Have you received any justification from the casino about why your balance was confiscated?
They claim I was in violation of the following arbitrary, buried clause:
"7.1.9. You cannot make a new deposit, claim bonus or free promotion, until you have played through your current deposit, bonus or free promotion. Your balance needs to be below $/€/AUD 1 before a new deposit, bonus or free promotion may be made, claimed or redeemed."
This clause is not given justification. Also, when I reached out to their chat about why my initial withdraw was denied - and told I had to deposit to get my withdraw - they did not make explicitly clear this bizarre policy. Clear explanation was withheld.
Further, I was FORCED to deposit - ostensibly in order to withdraw - after winning my bonus money... and therefore forced to mix my bonus winnings with my deposit money.
In my account, I was given a "real money balance" at no point did my balance from bonus winnings show as separate from my "real money balance"... If "real money" is distinct from "bonus winnings" then they should simply be kept in separate accounts, no? Why is the onus on the player to figure out this esoteric and punishing systemic issue. It seems to lack any logic outside of being employed to strip players out of their winnings. Simply put, why else would it be there?
Incidentally, I had cancelled the withdraw to withdraw a larger sum. If I had realized they would void my entire winnings - returning the initial 20 dollar deposit - then I obviously would not have cancelled the withdraw. But, quite simply, this alleged rule seems like nonsense designed simply to cause misunderstandings and void winnings. In fact, I still don't really understand the rule - would my winnings have been voided if I didn't cancel the deposit because I had simply withdrawn - or would they have been voided for having the audacity to gamble my deposit before the withdrawal went through?
If cancelling the withdraw is somehow the issue - and I still do not understand how or why it is - then isn't the most fair resolution to restore the 50 and any winnings subsequent to the cancelled withdraw? Merely cancelling the ones that were won on bets with "mixed funds"?
It does not seem that fairness was the goal - in any shape or form - and it does not seem that this rule has a fair, legitimate reason for existing. Nor was it properly highlighted by chat PRIOR to making my deposit to withdraw my funds. I was given no reason why the rule exists. It seems to be completely arbitrary. As I pointed out, who would want to gamble at a casino that treats it's ostensibly valued clientele so shabbily - and dishonest?
They did restore my 20 dollar deposit, but that is no sign of good faith. Given that Casino Brango has a high minimum withdraw (50 dollars), I was forced to gamble - and subsequently lose - the 20 dollar initial deposit instead of just taking my money and leaving their casino.
Further, voiding both the bonus and my legitimately won money is a double insult where only one insult would have been bad enough. How does cancelling a withdraw cost me a hundred dollars?
Have you contacted the casino yourself and asked for an explanation?
Yes, no satisfactory reason was given. Except, once again, pointing out this arbitrary clause buried in their terms that doesn't explain the reason for the clause.
Is your account accessible to you? Can you log in?
Yeah
What games did you play to wager through the bonus? (slots, live games, betting on sports)
Slots
What games did you play after the wagering of the bonus was complete?
Slots
Could you please share with me your communication with the casino? Send emails or chat transcripts to my email at tomas@casino.guru, or post screenshots here
I will forward you the interaction right now. Thanks.
Have you received any justification from the casino about why your balance was confiscated?
They claim I was in violation of the following arbitrary, buried clause:
"7.1.9. You cannot make a new deposit, claim bonus or free promotion, until you have played through your current deposit, bonus or free promotion. Your balance needs to be below $/€/AUD 1 before a new deposit, bonus or free promotion may be made, claimed or redeemed."
This clause is not given justification. Also, when I reached out to their chat about why my initial withdraw was denied - and told I had to deposit to get my withdraw - they did not make explicitly clear this bizarre policy. Clear explanation was withheld.
Further, I was FORCED to deposit - ostensibly in order to withdraw - after winning my bonus money... and therefore forced to mix my bonus winnings with my deposit money.
In my account, I was given a "real money balance" at no point did my balance from bonus winnings show as separate from my "real money balance"... If "real money" is distinct from "bonus winnings" then they should simply be kept in separate accounts, no? Why is the onus on the player to figure out this esoteric and punishing systemic issue. It seems to lack any logic outside of being employed to strip players out of their winnings. Simply put, why else would it be there?
Incidentally, I had cancelled the withdraw to withdraw a larger sum. If I had realized they would void my entire winnings - returning the initial 20 dollar deposit - then I obviously would not have cancelled the withdraw. But, quite simply, this alleged rule seems like nonsense designed simply to cause misunderstandings and void winnings. In fact, I still don't really understand the rule - would my winnings have been voided if I didn't cancel the deposit because I had simply withdrawn - or would they have been voided for having the audacity to gamble my deposit before the withdrawal went through?
If cancelling the withdraw is somehow the issue - and I still do not understand how or why it is - then isn't the most fair resolution to restore the 50 and any winnings subsequent to the cancelled withdraw? Merely cancelling the ones that were won on bets with "mixed funds"?
It does not seem that fairness was the goal - in any shape or form - and it does not seem that this rule has a fair, legitimate reason for existing. Nor was it properly highlighted by chat PRIOR to making my deposit to withdraw my funds. I was given no reason why the rule exists. It seems to be completely arbitrary. As I pointed out, who would want to gamble at a casino that treats it's ostensibly valued clientele so shabbily - and dishonest?
They did restore my 20 dollar deposit, but that is no sign of good faith. Given that Casino Brango has a high minimum withdraw (50 dollars), I was forced to gamble - and subsequently lose - the 20 dollar initial deposit instead of just taking my money and leaving their casino.
Further, voiding both the bonus and my legitimately won money is a double insult where only one insult would have been bad enough. How does cancelling a withdraw cost me a hundred dollars?
Have you contacted the casino yourself and asked for an explanation?
Yes, no satisfactory reason was given. Except, once again, pointing out this arbitrary clause buried in their terms that doesn't explain the reason for the clause.
Is your account accessible to you? Can you log in?
Yeah
What games did you play to wager through the bonus? (slots, live games, betting on sports)
Slots
What games did you play after the wagering of the bonus was complete?
Slots
Could you please share with me your communication with the casino? Send emails or chat transcripts to my email at tomas@casino.guru, or post screenshots here
I will forward you the interaction right now. Thanks.