Dear Sgskander,
Yes, unfortunately, according to the casino’s Terms and Conditions, the casino prohibits the use of various betting techniques, including low-risk wagering (even when playing without a bonus).
The casino has provided evidence proving that you had been in fact making low-risk bets on roulette, which would allow you to complete the wagering requirement without properly risking your deposit, which is why the casino increased your rollover requirement, and later decided to confiscate your winnings and return your deposits.
In Casino Guru, we believe that players should be allowed to play any way they want as long as they don't commit fraud.
There is no advantage for the player to be gained by making bets that cover most (or all) of the roulette wheel.
In this case, the player didn't even play with a bonus, so the only reason to require any wagering is to avoid potential money laundering. For this reason, it’s okay for the casino to decide not to count bets with extremely low variance towards wagering requirements. However, without any proof or at least an indication that the player was actually involved in any money-laundering activities, there is no justified reason to confiscate the player’s winnings. Therefore, we believe that the player should be paid.
As the casino has refused to reconsider their decision, which we consider unfair and against our Fair Gambling Codex, we will now close this complaint as 'Against Fair Gambling Codex'.
Dear Sgskander,
Yes, unfortunately, according to the casino’s Terms and Conditions, the casino prohibits the use of various betting techniques, including low-risk wagering (even when playing without a bonus).
The casino has provided evidence proving that you had been in fact making low-risk bets on roulette, which would allow you to complete the wagering requirement without properly risking your deposit, which is why the casino increased your rollover requirement, and later decided to confiscate your winnings and return your deposits.
In Casino Guru, we believe that players should be allowed to play any way they want as long as they don't commit fraud.
There is no advantage for the player to be gained by making bets that cover most (or all) of the roulette wheel.
In this case, the player didn't even play with a bonus, so the only reason to require any wagering is to avoid potential money laundering. For this reason, it’s okay for the casino to decide not to count bets with extremely low variance towards wagering requirements. However, without any proof or at least an indication that the player was actually involved in any money-laundering activities, there is no justified reason to confiscate the player’s winnings. Therefore, we believe that the player should be paid.
As the casino has refused to reconsider their decision, which we consider unfair and against our Fair Gambling Codex, we will now close this complaint as 'Against Fair Gambling Codex'.
Edited by a Casino Guru admin