Hej!
Jag hade en obehaglig incident med Playouwin som jag hittade p? Aksgamblers och d?r jag sedan l?mnade in ett klagom?l mot kasinot. Beskrivningen av ?rendet, hela historien om klagom?let med Playouwin och Askgamblers svar hittar du h?r:
https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/playouwin-casino-the-casino-added-an-unclaimed-bonus-to-my-account-and-confiscated-my-winnings-afterwards
Jag f?rberedde mitt svar ang?ende Playouwins ?vertr?delse av deras egna villkor, men n?r jag f?rs?kte l?gga upp det s?g jag att klagom?let hade st?ngts utan ytterligare m?jlighet att ?terupptas eller ompr?vas. Jag l?gger upp texten i mitt svar h?r:
--------
I sitt f?rsta svar sa Playouwins representant: '' vi arbetar enligt v?ra bonusvillkor ''. Men i deras andra svar l?ste vi: "vi g?r undantag och detta var ett av dem". S?, villkoren respekteras ibland och ibland ?r de inte ... Det verkar som bookmakern ?r den som best?mmer om han ska arbeta enligt dess villkor eller tv?rtom - att s?ga "denna kr?nkning var bara ett undantag."
Den tekniska delen av denna incident ?r intressant med det faktum att bookmakaren l?tsas vara kr?nkta bonuskrav ?ven om det i spelarens konto ?r tydligt att det inte finns n?gra. Men den tekniska delen ?r bara en konsekvens och anledningen ?r av juridisk karakt?r som bookmakaren gjorde f?r att han saknade f?rst?else f?r att reglerna ska f?ljas precis som de ?r skrivna. Jag kommer att g?ra en mycket kort utryckning som pekar p? huvudpunkterna i f?rh?llandet "bookmaker-player", varefter jag ?terkommer till den juridiska delen av det aktuella fallet.
Bookmakers villkor, efter godk?nnande av spelaren, har kraften i ett kontrakt mellan de tv? parterna. De ?taganden som uppst?r ?r tvingande, det vill s?ga det ?r obligatoriskt f?r de tv? parterna att respektera reglerna precis som de ?r skrivna. Det ?r inte till?tet att till?mpa dem selektivt eller ignorera dem. Det ?r om?jligt f?r n?gon av parterna i avtalet att efter eget gottfinnande g?ra 'undantag' uttryckta i handlingar som strider mot dem som st?r i reglerna. Om bookmakaren vill vidta ?tg?rder utanf?r kontraktets gr?nser har han m?jlighet att ?ndra villkoren och f?rst efter att spelaren accepterat dessa ?ndringar blir de nya reglerna till?mpliga.
Det finns en viss order inom spelbranschen f?r att aktualisera villkoren och det ?r f?ljande:
1. Bookmakern l?gger ut den nya versionen p? webbplatsen och pekar p? datumet d? de tr?der i kraft.
2. Bookmakern meddelar p? n?got s?tt spelarna om ?ndringen - med ett e -postmeddelande, ett meddelande eller n?r de loggar in - och ber dem att bekanta sig med de nya reglerna och acceptera dem f?r att forts?tta anv?nda bookmakerns tj?nster.
3. Spelaren p? hans sida bekantar sig med den nya versionen och v?ljer om han vill acceptera dem och forts?tta sin aktivitet eller inte och l?mna bookmakern.
I det specifika fallet:
F?r att l?gga till en bonus (en bonus, n?mligen inte en g?va!) Till mitt spelkonto i Playouwin, ?r det minst tv? saker som m?ste ?ndras:
1. Min status b?r g? fr?n "INTE ber?ttigad" till "ber?ttigad". Min status regleras i avsnitt 1.10 i Playouwins bonusvillkor, dvs detta avsnitt m?ste redigeras.
2. Ordningen f?r att kreditera en bonus till en spelares konto m?ste ocks? ?ndras. F?r tillf?llet m?ste spelaren g?ra anspr?k p? det. F?rmodligen vore det en bra idé om bonusarna l?ggs till p? bookmakers initiativ och motsvarande avsnitt i reglerna som ?r relevanta f?r de olika typerna av bonusar b?r redigeras.
Under den korta tid jag har anv?nt Playouwins webbplats har jag inte informerats om en ?ndring av deras villkor. Giltigheten i avsnitt 1.10 g?r det juridiskt om?jligt att fastst?lla n?got bonusf?rh?llande mellan mig och Playouwin. S? inga bonus?taganden kan tillskrivas mitt konto.
Jag tror att Playouwin kommer att respektera sina egna regler och styrs av sunt f?rnuft kommer de att komma ?verens om att reglerna ska f?ljas absolut och villkorsl?st. Dimensionen av konsekvenserna av deras brott mot villkoren (redan erk?nt av Playouwin som ett "undantag") ?r p? 1 020,42 euro som m?ste ?terst?llas till mitt konto.
Hello!
I had an unpleasant incident with Playouwin that I found on Aksgamblers and where afterwards I submitted a complaint against the casino. The description of the case, whole story of the complaint with Playouwin and Askgamblers’ replies you can find here:
https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/playouwin-casino-the-casino-added-an-unclaimed-bonus-to-my-account-and-confiscated-my-winnings-afterwards
I prepared my reply regarding Playouwin’s violation of their own terms and conditions but when I tried to post it I saw the complaint had been closed with no further possibility to be reopen or reconsidered. I post here the text of my reply:
--------
In their first reply, Playouwin’s representative said: ‘'we work in compliance per our bonus terms and conditions'. But in their second reply we read: 'we do exceptions and this was one and only of them'. So, the terms are sometimes respected and sometimes they are not… It seems that the bookmaker is who decides whether to work according to its terms or on the contrary – to say ‘this violation was just an exception.’
The technical part of this incident is interesting with the fact that the bookmaker pretends of violated bonus requirements although in the player’s account is clearly visible that there are none. But the technical part is just a consequence and the reason is of a legal character that the bookmaker did because his lack of understanding that the rules should be followed just as they are written. I will make a very short digression pointing out the main points of the 'bookmaker-player' relationship after which I will return to the legal part of the present case.
The bookmaker’s terms and conditions, after their acceptance by the player, have the power of a contract between the two parties. The resulting commitments are imperative, i.e. it is obligatory for the two parties to respect the rules just as they are written. It is not permissible to apply them selectively or to ignore them. It is impossible for either one of the sides of the contract to make at his discretion ‘exceptions’ expressed in actions contrary to those written in the rules. In case the bookmaker wants to take actions outside of the contract’s boundaries, he has the opportunity to change the terms and only after the player accept these changes the new rules become applicable.
There is a certain order in the betting industry for actualizing the terms and conditions and it is the following:
1. The bookmaker posts the new version on the website pointing the date they enter into force.
2. The bookmaker somehow notify the players of the change – with an email, a message or when logging in – and ask them to get familiar with the new rules and accept them in order to continue using the bookmaker’s services.
3. The player on his side get familiar with the new version and choose whether to accept them and continue his activity or not and leave the bookmaker.
In the specific case:
In order to add a bonus (a bonus namely, not a gift!) to my betting account in Playouwin, there are at least two things that need to be changed:
1. My status should go from ‘NOT entitled’ to ‘entitled’. My status is regulated in section 1.10 of Playouwin’s Bonus terms and conditions, i.e. this section needs to be edited.
2. The order of crediting a bonus to a player’s account needs to be changed, as well. At the moment the player needs to claim it. Probably it would be a good idea if the bonuses are added on the bookmaker’s initiative and the corresponding sections of the rules relevant to the different types of bonuses should be edited.
During the short period of time I have been using Playouwin’s website I have not been informed of a change in their terms and conditions. The validity of section 1.10 make it legally impossible to determine any bonus relationship between me and Playouwin. So, no bonus engagements could be imputed to my account.
I believe that Playouwin will respect their own rules and guided by the common sense they will agree the rules should be followed absolutely and unconditionally. The dimension of the consequences from their violation of the terms (already admitted by Playouwin as an ‘exception’) is in the amount of €1,020.42 that needs to be restored to my account.
Automatiskt ?versatt: