Dear Mikeriddiculous,
After gathering all the necessary information and data, we are closing this complaint as unjustified due to breaching the casino's bonus terms and conditions - unfortunately, even though it would be the best option if casinos had such rules enforced by the system, it is not an industry standard. All players are obliged to read the terms and conditions and comply with them, and you accepted them upon registration. According to the casino's rules, each player has to make at least one deposit between no-deposit bonuses, and this condition was not met. You can find the applied rule HERE - section RULES - No Deposit Bonuses (Free Chips, Free Spins), point 18.). In addition, casinos can limit their bonuses as they see fit, and we are talking about free money given by the casino. If the casino offered only free money to its players, which would mean the players could only win and withdraw the winnings, it would not make sense to provide its services at all. Therefore, and since it is not against our Fair Gambling Codex, we accept the casino's decision. You are not entitled to the disputed winnings (which would have been $100 since it was a no-deposit bonus) because the data clearly shows that you accumulated the disputed winnings from the second no-deposit bonus without making deposits between them (the first one - coupon "35CHANCES"/$35 - you claimed and used approximately a month before the winning one). Since your deposit was returned, the casino acted in accordance with its terms and conditions.
I am sorry we were not able to help you with this one, but please, do not hesitate to contact us in the future, if you run into any issues with this or any other casino. We are here to help.
In case of any questions, feel free to write to me at branislav.b@casino.guru.
Thank you very much, Nick and Palace of Chance, for providing evidence and for your cooperation.
Best regards,
Branislav, Casino.Guru
Dear Mikeriddiculous,
After gathering all the necessary information and data, we are closing this complaint as unjustified due to breaching the casino's bonus terms and conditions - unfortunately, even though it would be the best option if casinos had such rules enforced by the system, it is not an industry standard. All players are obliged to read the terms and conditions and comply with them, and you accepted them upon registration. According to the casino's rules, each player has to make at least one deposit between no-deposit bonuses, and this condition was not met. You can find the applied rule HERE - section RULES - No Deposit Bonuses (Free Chips, Free Spins), point 18.). In addition, casinos can limit their bonuses as they see fit, and we are talking about free money given by the casino. If the casino offered only free money to its players, which would mean the players could only win and withdraw the winnings, it would not make sense to provide its services at all. Therefore, and since it is not against our Fair Gambling Codex, we accept the casino's decision. You are not entitled to the disputed winnings (which would have been $100 since it was a no-deposit bonus) because the data clearly shows that you accumulated the disputed winnings from the second no-deposit bonus without making deposits between them (the first one - coupon "35CHANCES"/$35 - you claimed and used approximately a month before the winning one). Since your deposit was returned, the casino acted in accordance with its terms and conditions.
I am sorry we were not able to help you with this one, but please, do not hesitate to contact us in the future, if you run into any issues with this or any other casino. We are here to help.
In case of any questions, feel free to write to me at branislav.b@casino.guru.
Thank you very much, Nick and Palace of Chance, for providing evidence and for your cooperation.
Best regards,
Branislav, Casino.Guru