Diamond Club VIP - Mismanaged Bonuses

Hi jonathan7799 - welcome to ThePOGG.com!

Unfortunately there's nothing we can do to help you in this instance.

Firstly you should be aware that as a UK citizen you should not be playing with any operator that does not hold a UKGC license. Diamond Club VIP do not hold a UK license and as such are breaching UK law by accepting your play.

With this specific situation Diamond Club VIP do carry the following term:

"Bets placed on all games other than slot machines will be deemed a violation of the terms and conditions, your bonus and winnings will be voided."

While I appreciate that casino support may have given you incorrect advice at the point where you were given this advice you clearly had already violated this term. In other words, it wasn't the incorrect information that you were given that caused the violation. As such there would be no grounds for us to argue for the return of your funds. All I can suggest is that in future you ensure that you read the terms and conditions associated with any promotion you accept.

Sorry we could not be of further help!

ThePOGG

Thank you for your quick response. Here is my issue with it. All deposits come with an automatic bonus (you actually have to email to have this automation removed). If ALL deposits come with a bonus then why do they allow you to play any other game than slots? Surely, there should be some mechanism in their website that allows you to make a deposit and play any game you wish (even if a bonus is applied)? But to allow you to play for hours on a game and then turn around and say, sorry but you shouldn't have been playing it with a bonus (which they automatically applied) seems like just getting out of paying you any winnings. Isn't the onus on the casino to only allow you to play games you are eligible for? Many Thanks, [EDIT]

I would completely agree with your statement if a) bonuses were not automatic or you could opt-out on making a deposit and b) if their website allowed you to play other games but removed the bonus funds or warned you in advance. None of the above is the case. [EDIT]

Hi jonathan7799,

Firstly, accepting a bonus is passive in nature. You accept the bonus when you see it in your account and do not ask for it to be removed. "Acceptance" by definition does not require action, it required lack of action. Even within the UK license operators are allowed to add bonuses to your account that you qualify for automatically and the onus falls to the player to contact support to get them removed if they do not wish to "accept" the bonus.

Secondly, while I agree it would be nice if all operator automatically prevented you from playing the games or placing bets that would violate bonus terms, as almost all operators are running on multi-platform systems now - offering software from a lot of different providers - the practical implications of compiling a system that can integrate with all of these different softwares is substantial. Again even within the licensed UK market this is not currently required and very few operators have this sort of infrastructure in place.

Thanks,

ThePOGG

So, the fact that when I asked their online chat team why I couldn't withdraw and was told because of a 10% wager rule (that turned out to be false) rather than being told I shouldn't be playing the game at all (due to the bonus) isn't sufficient grounds for concern? Surely they should have informed me that I couldn't withdraw because I wasn't abiding by the Ts and Cs and advised me to stop at that point? In fact they told me to continue playing until my wager requirements on the bonus had been met. Surely this type of mis-information could be legitimate cause for complaint? [EDIT]

Hi jonathan7799,

It would be grounds for a complaint had it lead to the the confiscation of the balance. For instance, depending on the circumstances, if you had been advised before you played that you could play Caribbean Poker then that advice could be viewed to have led you to make the breach of terms. The facts here are that the advice about Caribbean Poker counting as 10% didn't make any difference. Even telling you directly at that point that you could play Caribbean Poker wouldn't have made any difference. The advice came after the fact of your violation and as such could not be considered to have had any bearing on your decision to play a game that was restricted by terms.It's not good practice and the support agent should certainly be retrained, but it does not provide grounds to argue that you should be paid.

Sorry,

ThePOGG

Hi, During the chat session the operative gave me specific count-down figures of how much more I needed to wager in order to qualify. On two or three occasions during the 20th to the morning of the 21st they gave specific amounts. How could they do this unless a rule was being applied? Surely this is very misleading information regardless of their other terms and conditions. They must have got those figures from somewhere... I also made further deposits on that occasion oblivious to the fact that I was in breach of terms because I had been told about the 10% rule so was unaware every time I made a further deposit. If they had made me aware I would have used the deposits/bonuses on eligible games. The fact is I was completely misled. Regards, [EDIT]

Hi jonathan7799,

You were NOT misled. To have been mislead you would have had to be directed to take action that would have led you to the breach of terms. You had breached the terms before you ever contacted support.

Yes you were given flawed information AFTER you had already breached the terms in a manner that meant you were not going to get paid. But this flawed information made no difference what-so-ever as you'd already breached the terms meaning you weren't going to get paid.

Ultimately this support agent's mistake - which likely occurred from representing several different casinos with several different rule sets at the same time - hasn't made any difference to the outcome. So whether or not you consider yourself to have been mislead makes no difference.

I'm sorry but I've given you a very clear explanation of our position on this issue and there's nothing further we can do to help you.

ThePOGG