Grand Prive Casinos
GrandPrive.com
Belle Vegas Online
Casino Grand Bay
Grand Bay Poker
Kasino Grand Bay
Lake Palace Casino
Jupiter Club Casino
Road House REELS Casino
Fortune Junction Casino
Jackpot Wheel Casino
Licensing Jurisdiction: Kahnawake
Updated 30 March 2006
| Underage Gambler |
The was a major issue that brewed for quite a while before becoming very public. This concerned an under age gambler and Grand Prive casinos. This is a Microgaming group - nine casinos total - here is the problem in a nutshell:
The player, who resides in Las Vegas, joined each one of these casinos made deposits and occasionally won here and there. She was never asked for her ID, and the fact that she was only 19 was never an issue. But when she made a larger withdrawal, the casino requested her ID. These are required by the agreement that the casino has with eCOGRA. They must ensure that the player is a legitimate person who is lawfully allowed to play. Well, she lives in Nevada, and the gambling age for jurisdiction is 21. So the casino voided her cash-in and returned her deposits. Sounds fair? Well fairness was not the issue here. The issue was a casino's accountability, responsibility, and their relationship with the online casino industry.
The casino failed to do its due diligence. They have all of the power within their means to prevent under age gambling. They relied solely on their terms and conditions, and in these times when underage gambling is such a hot topic - this is unacceptable. Underage gambling is beyond nickels and dimes, it is a behavior that is prompting the Bible thumpers in the US to hop up on their soapboxes and preach about the evils of online gambling. Reliance on the gambler to police his or her activities is a careless and irresponsible attitude to take. There is no excuse to have let this happen.
The casino considered this case closed in August 2005 since they turned this over to eCOGRA which understandably ruled against paying this player. There is absolutely no way eCOGRA or any other entity could consider asking the casino to honor a dime of her winnings.
But to the average Joe player, this casino appeared to be selective in who they were paying. It seemed to them that once the player had a big win, the casino found a loophole and decided not to pay. "She's a teenager - don't pay her." And this is the furor of the public. In the eyes of most players, casinos are crooks - you have to earn the players' trust, and this whole scenario fanned these flames of suspicion.
The casino failed us - those who work in this industry - by not making a bold statement to this episode. I was trying to convince them that the only way to face this would be to take this player's winnings and donate them to either a charity of her choice, or to some other organization - perhaps Gambling Anonymous. This would have nullified the notion that this casino was being selective. It would have cost them 20k (or whatever amount the winnings were). Hopefully it would have made the player feel that her negative experience was transposed into something positive - feeding hungry kids, providing counseling to problem gamblers, giving the homeless a home.
It would have saved a lot of anguish for the casino. And most importantly, it would have demonstrated to everyone that casinos will not profit from catering to under age gamblers. In short, this would have made many positive messages and provided something for the needy.
But in the casino's short-sightedness, they chose not to do this.
Since this incident, they have imposed a "No under 21's" straight across the board and closed the accounts of all players not meeting this criteria. They are rigorously enforcing this going forward. They are one of the very few operations that take a "no one under 21" stance which I know of.
|
Top of page |
Home |
News |
Forum |
Webcast |
Vortran |
Accredited Casinos |
Evil Ones |
Pitch a Bitch |
Partner Links |
Poker
|
|
