Self Exclusion - CM Accredited Casino

[Balthazar]

Yes. BOTH the player and the casino have erred here. One could not have erred without the other though. 50-50 situation.

If someone knowingly put himself in a dangerous situation and the incompetent ambulance driver take the wrong turn and isn't there in time to save his ass, is the hospital 50% responsible for the guy's death?

 

[bigjohn]

I may take a little heat for this but...

In situations like this I feel that, yes the casino should refund the deposit if the player loses and yes they should pay the player if the player wins. I always feel the parties who make the rules must be held to at least the same standard, or higher, as those who the rules are imposed upon.

When a player plays at a given casino they are expected to follow the rules to the letter or be subject to winnings confiscation, expulsion, or blacklisting.

For me, the bottom line is if these casinos are going to offer this service (SE), for whatever the reason given by the player, they must enforce it.

 

[funex]

If someone knowingly put himself in a dangerous situation and the incompetent ambulance driver take the wrong turn and isn't there in time to save his ass, is the hospital 50% responsible for the guy's death?

Let me rephrase that:

If a bungee jumping company gets a client that wants to jump from a bridge 200 meter high with a rope tied to his foot, and both knowingly of the dangerous situation, allow this to happen, then yes.. both are responsible.

 

[dunover]

If someone knowingly put himself in a dangerous situation and the incompetent ambulance driver take the wrong turn and isn't there in time to save his ass, is the hospital 50% responsible for the guy's death?

Actually, yes in this country the Ambulance service would be partly guilty.

 

[dunover]

I may take a little heat for this but...

In situations like this I feel that, yes the casino should refund the deposit if the player loses and yes they should pay the player if the player wins. I always feel the parties who make the rules must be held to at least the same standard, or higher, as those who the rules are imposed upon.

When a player plays at a given casino they are expected to follow the rules to the letter or be subject to winnings confiscation, expulsion, or blacklisting.

For me, the bottom line is if these casinos are going to offer this service (SE), for whatever the reason given by the player, they must enforce it.

I know you mean well here, but this policy would result in masses of players trying it on with in effect a no-lose gamble. This would make the player no better than rogue casinos that operate on a no-lose basis by taking deposits and keeping them if a player loses while finding excuses to refund only the deposit if the player wins.
The policy should follow GC guidelines, neutralizing accounts without paying winnings and not taking the deposits.

 

[Cleveland]

Anyhow, putting the refund issue aside, I would like to know at least which actions will be taken to fix this situation and keep their good reputation and image.

They still have a good reputation. One mistake (if we are taking sides) by one CSR doesn't destroy the reputation of an entire company built over a span of time. If that was the case I wouldn't have ate at McDonalds yesterday.

On a side note as we wait to see what Ian says: Something rings shady in your quoted statement. The contrast between the tone of your OP, and that statement is startling. Perhaps I'm reading it wrong. I wonder if they stated they will be sure not to reopen any SE accounts for any reason, would you be happy, or if by "which actions," you are referring to some form of compensation for you? I'm curious what actions would please you if you're not talking about anything given to yourself.

Unless it's all automated, and the locks unable to be removed, I see no other way to insure this from happening again (in my limited thinking of course), thus I don't really see how them saying "it won't happen again" will satisfy you or anyone for that matter. Which leads me back to the thinking.....you want something.

 

[Cleveland]

In terms of who is responsible for what portion of what, and the final outcome I think it's important to wait on Ian's response / research. It is extremely important to know what was said in all correspondence, not just what the OP presents to us.

I know for many big business is always wrong...In this case we know a rep is looking into it, might as well wait before casting.

 

[funex]

In terms of who is responsible for what portion of what, and the final outcome I think it's important to wait on Ian's response / research. It is extremely important to know what was said in all correspondence, not just what the OP presents to us.

I know for many big business is always wrong...In this case we know a rep is looking into it, might as well wait before casting.

You are right.
As I said putting the refund part aside, I would be happy that other players struggling with gambling, on a weaker moment wouldn't have it so easy as I did to get back gambling, not on a accredited house at Casinomeister at least.
I have to thank Casinomeister for helping me to solve other issues in the past, and I would like for it to continuing doing so to other players.

As for the "wanting something"
To be honest, I do admit that I want something and that something would be to get my deposits back and keep my self exclusion period till it's due and continue the struggle.

I'll wait for IanO contact regarding this issue and keep you updated, thank you all for your participation.

 

[dunover]

We can go round in circles here indefinitely until the site makes a decision. One last comment I will make is that we are ALL aware of how we should thoroughly read casino T&C's - woe betide us if we don't. The terms probably state (as they do on many sites) that you should not attempt to play or open another account when barred for any reason, whether by them for any reason or yourself for SE reasons. To this end the OP broke the terms.
The casino will ALSO have terms it should follow laid down by it's LA or Gaming Commission which oblige it to enforce responsible gaming measures should the player request them, and to have the measures available. Whether these terms state play at existing or new accounts by a SE'd player should be neutralized (like I believe the UKGC does) or not will depend on the region.
The player has broken the casino terms almost certainly although they shouldn't have been allowed to and the CS error means the casino has almost certainly breached it's LA terms too.

Disreputable sites love problem gamers as they know it's likely they'll binge-gamble and play until extinction of funds. This particular site doesn't come into that category, and I know it's a chicken-and-egg question but ultimately the site failed the player, not by intent but by weak CS.

 

[spoton]

I may take a little heat for this but...

In situations like this I feel that, yes the casino should refund the deposit if the player loses and yes they should pay the player if the player wins. I always feel the parties who make the rules must be held to at least the same standard, or higher, as those who the rules are imposed upon.

When a player plays at a given casino they are expected to follow the rules to the letter or be subject to winnings confiscation, expulsion, or blacklisting.

For me, the bottom line is if these casinos are going to offer this service (SE), for whatever the reason given by the player, they must enforce it.

I kind of agree with you, but as others have said, it leaves the casino open for freerolling. On the other hand, if the casino gets away with it, it kind of gives them a incentive to be lenient when it comes to these kind of rules. IMO a fair thing would be to pay some of the deposit back to the player, and give the rest to a charity that deals with problem gamblers or so.

 

[IanO]

Hi Funex/All,

sorry I could not get a final answer on this today but I am waiting to speak with one more person here before I respond. Thanks for your patience.

Ian

 

[Nifty29]

It's becoming increasingly obvious to me that the OP knew exactly what they were doing when they deposited at BB.

Remember, they tried it on at many OTHER accredited casinos first.

The OPs responses lead me to believe that this was their plan all along I.e. try and sneak past some CS agent at an accredited casino, post a complaint wanting their money if they win and are denied, or posting a complaint to get their money BACK if they lose.

If this was NOT the case, then why deliberately choose to attempt play at every casino they've EXCLUDED from rather than some that they haven't or some newly accredited casinos?

Sorry, but it's all just too convenient.

Funex, you might be a nice person, but what you're doing stinks like a pole cat.

 

[maphesto]

It's becoming increasingly obvious to me that the OP knew exactly what they were doing when they deposited at BB.

Remember, they tried it on at many OTHER accredited casinos first.

The OPs responses lead me to believe that this was their plan all along I.e. try and sneak past some CS agent at an accredited casino, post a complaint wanting their money if they win and are denied, or posting a complaint to get their money BACK if they lose.

If this was NOT the case, then why deliberately choose to attempt play at every casino they've EXCLUDED from rather than some that they haven't or some newly accredited casinos?

Sorry, but it's all just too convenient.

Funex, you might be a nice person, but what you're doing stinks like a pole cat.

This is a very serious accusation, Nifty! Whether you are right or wrong, you can never proove that. If you call it convenient to deposit and ask casinos to close accounts (self exclusion for 2-5 years) years back just to begin some "raid" now I wonder if he couldn't find an easier way from the beginning.

I do not like your post, even if I see what you mean.

 

[funex]

It's becoming increasingly obvious to me that the OP knew exactly what they were doing when they deposited at BB.

Remember, they tried it on at many OTHER accredited casinos first.

The OPs responses lead me to believe that this was their plan all along I.e. try and sneak past some CS agent at an accredited casino, post a complaint wanting their money if they win and are denied, or posting a complaint to get their money BACK if they lose.

If this was NOT the case, then why deliberately choose to attempt play at every casino they've EXCLUDED from rather than some that they haven't or some newly accredited casinos?

Sorry, but it's all just too convenient.

Funex, you might be a nice person, but what you're doing stinks like a pole cat.

Sorry but I find that accusation quite offensive.

As I said on my first post, I contacted several casinos and asked if my self exclusion period was due, as I just wanted to play a bit again on an accredited casino where I had all the documentation verified so I don't have to go through that hassle again, that was mainly it.
I have had so many accounts with so many casinos that I couldn't remember when and for how long I had asked to be self excluded.
I was going through the list of accredited casinos and checking with them the status on my account.

The rest were just consequences, please do not make those accusations, you could verify with IanO or any casino rep where I have an account, that I haven't had any issues whatsover with any house, besides a technical one with nordicbet and a self exclusion with crazyvegas.

Furthermore, I have a set limit of 10€ per month on Betsafe, NordicBet and Betsson, paddypower which were used that day,
I simply just got weak and wanted to play, with no second intentions, please do understand that.

Edit: spending 2000 usd on that day doesnt seems to be a wise move part of the agenda you accuse me of, it was just ilness and stupidity

 

[funex]

Anyway, i ll just wait for IanO answer and update you as soon as it happens.

 

[dunover]

Sorry but I find that accusation quite offensive.

As I said on my first post, I contacted several casinos and asked if my self exclusion period was due, as I just wanted to play a bit again on an accredited casino where I had all the documentation verified so I don't have to go through that hassle again, that was mainly it.
I have had so many accounts with so many casinos that I couldn't remember when and for how long I had asked to be self excluded.
I was going through the list of accredited casinos and checking with them the status on my account.

The rest were just consequences, please do not make those accusations, you could verify with IanO or any casino rep where I have an account, that I haven't had any issues whatsover with any house, besides a technical one with nordicbet and a self exclusion with crazyvegas.

Furthermore, I have a set limit of 10€ per month on Betsafe, NordicBet and Betsson, paddypower which were used that day,
I simply just got weak and wanted to play, with no second intentions, please do understand that.

Edit: spending 2000 usd on that day doesnt seems to be a wise move part of the agenda you accuse me of, it was just ilness and stupidity

Which begs the question, once you inveigled your way back into that casino, why did you not it the deposit limit button BEFORE playing?

 

[funex]

Which begs the question, once you inveigled your way back into that casino, why did you not it the deposit limit button BEFORE playing?

Good question, I don't know..

I don't even think that is possible to set it automatically with the house software, for casino games, only for Bingo I think, but I might be wrong.

Anyhow, I was just blinded for the urge to play and you never think when you start that you will spend that much.. untill you hit rockbottom.
Only at few houses I have deposit limits, most of them I'm just self excluded.

 

[Cleveland]

Good question, I don't know..

I don't even think that is possible to set it automatically with the house software, for casino games, only for Bingo I think, but I might be wrong.

Anyhow, I was just blinded for the urge to play and you never think when you start that you will spend that much.. untill you hit rockbottom.
Only at few houses I have deposit limits, most of them I'm just self excluded.

Have you taken other steps to deal with this issue other than setting this SEs at each casino? The reason I ask is because no matter the outcome in this case you will be right back where you started and still able to gamble (somewhere). Honestly I would rather see you not paid in this case in hopes that the stinging you feel from all of this will perhaps sink a bit deeper and induce a change. It could well cost you a lot more in the long run if not. Saying "hot" doesn't work all the time....some people need to be burned.

 

[funex]

Have you taken other steps to deal with this issue other than setting this SEs at each casino? The reason I ask is because no matter the outcome in this case you will be right back where you started and still able to gamble (somewhere). Honestly I would rather see you not paid in this case in hopes that the stinging you feel from all of this will perhaps sink a bit deeper and induce a change. It could well cost you a lot more in the long run if not. Saying "hot" doesn't work all the time....some people need to be burned.

I did take same small steps, cancelled a virtual prepaid card service associated to my bank account, destroyed some credit cards, self excluded from casinos, avoided going to land casinos, etc..
Last yeear I moved to a new city and country, they don't have any casinos around here, only blackjack tables in Pubs and I'm not a big fan, thats a plus.

Although, with Internet.. if you have a gambling problem, you're never safe, you're always bombarded, even the bloody TV channels in Sweden show casino and betting sites advertisements all the time.

Someone gave me the hint to start using Gamblock, I am actually considering this as soon as this thread reaches to a conclusion.

 

[dionysus]

I'm afraid I'm with Celaveland on this one - while casinos should honour an account block, much like driving, it's a privilege not a right, and returning your funds doesn't much discourage you from depositing again.

As to gamblock, why wait til the thread's over? It could continue on as other players might still read it, and other members chime in - if youre serious, just do it now

As well, since you came to say what you wanted, and the rep is already looking into your account, you should have Bryan lock you out of the forum, all but for the help page, as participating in a gambling forum is contrary to helping you stop - the rep can still pm you

 

[Casinomeister]

I would seriously look into Gamblock. Seems like this has happened before:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...selfexclusion-period-incompetent-agent.51668/

And it will happen again. Please check out the Quit Gambling page - hopefully you can use some of these techniques to either totally quit or at least cut down a little.
https://www.casinomeister.com/quit-gambling/

I'm moving your account into the "Quit Gambling" user group so that you can maintain your membership, but you should be able to access any gambling related threads or screenshots.

 

[dionysus]

As well, since you came to say what you wanted, and the rep is already looking into your account, you should have Bryan lock you out of the forum, all but for the help page, as participating in a gambling forum is contrary to helping you stop - the rep can still pm you

oh well, done already lol

 

[dionysus]

I would seriously look into Gamblock. Seems like this has happened before:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...selfexclusion-period-incompetent-agent.51668/

And it will happen again. Please check out the Quit Gambling page - hopefully you can use some of these techniques to either totally quit or at least cut down a little.
https://www.casinomeister.com/quit-gambling/

I'm moving your account into the "Quit Gambling" user group so that you can maintain your membership, but you should be able to access any gambling related threads or screenshots.

lol, hopefully that's 'shouldn't'

 

[Cleveland]

I would seriously look into Gamblock. Seems like this has happened before:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...selfexclusion-period-incompetent-agent.51668/

Ok that does change a lot. I can only guess you knew the likely hood of being paid would be high as you have been through this before, and the casino is a reputable one. I know we don't have the reps side yet, but from that thread....I do feel Nifty hit the nail on the head in this one.

Either way I can't see this ending good. Paid or not.

 

[dunover]

I would seriously look into Gamblock. Seems like this has happened before:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forum...selfexclusion-period-incompetent-agent.51668/

And it will happen again. Please check out the Quit Gambling page - hopefully you can use some of these techniques to either totally quit or at least cut down a little.
https://www.casinomeister.com/quit-gambling/

I'm moving your account into the "Quit Gambling" user group so that you can maintain your membership, but you should be able to access any gambling related threads or screenshots.

This has really pissed me off. There were some of you being harsh on Nifty for his last post, which I also thought harsh. Turns out he was right. I have spent time on several posts helping support this OP and gently encourage a positive outcome, when CM then tells us he has done this before. The bloke may have a problem, but is also an OPPORTUNIST and clearly (based on VPL's correct and fair treatment before) tries to exploit the ignorance of CS after SE and when he does so bets big amounts, knowing that they could win him big amounts or if not he can come here and play the rule book for sympathy and a refund.
Those of you who often comment on my, and especially Nifty's cynicism, would do well to refer back to this thread. OP, you have taken advantage of people's sympathy here. Not cool.
And I thank CM for stopping myself and others from further making fools of ourselves on this thread.
Over and out.