Dear Sir/Madam,
I begin my complaint with an extract from a review I read on Cosmik casino:
At the end of the day it’s all about the fun you had playing and the care provided, and I have only good things to say about them both. It will be a fantastic experience and in my opinion well worth taking a spin at.
Well you can imagine how quickly my delight at winning 2500 Euro on a scratch card turned to utter dismay when I was told that my win had been revoked for “irregular play.” A further email from Cosmik elaborated this as being:
• Placing total bets equal to or greater than 30% of the value of the bonus credited to the player account, prior to the wager requirement for that bonus having been met.
• Placing total bets equal to or greater than 30% of the value of the deposit.
• Using the double-up feature to increase bet values. “Total bets” is defined as the sum of individual bets (lines, chips, hands, etc.) within a round, i.e., the total bet amount when clicking the “spin” or “play” or equivalent button
Kind Regards,
Verification Team
I contested this ruling on the ground that I never bet more than 30% of my account deposits. The only time I made a substantial bet (100 pounds at most) was after I had won 2500 – which I contend to be a deposit in my account and therefore clears me of any breach. I arrive at the view of the winnings as a deposit through the ordinary definition of the word: “a sum of money palced into an account.” The winnings were indeed placed into my account and I gambled on the assumption that the account was available to be to gamble. In terms of the conventions of online gambling, many online casinos will direct gamblers to “reversing a withdrawal” if they attempt to make a deposit while awaiting a pending withdrawal (ie. of winnings). In short, Cosmik offer no grounds for why I shouldn't assume a “win” to be a deposit into my account – for, if it isn’t, then how can it be withdrawn. I cannot withdraw something if it hasn't in the first place been deposited into my account.
• Thus, before the effective deposit of my winnings into my account I never bet more than 30% of my deposit. I have attached a game history to show this (over some 3000 bets on slots and blackjack tables)
• Secondly, there is no suggestion of fraud or suspicious play - Jeff the account manager said in an email to me that no one at the casino believes i was acting suspiciously or fraudalently at any time. I insert a copy of the email from Jeff, Cosmik’s well-known accounts manager, below
Hi,
Sorry to be late getting back to you.
I have put your case this afternoon to the management of the cosmik.
I am also waiting to hear what they have to say on the matter.
There is no point me going into the in's and outs of things. But i can assure you, that nobody in the casino, thought or thinks you were doing anything fraudulent.
Regards
Jeff
Does this not beg the question? No suggestion at all of any dodgy gambling and yet the winnings have been revoked? Does this not arouse some suspicion about the purpose of the fabled paragragh 103 or 30% rule as some call it?
If Jeff’s acknowledgement of my sincerity raised some eybrows, the the advice from Cosmik’s own customer support officer suggests that there is a history of “using” this clause against ordinary gamblers. Matthais advised me to fight against decisions from “accounting.” Why would a customer support clerk counsel against their own accounting department? I insert the relevant conversation below.
Me: I apologise if i have been terse. I feel like i have walked into a nightmare
Matthias: hang on, I'm looking for his email
Me: thank you
Matthias: not at all, I can absolutely understand you and I sometimes feel like we have to fight against decisions from accounting
Matthias: you can reach Jeff at [email protected]
Me: Thanks
Matthias: I apologize for this experience Daniel
Me: Hope your night is better than mine
Me: Cheers
Matthias: cheers Daniel
• Thirdly, when I asked the customer service representative – in this case Amelie - whether i was eligible to play Blackjack after my winnings had been revoked she responded, "of course," suggesting that she herself was either: a) unaware of this clause or b) deliberately obscure and not forthcoming to gamblers about the existence of such a clause. I attach below a copy of that conversation:
• Me: Amelie am i allowed to play on blackjack?
• Amelie: of course, why not?
• Me: because the minimum bet is more than 30% of what i have deposited from my credit card
• Amelie: well in this case not, unfortunately :(
• Me: Ok.
• Me: Cheers
• Me: Have a good night
• Amelie: cheers, Daniel
• Amelie: thx, you too :)
• Fourthly, my win was advertised extensively on the website for a number of days including after my winnings had been revoked. Mathais said that the advertisement could not be removed manually – in which case other gamblers have been deliberately mislead and a notice should be placed on the website correcting the false advertising. Why is it that they can manually revoke my winnings but not withdraw an advertisement which is falsely luring gamblers to believe that people are winning”big” on their site?
• Further, Cosmik refunded me only one of my deposits despite cancelling all my wins. The initial two deposits of 20 pounds were never refunded. The refund that they gave was into my gambling account and not back to my credit card even though they knew I couldn’t withdraw the amount because it was less than 100 pounds. In effect, they were locking my money into their website, knowing full well that I have no choice but to gamble it again and hoping I might win over a 100 pounds to withdraw it. But more pressingly, this raises a contradiction in their own interpretation of rule 103 or the 30% rule:
If Cosmik regard the transfer of 20 pounds/24 euros into my account as a deposit or reestablishing a deposit, then surely the transfer of a 2500 win from Cosmik into that same account is a deposit, too. If I am only person who can deposit into my account, then the money should have been returned directly to my credit card and I should be the one to enact or make a deposit – something which Cosmik claims they cannot do-ie. make a deposit).
Quite Clearly, by Cosmik’s own reasoning, there was a 2500 euro deposit into my account when I won the money, so in fact I never breached the Casino rule by gambling 100 pounds on blackjack after that deposit was made.
By way of conclusion, I return to the original « glowing » review that i read about Cosmik on the Reviewed Casinos website.
At the end of the day it’s all about the fun you had playing and the care provided, and I have only good things to say about them both. It will be a fantastic experience and in my opinion well worth taking a spin at.
Does this sound like fun? And providing care? Or a fanstatstic experience? In fact, given that Jeff acknowledged that no accusation of foul or fraudulent play was being made against me, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that this is just another instance of a bully beating up on the smallest kid in the yard. There is nothing I can do. But I hope I have been heard!
Resolved
£40
