K?ra Adam.
Det ?r felaktigt. D?rf?r utf?rdades ett beslut om att ?terf?rvisa klagom?let.
Jag anv?nde inte bonusen i fr?ga f?rr?n efter den 24 december.
Betalningar fram till den tidpunkten beror p? spelet till den normala reflektionshastigheten.
Beviset ?r att jag inte har f?tt n?gon s?dan kommunikation fr?n kasinot om n?got av mina uttag fram till den 18 december.
Alla uttag fram till den punkten har granskats och godk?nts av casinot, och det borde inte vara n?gra problem h?r.
D?rf?r strider det mot reglerna att ta upp tidigare uttag nu och h?vda att de ?r mer ?n ins?ttningsbeloppet. ?r det inte?
Fr?n det att jag registrerar mig p? casinot till den 18 december.
→Jag hade spelat spel utan problem, och kasinot hade fastst?llt att det inte fanns n?gra problem med uttag.
24 december
→Jag gjorde en ny ins?ttning p? $2500 och drog f?rdel av bonusen.
Det verkar dock som att kasinot gjorde ett misstag n?r det satte andelen nyspelade spel, och mitt konto frystes p? grund av det.
F?r n?rvarande
→ Kasinot h?vdar att ?terbetalningen p? $2500 har slutf?rts f?r uttag som gjorts f?re den 18 december, av n?gon anledning.
Det visar sig att fr?gan som st?r p? spel i det h?r fallet bara ?r att det fanns ett problem med ins?ttningsbonusen den 24 december, och att alla tidigare betalningar var irrelevanta.
D?rf?r beh?ver kasinot endast ?terbetala 2 500 $ f?r denna ins?ttning p? 2 500 $.
Om casinot hade fryst mitt konto den 18 december p? grund av problem s? hade jag inte gjort min sista ins?ttning i f?rsta hand.
Om det hade varit ett problem tidigare, varf?r h?ll kasinot tyst? Det verkar f?r mig att de lurade mig att g?ra en ins?ttning.
Dessutom var oms?ttningskravet alltid 100 % i casinots system, och det fanns ingen indikation p? 10 % i villkoren.
Det verkar som att casinot av misstag hade st?llt in kursen Om spelet som lades till den 24 december eller runt, till 100 % n?r den borde ha varit 10 % internt, och det ?r naturligtvis om?jligt f?r anv?ndaren att inse att detta ?r ett fel.
Dear Adam.
That is incorrect. Therefore, an order was issued to remand the complaint.
I did not use the bonus in question until after December 24.
Payments up to that point are due to game play at the normal reflective rate.
The evidence is that I have not received any such communication from the casino on any of my withdrawals up to December 18.
All withdrawals up to that point have been reviewed and approved by the casino, and there should be no problems here.
Therefore, it is against the rules to bring up past withdrawals now and claim that they are more than the deposit amount. Is it not?
From the time I register at the casino until December 18.
→I had been playing games without any problems, and the casino had determined that there were no problems with withdrawals.
December 24th
→I made a new deposit of $2500 and took advantage of the bonus.
However, it seems that the casino made a mistake in setting the percentage of newly played games, and my account was frozen because of it.
Currently
→The casino is claiming that the refund of $2500 has been completed for withdrawals made before December 18, for some reason.
It turns out that the issue at stake in this case is only that there was a problem with the December 24 deposit bonus, and that all previous payments were irrelevant.
Therefore, the casino is only required to refund $2,500 for this deposit of $2,500.
If the casino had frozen my account as of December 18 due to problems, I would not have made my last deposit in the first place.
If there had been a problem before, why did the casino keep quiet? It seems to me that they tricked me into making a deposit.
In addition, the wagering requirement was always 100% in the casino's system, and there was no indication of 10% in the terms and conditions.
It seems that the casino had mistakenly set the rate About the game added on or about December 24, to 100% when it should have been 10% internally, and of course it is impossible for the user to realize that this is an error.
Redigerad
Automatiskt ?versatt: