Draga Ladigaga,
Razumem da vam je dono?enje zaklju?ka u ovom slu?aju bilo izazovno. Me?utim, ?eleo bih da istaknem da smo podr?ali kazino u ovoj konkretnoj situaciji.
Na osnovu ?injenica koje smo prikupili u to vreme, izgleda da ste, uprkos tome ?to ste bili svesni da je bonus koji ste dobili, posebno za slotove, nastavili da igrate Blackjack. Iako ste povremeno kladili na slotove kada je va? balans bio nizak, stalno ste se vra?ali Blackjack-u. Zbog toga smo verovali da je kazino u pravu.
Molim vas nemojte me pogre?no shvatiti, drago mi je ?to ste na kraju pla?eni. Me?utim, na osnovu dokaza koje smo imali na raspolaganju u to vreme, doneli smo odluku da pre?emo na stranu kazina.
Ovo je sli?no pravnom procesu u ve?ini demokratskih zemalja. U sporu u po?etku poku?avate da ga re?ite bez uklju?ivanja suda. Ako to ne uspe, mo?ete podneti stvar lokalnom sudu (u ovom primeru www.kpvfaw.com). Ako lokalni sud presudi protiv vas, onda imate opciju da eskalirate slu?aj nacionalnom sudu. Me?utim, ?ak i ako dobijete slu?aj, to ne zna?i da ?e suprotna strana biti ka?njena ako popravi situaciju (kao ?to je kazino u?inio tako ?to vam je platio). Klasifikacija koju ste spomenuli, ?pomogla je publicitet", odnosi se na slu?ajeve kada smo na strani igra?a. U va?em slu?aju, po?to smo stali na stranu kazina, oni su smatrali da su njihovi postupci opravdani.
?ivo se se?am va?eg slu?aja i iskreno sam radoznao (ako nije poverljivo) kako ste ubedili kazino da vam plati. (koje ste dokaze koristili ili ?ta ih je ubedilo) Mo?emo pobolj?ati na?e procese. Ako smo pogre?ili, mo?emo nau?iti iz iskustva.
?to se ti?e SBGOC-a, u svojoj ?albi ste naveli da su vam pomogli, a ja nemam drugu opciju kako da zatvorim ?albu. Ne tra?imo zasluge za njihovu pomo? i verujem da bi svako ko ?ita ?albu shvatio da je SBGOC odigrao ulogu u re?avanju va?eg problema. Trenutno procenjujemo ovu organizaciju i ako sve bude kako treba, preporu?i?emo igra?ima da im se obrate u slo?enim slu?ajevima. Jo? uvek istra?ujemo mogu?nosti za saradnju.
?elim da vas obavestim da ?emo ponovnim otvaranjem ?albe i obave?tenjem o druga?ijem ishodu mo?da ste?i nove uvide ili pobolj?ati na?e metode, a drugi igra?i ?e postati svesni SBGOC-a. Stoga ovo vidim kao pozitivan razvoj doga?aja.
Dear Ladygaga,
I understand that reaching a conclusion in this case was challenging for you. However, I would like to highlight that we were supporting the casino in this particular situation.
Based on the facts we gathered at that time, it appears that despite being aware that the bonus you received was specifically for slots, you continued to play Blackjack. Even though you occasionally wagered on slots when your balance was low, you consistently returned to Blackjack. Due to this, we believed that the casino was in the right.
Please don't misunderstand me, I am pleased that you were eventually paid. However, based on the evidence we had available to us at the time, we made the decision to side with the casino.
This is akin to the legal process in most democratic countries. In a dispute, you initially attempt to resolve it without involving the courts. If that fails, you can take the matter to a local court (www.kpvfaw.com in this example). If the local court rules against you, then you have the option to escalate the case to a national court. However, even if you win the case, it does not necessarily mean that the opposing party will be punished if they rectify the situation (as the casino did by paying you). The classification you mentioned, "publicity helped," applies to cases where we are on the side of the player. In your case, since we sided with the casino, they believed that their actions were justified.
I vividly recall your case, and I am genuinely curious (if it is not confidential) about how you convinced the casino to pay you. (which evidence you used or what convince them) We can improve our processes. If we made a mistake, we can learn from the experience.
Regarding SBGOC, in your complaint, you mentioned that they assisted you, and I have no other option how to close the complaint. We do not seek credit for their help, and I believe that anyone reading the complaint would understand that SBGOC played a role in resolving your issue. We are currently evaluating this organization, and if everything goes well, we will recommend players to contact them in complex cases. We are still exploring possibilities for cooperation.
I want to inform you that by reopening the complaint and informing us of the different outcome, we may gain new insights or improve our methods, and other players will become aware of SBGOC. Therefore, I see this as a positive development.
Automatski prevedeno: