Greetings all,
I am sorry for my delayed reply and thank you for all information.
Hello, IceBet Casino Team,
If I am not wrong, rule 3.7 was amended recently and as we see on the screenshot shared with the player's first post, a casino representative invoked rule 3.7 in its original wording. The casino has the right to change its rules anytime and the player is obliged to read them, but in the time of claiming and wagering the bonus, he accepted the original version of this rule, and this was applied against the player in this case. The message from the casino representative confirms that. If you can prove the amended rule was already available to the player to see at the time the winnings were confiscated, please correct me and send me the necessary data supporting your claim to branislav.b@casino.guru.
This is the original rule 3.7 wording:
"3.7. In the case of bonus wagering, the player has the opportunity to withdraw the amount that was at the time of wagering bonus, but not more than the maximum amount available for withdrawal under this offer."
Based on a few complaints from the past, our attitude toward this rule is well-known.
However, even if the player would use any of the welcome bonuses and would know about the new version of rule 3.7 earlier and accepted it, the rule's meaning and comprehensibility remained unchanged compared to the original one - the same trap for ordinary players. In addition, there is not any explanation for the situation, when the player would lose the converted money. The rule is written so that only the casino benefits from it and at the expense of the players.
Bonus wagering is usually finished by making a withdrawal or by meeting the bonus wagering requirements. Rule 3.7, in its actual wording, says the player "could withdraw" or "will be able to withdraw" - this does not mean any obligation for the player to withdraw the funds right after meeting the wagering requirements.
Once the bonus wagering is done, the funds are converted to the real money balance and the player is not informed that he continues with the "real money balance affecting the bonus balance". Once the player sees it in the real money balance, he knows he could withdraw it, not that he has to withdraw and deposit it back to be able to continue playing with the same real funds. He does not know about the difference, and the casino allows him to further play without notice. The winnings (within the maximum cash out limit for the bonus) should be deducted right after meeting the wagering requirements. Once it is done, there is no reason to do it later upon a withdrawal request and apply any bonus rule to the player's real money. Once the wagering requirements are met and the funds are in the real money balance, the player is allowed to do anything he wants with these funds.
Summary - although the casino acted within its terms and conditions, applying rule 3.7 in this way does not comply with our Fair Gambling Codex (available HERE) and we consider it really unfair to players. We recommend the casino reconsider its decision and refund the player with the confiscated winnings.
Is the casino willing to reconsider its decision and return the confiscated funds to the player's casino account?
If the casino's decision is final and remains unchanged, I am afraid there is nothing left to be resolved and we will be forced to close the complaint as unresolved.
Greetings all,
I am sorry for my delayed reply and thank you for all information.
Hello, IceBet Casino Team,
If I am not wrong, rule 3.7 was amended recently and as we see on the screenshot shared with the player's first post, a casino representative invoked rule 3.7 in its original wording. The casino has the right to change its rules anytime and the player is obliged to read them, but in the time of claiming and wagering the bonus, he accepted the original version of this rule, and this was applied against the player in this case. The message from the casino representative confirms that. If you can prove the amended rule was already available to the player to see at the time the winnings were confiscated, please correct me and send me the necessary data supporting your claim to branislav.b@casino.guru.
This is the original rule 3.7 wording:
"3.7. In the case of bonus wagering, the player has the opportunity to withdraw the amount that was at the time of wagering bonus, but not more than the maximum amount available for withdrawal under this offer."
Based on a few complaints from the past, our attitude toward this rule is well-known.
However, even if the player would use any of the welcome bonuses and would know about the new version of rule 3.7 earlier and accepted it, the rule's meaning and comprehensibility remained unchanged compared to the original one - the same trap for ordinary players. In addition, there is not any explanation for the situation, when the player would lose the converted money. The rule is written so that only the casino benefits from it and at the expense of the players.
Bonus wagering is usually finished by making a withdrawal or by meeting the bonus wagering requirements. Rule 3.7, in its actual wording, says the player "could withdraw" or "will be able to withdraw" - this does not mean any obligation for the player to withdraw the funds right after meeting the wagering requirements.
Once the bonus wagering is done, the funds are converted to the real money balance and the player is not informed that he continues with the "real money balance affecting the bonus balance". Once the player sees it in the real money balance, he knows he could withdraw it, not that he has to withdraw and deposit it back to be able to continue playing with the same real funds. He does not know about the difference, and the casino allows him to further play without notice. The winnings (within the maximum cash out limit for the bonus) should be deducted right after meeting the wagering requirements. Once it is done, there is no reason to do it later upon a withdrawal request and apply any bonus rule to the player's real money. Once the wagering requirements are met and the funds are in the real money balance, the player is allowed to do anything he wants with these funds.
Summary - although the casino acted within its terms and conditions, applying rule 3.7 in this way does not comply with our Fair Gambling Codex (available HERE) and we consider it really unfair to players. We recommend the casino reconsider its decision and refund the player with the confiscated winnings.
Is the casino willing to reconsider its decision and return the confiscated funds to the player's casino account?
If the casino's decision is final and remains unchanged, I am afraid there is nothing left to be resolved and we will be forced to close the complaint as unresolved.
Edited by a Casino Guru admin