Casino Midas - remove non bonus related winnings for bonus abuse

Hi jbls1 - thanks for getting in contact.

I'll be happy to get in contact with Casino Midas for you but before I can I need you to provide me with the username and email address you use there. Once I've got those I'll try and contact them.

It would also be very useful if you could send me screen shots of your account history. If you can, email them to [email protected]

Thanks

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

Just to keep you informed, I have received a response from Casino Midas, but at the present time those responses have only detailed that an authorized individual will respond to this issue shortly.

I realise these sorts of delays are frustrating, but I'd like to ask you to bare with me while I try to get Casino Midas to come to the table.

Thanks for your patience.

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

Due to the direction that my discussion with Casino Midas has taken, I'm now required to enter into a non-disclosure agreement regarding the information that they are looking to share. This is going to take a few days to arrange documentation wise. Please bare with me while I get everything put in place.

In the meantime, after discussion with Casino Midas, they have agreed to return your deposit while we discuss the rest of the issues. This payment should already have been made to you. If you could confirm that you've received the payment and the size (for updating our recovery total), I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

Thanks for confirming that you've received £4300 worth of deposits returned. By the looks of things, they've returned all your deposits, so if you could check this and confirm for me that would be useful.

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

I'm still waiting on a response from Casino Midas. I haven't had any response from them since last week, so I'll be chasing that up now.

Thanks

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

Unfortunately after a promising start to the conversation, I've been unable to get any response out of Casino Midas for over a week now. This could be nothing more than the member off staff responsible for dealing with this issue being absent, so while this is frustrating I'm going to hold off om making any judgements at this stage.

I'll give them until Saturday the 24th of August - another two weeks and vastly more than ample time to put together whatever Non-Disclosure Agreements they feel are required - to respond and if I haven't heard from them by then I'm going to assume that they've changed their minds about discussing this issue and publish my report.

Sorry for the delays.

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

I've just heard back from Casino Midas. Before we can proceed any further, Casino Midas require you to sign and return the form they've emailed you giving your consent for them to discuss your account. When you do this, if you could CC [email protected] so I can see that this consent has been given I'd appreciate it.

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

Have you emailed Casino Midas the permission they requested yet?

Thanks

ThePOGG

Hi jbls1,

Has this permission been forwarded to Casino Midas yet?

Thanks

ThePOGG

At this point I feel it's completely fair to assume that jbls1 has decided not to move forward with the mediation process. jbls1 has expressed the view over email (one month previous) that they do not feel that they should have to go out of their way to provide Casino Midas the requested permission to discuss their account. This however is a legal requirement before the discussion of any financial or personal account, be that with a bank, utility companies or any other group that holds personal information on you. Different groups will always have different standards that their legal department's have stipulated to ensure that they are not in breach of any privacy laws, but ThePOGG.com will always support any reasonable requests for permission. If anything, groups that take a stronger stance on this issue are more likely to be viewed positively as protecting a player's personal data from falling into the wrong hands is a crucial security issue. I've had to think long and hard about how this case would be marked up. In the case where a casino refuses to provide supporting evidence related to a complaint yet claims that the player has breached terms a complaint would usually be marked as 'Unresolved' as we have a he said/she said situation wherein there is not enough available evidence to support either party. This is the first instance we've encountered of a player creating the obstacle to continued discourse. My first thought was to treat this in the same fashion as the casino refusing to share evidence, but there is one critical difference - in any complaint proceeding the casino is completely identifiable while the player is completely anonymous. This leads to an imbalance wherein the casino who refuse to communicate is subject to a report that highlights ambiguity regarding their behaviour which has the potential to negatively impact their reputation while the player who choose to impede the discussion can just dispose of the username they posted the complaint under and start fresh under another assumed name, allowing a player with a grudge to inflict potentially damaging press exposure on a casino while ensuring that they suffer no negative consequences even in a social sense. As such I've made the decision that in the situation where a complaint cannot be fully addressed due to the player choosing to be the obstruction to the mediation process the complaint will be marked in favor of the casino as Resolved. ThePOGG