of this. They speak about their investigations in general, and not specifically about my case - it is possible that they found these "other similarities" between some players but this just doesn't apply to me. That's why I suggest that they should show the details of my account to you, because that would prove that they have no serious reason for non-payment.



Finally, I would like to quote a comment from a member of the Gambling Industry Association forum:



"Two points I wanted to comment on. One, why even bother with the investigator at all? If proof of actual identity wasn't the main objective...but they suspected some sort of tampering, or fraud, then what difference would it make if Embalu was who he said he was? Makes zero sense to me, lol.



Second....created similar results amongst the group? If the casino said anything even remotely close to that....then they are implying that their software can be tampered with. And that there was no "random" play here. And all I can say to that is.....WTF?



I'm gonna bow out of the public debate which I KNOW is going to ensue, but man...implying that the software can be fiddled with by outside sources? That would be the story of the decade....every bit as big as Absolute Poker/superuser accounts."



Best regards,

Balazs

posted on May 20, 2010.

I will get back to you next week once the link you have sent me has been looked at by upper management.



Kind regards,



Louise

posted on May 28, 2010.

I hope you are well.


I would just like to let you know that we are in further talks with the player again and will update you as to any news regarding possible changes to the outcome of further verification attempts of the player.


I will be in touch either way to let you know the outcome.


I have emailed you from my personal work email due to out other email system not receiving emails from you successfully.


Thanks,

Louise.

posted on May 28, 2010.

I hope you are well.


I would just like to let you know that we are in further talks with the player again and will update you as to any news regarding possible changes to the outcome of further verification attempts of the player.


I will be in touch either way to let you know the outcome.


I have emailed you from my personal work email due to out other email system not receiving emails from you successfully.


Thanks,

Louise.

posted on June 3, 2010.

Sorry, I have been out from the office for a few days, plus, when we first got back in touch with the player to ask that he provide us further documentation, he had first of all provided incorrect information so this had taken some time to deal with.


I come with good news however! The player had been paid the remainder of his balance to his Moneybookers account. This was sent 15 minutes ago to him and he has been emailed to notify him of this and explain the amount he received.


We were extremely certain that his case was fraud but after further extensive investigation, he has cleared himself if this. He was very co-operative with us and showed us a lot of his information such as bank statements and Moneybookers screen shots, so we feel pretty good to have cleared him of what was suspected of him.


This can be made public knowledge now.


All the best.


Thanks,


Louise.