Ag Awards
Notifications
Login
You are about to go to the Italian version of AskGamblers
Kindly note that some features such as complaint service and forum are currently available only on the international version.
You are about to go to the German version of AskGamblers
Kindly note that some features such as complaint service and forum are currently available only on the international version.

BitStarz Casino - Failed to Compensate According to Games Stated Pay Table

RESOLVED
Posted on

I'm submitting this claim on askgamblers after submitting it prior on another site to no avail. The reason I am submitting it here is that Bitstarz has unfairly compensated other players who had the same issues as I state here, yet have denied me compensation and that does not sit well with me at all, as I'm a loyal Bitstarz depositor. This complaint is being submitted in direct response to how I've been treated by Olle, Bitstarz Online Rep. The other players who submitted similar claims, did so AFTER I submitted mine. Bitstarz and more specifically, their online Casino Rep, Olle, has continually and intentionally denied me any compensation on this issue, after unfairly compensating the other said players of Aztec Magic (and other Bgaming slots) which I believe is wrong (and unfair) as my claim is legit as you will see below. I can provide proof of other players saying they were compensated by Olle and Bitstarz upon request, but have not included the proof in this complaint for clarity.

So after going through my screenshots I found that I had two rounds that indeed had not payed out correctly according to the pay table, as they both had multiple wilds in the winning combinations.

Both rounds were spun within 7 minutes of each other on the same day. And in both rounds, the lines paid correctly if there were no wilds involved, but as the pay table rules state, if 2 wilds are in a winning combination it multiplies by 40 and if 3 are involved it multiplies by 200 (please see enclosed pay table screenshot).

On Screenshot 1 -

My Line 3 win paid 28.14 mBTC but should have actually paid .35 BTC

Line 3 = 125 x 40 x .07 = 350 mBTC or .35 BTC

Total win should = 350 mBTC or .35 BTC.

Total win actually paid out to me = 28.14 mBTC or .02814 BTC

On Screenshot 2 -

This round paid me 19.15 mBTC or .01915 BTC, but should have actually paid me 120.90 mBTC or .1209 BTC

Line 2 = 200 x .05 = 10 mBTC
Line 8 = 50 x 40 x .05 = 100 mBTC
Line 6 = 5 x 40 x .05 = 10 mBTC
Line 4 = 6 x 3 x .05 = .9 mBTC

Total win should = 120.90 mBTC or .1209 BTC

Total win actually paid out to me = 19.15 mBTC or .01915 BTC

To Conclude -
I should be receiving .4709 BTC as the adjusted win for both rounds. Being a loyal Bitstarz player, I trust that Bitstarz will do the right thing as they are always quick to help in any way they can. With a lot of other Casinos these days not being the most honest places to play, it's good to know that Bitstarz is still a place you can trust and feel good about spending your hard earned BTC there.

I just hope to resolve this soon, and am curious to see if they try to credit me with no multipliers instead of the stated multipliers, because as the rules state, 2 wilds in the winning combination is 40x while 3 wilds is 200x. And ***it doesn't say anything about the wilds having to be all in a row*** so I should receive .4709 BTC instead of the 47.29 mBTC I got from both the wins.

Posted on 01 November 2018

Dear all,

Allow me to present the BitStarz side of the story in regards to the complaint above.

This all started as a complaint on LCB where there was a dispute in regards to a wording of a BGaming Game. We spoke to BGaming about this, and they believed the wording was clear enough and didn't wish to give any compensation to the player. As we believed the wording could have been a bit better, we decided to compensate this particular player out of our own pockets and inform in the thread of the fact that the slot was paying out correctly, just that the wording was a bit poor.

As there's nothing wrong with the RTP or the payout of the game and the Game Provider believes that there's nothing wrong with the wording, I don't think we can be held liable to compensate the OP of this complaint. We made an exception for the first player as a goodwill and even though the OP of this complaint was aware that there was nothing wrong, he continued to play the slots from BGaming.

We're concerned about the genuine intention of the complaint as the player was indeed aware of there being nothing wrong with the slot, and still continues to play the games till this day. We're also quite puzzled about the comments made by the OP just recently where he stated:

"Bitstarz still hasn't changed the paytable wording to reflect the subtraction of the multiplier wording!! I know what which game I'm gonna go play right now :)"

In summary from our end. There's nothing wrong with the slot itself and the RTP, and BGaming believe that the wording of their payable holds up. The OP of this complaint was aware that there's nothing wrong and i still till this day playing the BGaming games with what we believe are non-genuine intentions in hope of getting an extra payout (according to the forum posts of the OP).

Hence, we do not believe we're liable to compensate the player.

Regards,

BitStarz

Posted on 01 November 2018

Edit: As the screenshot did not display. I'm adding the forum post from the player which states the above comment.

https:­//w­ww.s­cr­een­cas­t.c­om/­t/T­xRM­EXipq

Posted on 01 November 2018

Ok, let me say this straight away, yes, this is about an extra payout, which I believe my situation warrants and I will go into detail below (and subsequent screenshots) as to what I mean by this. And second, yes, I continue to play Aztec Magic till this day, as I love that game. I won't deny either of those claims made by Olle. What's wrong with this situation being about those two things?? My problem with situation lies with Bitstarz compensating multiple players for the ambiguous wording for not only Aztec Magic, but now twice for Desert Treasure, and I get denied any compensation for the same situation, when I submitted my complaint before two of the three players who got compensated. Please see screenshot 4 that shows the second player stating he got compensated for ambiguous wording in Desert Treasure. He also states that a third player got compensated for the exact same complaint as I have filed here, but I don't know the game involved. And lastly let me say that I still love playing at Bitstarz, they are one of the best out there, I just thought it was wrong that they have in the past and still do today, compensate other players for this situation with the ambiguous pay table wording for some Bgaming slots. Actually, the pay table is not even really ambiguous TBH. It is very, very clear on how the multipliers should be applied to round wins when the pay table states if 2 wilds are in a winning combination it multiplies by 40 and if 3 are involved it multiplies by 200 (please see enclosed pay table screenshot). The pay table does not state where the wilds need to land for the multipliers to be applied, because if they meant it that way, it should be stated as such in the pay table. Why would any reasonable person think otherwise?? Any reasonable person would know how this multiplier gets applied to round wins. I don't know why Olle from Bitstarz keeps questioning my "intentions" in regards to this situation either. Well, let me clear that up now, my "intentions" are to get some compensation for this situation, just like the other three players have gotten. You know what, I'd settle for the 120.09 mBTC for just one of the wins, as I feel like since the other three players got compensated and I did not for the exact same situation with my complaints being filed and discussed before two of the three other players filed their complaints, that I deserve at least that.

Posted on 01 November 2018

I forgot to say something about the comment I made in regards to the wording not being changed for Desert Treasure and how I "knew which game I was gonna go play". That comment was an off the cuff, tongue-in-cheek, ha-ha-wink-wink, I was messing around comment. I was being semi sarcastic and semi joking around when I said that, but forgot that sarcasm and the sort aren't reflected well in written words. It probably doesn't seem that way given my tone, but I assure you, I was tongue in cheek messing around when I said that. Maybe it was the wrong thing to say at the time now that I have hindsight on my side to allow me the clarity to think about it some more, but I said it and I needed to clear that up a bit.

Posted on 01 November 2018

Hi there,

So, I think the definitions and wording here is slightly problematic. I don't think we're talking about a compensation here, but rather a goodwill. As there's no error with the game itself, I believe it's perhaps a little bit unfair to call it a compensation, but rather a bonus or cash amount that is given at our own discretion to certain players.

The way I see it here is the following. According to BGaming, there's nothing wrong with the payout of the game, and nothing wrong with the wording. Hence they're not liable to give the player anything extra. If there was, the player in question would have a legitimate claim with BGaming. However, I think it's rather far-fetched to demand a compensation from BitStarz in this case. I find it hard to see where it would be justified to get a payment from us, as we are not to blame here (if anyone).

As this is a goodwill that has been given out in the past and not a compensation for any wrongdoing, we are not liable nor obligated to give a particular player some funds. We've decided to give goodwill to some similar cases, but that is at our own discretion and is nothing that has been refunded by BGaming, but a goodwill certain players.

My example here would be that if a VIP player has some negative experiences in a game (nothing wrong with the game but it got stuck or something similar), we wouldn't be liable to give the player a compensation if there wasn't anything wrong with the game, but we can choose to give the player a goodwill for the bad experience, this is the way we've treated these cases in the past.

I would wait for an official statement from BGaming in this case if AG wishes more information for a verdict, but I ultimately believe that this is not a dispute with us.

Kind Regards,

BitStarz

AskGamblers
Posted on 01 November 2018

Dear mushroomjazz,

After carefully reviewing your case, requesting and assessing all the relevant details and facts from the affected operator, AskGamblers Complaints Team reached to the conclusion that you have already been given a satisfactory explanation as well as a justified and fair response to your claims on behalf the BitStarz management.

Moreover, our team have been in contact with the affected gaming vendor - BGaming and their team kindly provided us with full information on the case. It appears that back in August you have already been explained in details from BGaming representatives that the game rounds which you officially disputed have paid out correctly and according to the relevant game's paytable and rules.

Based on the above, AskGamblers Complaints Team consider the complaint as resolved and the case is being closed. Should you have any further claims, please make sure to forward these to the gaming provider directly or to the relevant regulatory body/testing agency which would be the only competent authority to investigate further this case.

By subscribing you are certifying that you are over the age of 18.

Sign up for +350 No Deposit Spins!

This offer is not applicable to residents of Great Britain.

By subscribing you are certifying that you have reviewed and accepted our updated Privacy and Cookie Policy