If a casino system says "Approved," should the player be held responsible for a rule breach?

Hi evervone

I've been thinking about a situation that many of us face Imagine you try to claim a bonus, and the casino system shows "Approved" and adds the funds/spins to vour

account. You play, you win, and then--during withdrawal-the casino says: 'Actually, you weren't supposed to have that bonus because of [Rule X1, so we are confiscating your winnings.'

My question is: Why is the burden on the plaver to double- check the Terms and Conditions if the casino's own automated system already vetted' and approved the transaction? In my opinion, if the software allows it ano labels it as 'Approved,' the casino should honor any resulting winnings. It teels like a 'trap' to let someone play and then find a reason not to pay based on a system-allowed action.

What do you think? Should the Approved' status be final, or do casinos have the right to override their own software later?

I believe that it all depends on the casino and also on what kind of bonus it is.

No deposit bonus or deposit one?

If it is a bonus where a player did not deposit anything, it is really difficult to make the casino pay, I think.

If the player has already invested some money, the casino should at least find an alternative.

Did this happen to you at some online casino?

Yes, I have had a complaint filed for 2 weeks which is still being reviewed and it concerns consecutive coupons without a deposit, and their system allowed me to use them (1-unsuccessfully rolled over, 2-successfully rolled over and credited, after which they are already releasing a larger amount to me, which was subsequently confiscated when I tried to withdraw it).