Two processing ways not explained clearly for deposit with credit card

[Jian132]

Recently I noticed that when a casino accepts deposit by credit card, there may be two different ways of processing that a player had better be aware of in advance. And that is: some casinos issue a simple request to your bank for a credit payment, while others ask to your bank a cash advance from your credit account. The difference may be more or less important according to each person's situation, because a cash advance implies not only 2.5% of commission, but also a consequent high rate interest on the amount of cash involved, while a credit payment has none of that and offers just all conveniences of a credit card in its basic meaning. The worst side of this is that casinos usually don't explane clearly in which way they will process your deposit by credit card (don't expect the support members of a casino to clarify this point at live chat, because they will all confirm that the request will be issued for credit payment, not cash advance). So you may end up having to pay some money to your bank because of commission and interest without being aware of it in advance! I myself have so far made deposits at various online casinos with credit card and it has always been processed as a simple credit payment. In my case, I have always had an agreement with my bank not to accept any request of cash advance, because I know I will never use my credit card for that. Thanks to that, when my bank recently blocked requests for my deposits from three new casinos where I signed up, I came to notice the other way of processing by calling my bank. I hope this information may be helpful for some of you.

 

[pinnit2015]

Surely a payment to a casino is governed by the terms of the credit card company? All credit cards I have clearly state that any gambling transactions are treated as cash advances and hence the fee. For the card company it’ll be irrelevant then how the casino treats it?

 

I had a cool thing going back in 2006. Card company treated as purchase. All purchases got 2 or so percent cash back. And the casino didn’t have a x1 playthrough. So... deposit. Withdraw. Deposit. Withdraw. Got about 2 or 3 k cash back before they cottoned on. Apparently that was abusing the spirit of the cashback. I pointed out it didn’t breach their terms and conditions. Result? Paid out and they closed my account.

[Jian132]

Surely a payment to a casino is governed by the terms of the credit card company? All credit cards I have clearly state that any gambling transactions are treated as cash advances and hence the fee. For the card company it’ll be irrelevant then how the casino treats it?

 

 

Thanks a lot pinnit2015! So, it's me who have omitted noticing this statement of credit card company and taken my luck as granted by mistake.

[cocopop3011]

I've never deposited using a credit card neither do I agree that casinos should accept a credit card as a method of payment , imo no casino should accept it but just my opinion of course. I've never really thought about how my credit card company would treat the purchasen but a cash advance would be a miuch interest rate.

[pinnit2015]

Thanks a lot pinnit2015! So, it's me who have omitted noticing this statement of credit card company and taken my luck as granted by mistake.

Yeah they specifically mention it now...

 

Years ago they treated it as any online purchase but they, well most of them, changed it 6/7 years ago now to being the same as taking cash out of a machine etc.

[Jian132]

In fact, I have no problem with debiting my account immediately to pay my gambling. But different debit methods can cost more or less or even none. Debit Card (instead of credit card) or eCheck, for instance, cost nothing, while Instadebit may cost something. I suppose no one would prefer a method which costs something to a method which costs nothing. I wonder why not every casino supports costless deposit methods. It would be great if someone can compile a list of all possible methods with their different charactaristics, advantages and disadvanges, etc. 

[pinnit2015]

I think one of the factors is that some methods are more 'fraud friendly'. I know that Skrill came into a lot criticism from some casinos for this. There will also be the element of cost to the casino - be interested to see some unit costs for how much each transaction cost the casino.

 

Personally I'm not a fan of e wallets - their fee's are frankly ridiculous. And i've had my withdrawal held up several times, so they're a no no to me. 

[cocopop3011]

I think one of the factors is that some methods are more 'fraud friendly'. I know that Skrill came into a lot criticism from some casinos for this. There will also be the element of cost to the casino - be interested to see some unit costs for how much each transaction cost the casino.

 

Personally I'm not a fan of e wallets - their fee's are frankly ridiculous. And i've had my withdrawal held up several times, so they're a no no to me. 

 

Held up how?

[pinnit2015]

Held up how?

Bit like paypal used to do 'subject to review due to activity on account'. Meant that couldn't log in until it was concluded. Or whatever that meant. 30 days?

 

When you ask what it was about, they also refuse to answer....hence they've been consigned to history