It’s rather convienent that they chose not to pay on the big win, yet they paid out on the smaller ones no problem. I would sure like to know when Bella came to the conclusion that she was under age. If she put her correct date of birth on her application when joining the casino, then they just out right stole from her. If this player was losing and kept on losing, there would never be a word said from Bella. Bottom line here, I think they knew her age from the get go and decide not to pay only when she hits a big win is just plain thievery. I can see if affiliates here think this player should not be paid for reasons of it might hurt our cause in legislation as paying her would in essence be a concession to condoning underage gambling. That, I can understand but for those of you who think she shouldn’t be paid because of some BS clause they put in their T&Cs that gives them an out not to pay when a player hits big, well thats not right. Casinos just don’t overlook a players age, they knew it the whole time and this was just a way for them not to pay. I would not feel this way if they shut her down from the beginning because she was under age. But they didnt do that, they knowingly took deposits and processed nominal payouts knowing in the long run that this player would be a profit center for them unless she hits big which is highly unlikely. I think they knew from the start that she was under age and this is merely just a reason not to pay.
‘