WINNERonline Gambling Discussion - View Single Post - Bellavegas won't pay 20K in winnings

I've emailed eCOGRA on the matter:

Quote:

Hi there,

This regards an incident recently brought to public attention at Winneronline:

http://mb.winneronline.com/showthre...26&page=1&pp=10

Casino: Bella Vegas

Account number: tbvr XXXX

The player cashed out a total of £13,137 GBP on the occasion of her last visit to the casino, of which she received back only her deposit, amounting to about £3000, leaving approximately £10,000 GBP unpaid.

The casino cited the fact that she is underage; being only 18 in a state (Nevada) where the legal age for gambling is 21.

The player filed a complaint with you, and you found for the casino on the basis of the underage issue.

Although this issue is not disputed, it fails to take into account important relevant aspects of this player’s history with the casino:

Before being denied this largest, most substantial cash in, the player allegedly deposited a total of seventeen times and cashed out three times. This has not been disputed. The casino had many opportunities to verify her personal details – twenty in total. Twenty-one if you include the process of registering and being accepted.

I would suggest that, rather more than the casino simply having many, many such opportunities to verify the legality of her membership, the fact alone of three approved cash ins is tacit, incontrovertible indication on the part of the management of the player’s right to patronise their operation.

The player was underage, this is not denied. However, given the reasonably long standing (and tacitly accepted) relationship they had with this player, as her many deposits and several successful cash outs indicate, in the circumstances the most appropriate course of action seems to be to settle all debts first, and then close her account subsequently. Equally, a solution might be proposed which would acknowledge the player’s own mistake in the matter, that of registering as an underage gambler in the first place, such as an equal division of winnings between casino and player. As it stands, to deny ALL her cash out after so many successful and unmolested transactions is unacceptable behaviour on the part of the casino in the minds of many industry watchers.

I also have to say that, aside from the strict facts of the case, it does appear rather convenient on the part of the casino to have picked up on this age issue only on the occasion of her largest cash out! Why did they not pick up on it at some point during her seventeen deposits? Or the occasion of that £3118 cash out? One cannot be blamed for infering that the age issue is being used here as justification for reneging on a substantial payment.

It would be a fine gesture on the part of the casino to acknowledge their failings in this matter and offer a settlement to the player, and as such I would urge you to revisit this matter and reconsider your decision.

Thanks,

Regards,

(Me)