- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The message is pretty clear.
Quote:determination of the legality of real money casino play is the Player’s sole responsibility. By placing real wagers, the Player warrants that he/she is legally able to do so within his/her jurisdictionI suspect this clause was recommended by their legal team so that the CASINO couldnt be charged for aiding and abetting in the US or other territories where players might be in violation of local laws or ordinances.
Now, wheather they are still obligated to pay winnings or not is another story. I dont believe this term in and of itself is saying that they wont pay players, it’s saying they arent responsible for dertiming the legality of play in a geographic area.
Ok, i have a question,
This is a important issue and i can see both sides, but my question is this,
when you first signup at any casino, you have to register your name, and age.
Did this kid lie about his age? did he put 19 or 21?
If he lied about his age, game over, they can always say that because it was such a big win, that his account got looked into which i am sure they do to all of us if we win something big, cause if they can avoid paying, they will.
So if he gave the the ammunition to use against himself, its his fault.
But, if he put his legal age and was honest. Then they are 100% wrong, if they want to put that you have to go by your jurisdictions age limit for gaming. thats fine, but they better make thier software capable of picking up on any lieing right from the start, otherwise they are breaking the laws by taking a minors money.
this is one reason why the damn government has ammunition to use against online gaming, and it is frustrating to say the least, we do not need to be giving them any more info to use against this issue, or we all will be shut down.
If your not of legal age, then don’t gamble, plain and simple, and the casinos, need to make sure that thier customers are of legal age, if they are going to use that as a reason not to pay!
triple777s
One thing that just dawned on me….
I wouldnt publish this conversation all over the internet as it may tend to reinforce Goodlattes argument that online gambling is being used by under age players! 😮 😮 😮
Ok, I will have to read thread….
Doh!!! Here is what eCogra responded and I tend to agree with their assessment. Plus the players deposits were refunded. While I am sure this is disapointing to the player this is exactly what would happen at any reputable land based casino also
Quote:I have investigated your query with the casino and have found that the reason you have not been paid your full cash-in amounts is that the casino has determined that you have not reached the legal age to gamble in your jurisdiction, Las Vegas. As such the casino has followed their Terms and Conditions and voided all play on your account and refunded your deposits.Both eCOGRA and the Casino are committed to Responsible Gaming and take the issue of under-age gambling very seriously. eCOGRA requires players to be of legal gambling age in their home jurisdictions . The casino’s Terms and Conditions reflect this and I have copied the relevant sections of this for you;
damiandunlap wrote:They decided to steal from her after she won big. She had already cash out a few times.This is what bothers me. I am all for not paying underage players. Period.
Not paying them after they cashed out a number of times already – that’s not right.
She should have never been paid in the first place.
I have been having some probs with this group as well, but I do have to say they paid the player back for all the deposits she has made, I feel they have done what they should have there.
BUT what is to happen now if say…500 players from the US come forward now that are in the age range of 18 to 20 and they all want all the money back they have deposited in the past, would Bella pay them all? It would have been best if they just paid out her winnings and be done with it.
Hi, just curious in a case like this how will it affect the affiliate. When someone is taken out of play will he lose any profits they have already received. and a void any Negative Balances
thank mikeI felt for the player initially because she won and gets nothing. But I have to agree that since she was only 18, she should have not played in the first place. Where is it legal to play at the casinos if you are 18? Why did the casino allow her to SIGN UP in the first place? I think the casino is at fault 65% whereas she is at fault the remainder. They are a company and should have security measures in place on INITIAL sign up, not X deposits and X withdrawals later.
The girl was not playing in a land casino.
She downloaded and put her age, dob, address, got paid out 3 times, deposited 17 times.
No one noticed the player was technically underage via some whacked out logic proffered by the onland gambling centre of the world, ruling upon online gambling. Not until she cashed out 10k+, which triggered further checks under US money laundering laws.
The players seal ruled against her on the basis of the 19 year old is underage due to Nevada law. G4 ruled so for them, ecogra could not decide I guess.
G4 has 3 directors.
# (Kevin Farrel Roberts, http://www.gamblingtherapy.org)
# (Thomas Nilsson, ACE Sweden)
# (Pieter Remmers, Assissa Consultancy Europe, Amsterdam )Nevada law bars all residents from online gaming. Not all Nevada players are being refused payouts.
# The good people of gamblingtherapy etc have this one right on their level.
# The online casino industry has not been represented correctly by ecogra.
# The player(s) have not been represented properly on this one.A lot of ppl are expressing concern that she was 18+. However, if you look at Bella Vegas, and just about any other MGS site, you’ll see a big “18” symbol circled in red prominently displayed on their main page!! What does that mean?
Besides, she also lives in Nevada, which specifically does not allow online gambling. I’m afraid that this is an indication that Bella Vegas will “cherry-pick” which “laws” it will honor, and which it will not.
Will they choose not to pay anyone from Nevada, after they win a big amount? The technology is available to prohibit registration from anyone meeting any given set of criteria. They chose not to use that technology, but will now choose not to pay when it suits them. But they will accept deposits. This, in any light, is dishonest.sneaky.gif
A lot of casino webmasters only react when things cut into there income. But dont react when casinos out right steal from players, which will hurt everyone in the end
exactly. And yes Prof, it is already all over the net. After first reading about it i was shocked I hadn’t heard about it here. This happened some time ago.
Besides, she also lives in Nevada, which specifically does not allow online gambling.
well I specifically and violently disagree with any law that invades the privacy of my own home and tells me what I can or can’t do; as long as I’m not hurting anyone else in a direct and present manner. Meaning don’t tell me you have the right to come into my home and tell me I can’t gamble because it might at some point later on hurt my family because we suddenly end up in hard times or etc. I’m talking direct and present physical danger. Everything else the gov can keep the hell out of my business in my home.
But all that isn’t worth a tiddly-wink if I can’t count on the casinos to hold up their end of the bargain and not be intimidated by an entity that is completely outside their jurisdiction and that has absolutely no right to stand outside the casino’s doorstep and chase off customers. If that country has a problem they must deal with it at or inside their own borders.
Which puts the ball back into my court. I’m guilty, … should I decide to turn myself in, because that is the only damn way the gov should know about what the heck I am doing in the privacy of my own home … if I am not some kind of terrorist threat or the like.
So what I’m saying is that its not the casino’s place to enforce the laws of other countries, however it is the casinos place and very much so; to observe the one universal law of gambling, “if you let me place the bet and I won, beating the odds fairly, then you must pay me!”.
This is a real can of worms and just because a lot of folks in our industry have chosen not to address it doesn’t mean it will go away. What is going to happen is another incident will come up, next time perhaps the player will be completely of age, and some bean counter will report to some rocket scientist of a casino owner that they can avoid paying out … $50k if they play the “Oops! you live in Nevada, that’s illegal to gamble, so we’re not going to pay you. However, we’ll cheerfully refund all the money you gambled to us and lost; leaving us with a nifty savings of $48,550. You should have read our T&Cs, it not-so-plainly stated that we …. might pay you, … might not. The one thing we want to make clear is that we don’t have to and can still be viewed as reputable”, card.
That sound like the situation summed up in layman’s terms? Its what I read in all this.
I’m not terribly worried as casino gamblers have already proven they will take risks that would make the average decent poker player cringe. In fact it practically ensures a greater need for sites like mine than ever before,… because rest assured I will be diligent in taking down the listing of any casino or group that ever employs this tactic without hesitation.
Bella Vegas’ little tactic whether it have been to avoid paying (which it greatly lends suggestion by simple math that they knew the girl’s age, or had access to it, long before this cash-out ever was a twinkle in her eye, and they chose to pay her not once, but several times) or by some sort of glitch in the system where her age was truly not taken notice in respect to her locality – but following that line of thinking then it would not have mattered her age since all players from her locality are not legally allowed to play online …
then this multi-billion dollar industry had better spend a few extra dollars and have their software set to not take deposits from these respective localities.
Which ain’t gonna happen. And even if it does… then you will see a sudden rise of the “out-law” casino which I fear will be all that and more … if you know what I mean ….
and the best of these outlaw casinos will pay their winners on cashins to anybody of whatever the casino sets as minimum age will be, likely 18, .. in whatever location they may reside …
and they will be IMHO 100% in the right to do business as such. My attitude would be that hey I didn’t come and force you to play at my casino,… but I will honor the spirit of the game and pay anybody who bets real money and beats the odds.
Its not my place to enforce the laws of other countries, and its not the place of other countries to come to my doorstep and think I’m going to lay down and let them enforce those laws from outside their borders where they have no jurisdiction.
Let me make this perfectly clear.
CAP does not support, condone or endorse online gambling by people under the age to legally do so in the jurisdiction where they reside. PERIOD.
We DO support the right for adults, who are legally old enough to gamble, to do so online if they wish when this does not violate local, state, federal or country law where they reside.
We DO NOT Advocate that ANYONE, ANYWHERE, AT ANY TIME violates any local, state or federal law.
I honestly hope all webmasters and affiliates share these beliefs and that they do NOT promote any illegal activities, whatever those might be.
Damian they returned her deposits which was a fair thing to do. Yes, in a perfect world she would have been paid her winnings and she would be happy. But this isnt a perfect world.
I feel bad for the player and am sure she is disapointed. But given the circumstances it’s difficult to expect the casino to pay her the winnings.
Should they have been more dilligent on her previous pay outs? Yes. But luckily for her they werent. She apparently DID collect winnings in the past and thats a good thing from her perspective Im sure.
Should they have rejected her deposits, Yes they probably should have.
But once a business IS aware that a law is being broken by their actions the responsible thing to do is CEASE whatever it is thats breaking the law.
For example let’s say you open a bar, and a young lady comes in and shows you a fake ID and you serve her. She drinks a few drinks and leaves. She comes in again and you again serve her based on the fake ID. She drinks her drinks and leaves. The THIRD time she comes in your bar and plops herself down and starts drinking. After an hour another customer comes up and says “Hey Man that girl is under age. You better quit serving her!” If you are a responsible operator you thank her for her past business and ask that she leave. You dont let her sit there and keep serving her because you did so in the past. Once you are AWARE that a law is being broken you HAVE to act responsibly or YOU might lose YOUR liqour license.
I know this isn’t exactly what happened, but it’s similar in concept. Once the casino realized it was against the law to serve her they did the responsible thing and closed her account. They were even nice enough to give her back the money she paid for the drinks she guzzled down before they realized there was a problem.
Lets put the underage thing aside. As was not my intention to focus on that aspect of the situation.
I totally agree that underage gambling should never be allowed as I think everyone else here does also.
What I am concerned about is that there is an obvious loophole which looms larger the bigger the win the player has; that potentially lets the casino out of paying while still being able to keep its reputation untarnished.
So am I to report to my readers that basically if they live in the states or anywhere else where it is illegal to gamble online,… which includes (please correct me if I’m wrong) Canada and Australia, and a number of eastern European countries … that they can expect NOT to be paid?
I am pretty sure that isn’t the message the casinos want to send.
I realize this is the stickiest of matters but pretending it isn’t there will not keep it from happening again and like I said; next time it might be a player of legal age, living in Nevada.
I think this is something that should be addressed by the casinos while at the same time totally understand why they don’t want to: and things were okay until the Bella Vegas incident because the casinos had always paid but I fear the day is coming; just a matter of time really… until the amount reaches the right height with the wrong small-minded person making the decisions … before we see a denial of payment based on the player’s location rather than age.
I have come to the conclusion that for now I am going to tell my readers that all I can do is to list casinos that have up until now; always paid players if they were of legal age (better figure 21 folks). And promise to take down any casinos that ever stop paying on legit cash-ins to adults.
I actually agree Prof.
The problem is though Lou, no one is allowed to bet online while residing in Nevada according to Nevada.
Ecogra/g4 are going to have to rule on a player from a barred jurisdiction who is 39 and has just lost 50k. Most likely from a gaff like sealand where they make their own bye-laws.. People will try anything. (it has happened already – remember the lady who refused to pay her credit card bill of 60k or so, because the credit card should not have allowed her to bet online)
They will quote the precedent has been set forth by ecogra.
That player will be right in essence. The fact that player is trying a take on will get short thrift from me, for the law is an ass and so will the 39yr old be. This 19yr old girl is not.Ecogra are funded by Cassava and Micro. Con & micro accept players from barred jurisdictions. Ecogra never ruled all Nevada players breaking Nevada law should abide by Nevada law.
Cherrypicking for the worst reasons imo. To look good.
BBS1 is on the money. This one will very likely come back to bite hard 1 dark day.
