- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
You can’t “totally agree” and then accuse the casino of cherry picking.
sneaky2.giUnderage players cannot gamble. Period. No winnings paid.
Gambling online when it’s illegal in your jurisdiction must be stamped out too. no winnings paid. Period.This can be quickly implemented at casinos and sportsbooks by requiring utility bills, drivers licenses and/or passports to be scanned and faxed/emailed in the name of the cardholder. It IS becoming a relatively common procedure for Credit Card authorisation these days.
(at least it is at reliable and reputable sports books that take their role seriously)
:hmmm:Basically customers may have to prove their right to gamble. The lax approach to this is resulting in the current proposed legislation.
(of course it may mean a brand new industry pops up – providing fake internet ID)
:hehe:
If you don’t like the legislation then stop it. Organise yourselves and make sure that your elected representive understands that he’ll be out on his arse at the next elections.(of course for this to be true you’ll need to show a ground swell of opinion that Americans consider this a basic and important infringment of their rights).
The politicians are not doing this because the REALLY believe that online gambling is EVIL. They are doing it for publicity and brownie points in their local electorates and states. Politicians are slimy self-serving creatures that will react to mass media displays of outrage.
IF the legislation gets passed then you’ll have two choices :
– IF you don’t like it then move out of the US.
– IF you decide that it’s not that much of a big deal then live with it and gamble at authorised land based casinos.Good luck.
:huh2:Gunner Paul.
I agree underage gamblers should’nt be paid. The cherrypicking comes in when applying Nevada law when it suits.
It’s one or the other. Nevada law or not Nevada law. I say not. I say pay the 19 year old.
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.
‘The things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmm, you all have seen just how underhanded and sneaky Grand Prive is and this is not the first time nor will it be the last time they pull these tricks, like I said I agree they did ok by giving her the deposits back BUT I think they were dead wrong to take her money without a red flag going up in the first place.
We can all debate back and forth but the bottom line is they just don’t care what any of us think about them they have proven that over and over in the last few months.
If a casino was talking my 18 yr olds money I would be pissed as all hell and they would be dealing with MOM! (hehehe)
In my opinion Bella Vegas should walk down the halls of roque casinos. Pay me once, pay me twice, a big win lets pull out the T&C’s and don’t pay. If they paid the player in the past, they should pay now. The T&C book didn’t come out when she was making a deposit did it?
Common sense tells me she got burnt. Not to mention the hook they threw me over xmas, it amazes me the lack of support she is getting. greek39
Hi, it would be one thing if she had supply fraudulent information during sign up, it does not appear from what I read that she tried to deceive the casino about her age. It’s one thing if you walk into a bar and knowingly present false identification where you are intentionally jeopardizing the owner’s livelihood . In this case it seems both parties are at fault. She may not have intentionally violated the agreement, but at the same time the casino did not enforce their own rules. Was their intention dishonest probably not. There was a post on another forum that suggested a compromise. Both parties whether unknowingly or intentionally violated each others trust. Some type of mediation between the player and the casino should take place.
“Trust is the only bonus offered that keeps people in a casino”
One last thought I’ll have to go back and read all the posts .Put if she excepted her deposits back. Wouldn’t that be Acceptance of am a compromise.
” When commonsense fails call the attorneys”
