Android Phone

iPad

iPhone

Windows

Bitcoin

US Dollar

Ainsworth

Amatic

Aristocrat

Ash Gaming

Atronic

Bally

Bally Wulff

Barcrest

Betdigital

Betsense

Betsoft

Big Time Gaming

Blueprint Gaming

Booming Games

Cadillac Jack

Casino Technology

Endorphina

Everi

FUGASO

GameArt

Gamesys

Genesis Gaming

High 5 Games

Inspired Gaming

Iron Dog Studio

iSoftBet

Konami

Lightning Box Games

Merkur

Microgaming

MultiSlot

Nektan

NetEnt

NextGen Gaming

Novomatic

OMI Gaming

Play'n Go

Playson

Playtech

Pragmatic Play

Rabcat

Saucify

Shuffle Master

Side City Studios

Sigma Gaming

Skywind

SpadeGaming

Spielo

Spigo

Spin Games

Spinmatic

StakeLogic

Thunderkick

Tom Horn Gaming

Wazdan

Yggdrasil Gaming

Kahnawake

Slots.lv Casino

Amex

Bank Transfer

Interac

Master Card

VISA

Chat

Email

Phone

Hi ps831 - welcome to ThePOGG.com!

Unfortunately there's nothing we can do to help you in this instance.

In any well licensed market there would be advertising standards to refer to. Unfortunately in this case, you are resident in a market where online gambling is illegal and are playing with an operator that is breaking US law by accepting your play. There is no authority to set the standards that the operators would have to adhere to.

From a comparative position, if this issue was to have occurred at a MGA licensed operator inclusion of this term within the promotional terms, or within the general terms page would be sufficient to expect adherence. Under the UKGC system the term would have to be both included within the promotional term and summarised within the advert as a 'significant term'. In both cases you would have an arguable case. But it is the existence of the regulatory authority to decide the standards that have to be adhered to within their market that allows for that position to be taken. Without that we have an operator who is effectively legally untouchable, from a group that is only partially cooperative with complaint management and a case where there is no clear definition of how far from the advertisement relevant terms are allowed to be. In short it's not a case we could pursue with any realistic expectation of a positive outcome.

Sorry we cannot be of further help.

ThePOGG

The player is looking to argue that the term in question was too hard to find, but as this is an unlicensed operator there is no regulatory body to set this type of condition.

On 4/19, I won $28,825 playing on the double up bonus at Slots.lv. I signed up for Slots.lv because of their seemingly excellent reputation as well as their (advertised) no maximum withdrawals or wager size when playing with a bonus. My basic strategy was to deposit between $45 and $80 for the 200% unlimited bonus and wager $20 per spin (between 8% and 14% of the starting balance). On the particular deposit in question, I started winning right away and played my rush increasing to $50 per spin. As the slots stayed hot and my balance increased further, I raised my bets to $100 per spin and had an amazing run, ending with $28,825.
 On 4/20, my account was verified and I put in for a withdrawal. On 4/21, my account was then locked, and on 4/23, I was told to call and confirm my identity. On 4/24, I repeatedly called the phone number Slots.lv provided but no one ever answered. I then went onto their online chat, spoke with Shontelle, and arranged Slots.lv to call me the next day. They neither did that, nor called me at any point. On 5/6, I received an email from Slots.lv stating that I had broken their terms and conditions and my winnings were voided.
 As I was extremely upset, I immediately arranged for legal counsel to represent me and my attorney contacted them on 5/8 outlining - 1) their rules were so hidden so as to not be binding and 2) I was not guilty of bonus abuse. On 5/21, Slots.lv responded negatively, and on 6/1, my attorney refuted all their arguments except the 20% of deposit rule. However, this rule (or any of their bonus rules) is so hidden it constitutes false advertising and should not be enforced here. These letters are all listed at bottom and have been emailed to complaints@thepogg.com. Note also that the vast majority of the bonus terms and conditions that constitute bonus abuse refer to a player who bets large at the beginning and then reduces their wagers after getting ahead. My play was the exact opposite.
 Briefly, here is my argument - Upon signing up, I read the bonus terms and conditions. The double up bonus is advertised on the site and here are the terms (this is from 7/14, the bonus was 200% and unlimited when I played in April. I can produce the original terms if necessary):
 THE DOUBLE UP TERMS AND CONDITIONS
 • Players must have made a deposit to be eligible for this bonus.
 • The Daily Double Up consists of a 100% match bonus up to $100 per redemption, which can be redeemed once per day.
 • As of June 29th 2020, The Daily Double Up Bitcoin Edition consists of a 150% match bonus up to $500 with 2 redemptions per day. Must be depositing with Bitcoin to be eligible.
 • For the Bitcoin match bonus, the minimum deposit required is $10.
 • Once the bonus code has been redeemed, players must meet the playthrough requirement before being able to use the next bonus code.
 • Deposit plus bonus amount is subject to a specific playthrough requirement before the deposit and bonus amount and any winnings can be withdrawn.
 • The playthrough requirement for withdrawal is viewable in the My Rewards section of your Account Dashboard by clicking on the specific bonus.
 • Forfeiting this bonus will result in this bonus and any subsequent winnings associated with this bonus to be removed.
 • All games contribute to playthough requirements; however, certain games may have a greater contribution than others. For more information please view our wagering contribution chart.
 
 GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
 • The general rules and policies of www.slots.lv shall also apply to the Promotion
 • Slots.lv has the right to cancel or withdraw the Promotion or change any of its terms at any time and without cause or notice.
 • Bonus funds may not be used in any Live Dealer games.
 
 There are two links on these rules. The first is to the wagering contribution chart, which I was not concerned about because I only planned to play slots and did not care about contributions of other games. The second link is to general rules and policies of www.slots.lv. This is simply the home page. Trying to exercise due diligence, I found terms of service and clicked that. The terms of service are nine (screenshot) pages long. I read all of it and saw no mention of any specific bonus terms and conditions. Apparently, there is a help link at very bottom of Section 6.4 (which is quite a long section as well) which links to specific bonus terms and conditions such as what constitutes bonus abuse as well as the 20% of deposit maximum wager rule.
 I believe this most important 20% max wager rule is hidden to an extent that it is unreasonable to expect a player to find it and therefore should not be held as the basis to withhold fair winnings. If I continued to play and lose, as was most likely, I would not have been given my money back.
 Before playing, I had also looked at many affiliate sites, among them kasinoking.co.uk. That site clearly advertises NO in the column for max wager. As further proof that Slots.lv is engaging in false advertising, all this information was sent to Slots.lv on 5/8, and as of today the kasinoking.co.uk website has still not been updated. Furthermore, Slots.lv has updated their double up bonus page but felt no need to add any mention of bonus rules or a maximum allowed wager when playing with a bonus. Note that thepogg.com also currently advertises no maximum wager on their website.
 I feel that if Slots.lv is an honorable casino (as they are the sister of highly rated Bovada.lv) they will restore my balance and pay my fairly won winnings as well as update their website and contact their affiliates that are continuing (almost 3 months after my alerting Slots.lv) to advertise no maximum wager.
 
 PS: The following has been emailed to complaints@thepogg.com in 4 emails of 3 attachments each (to insure the emails do not get blocked). These include communications with the casino and relevant screenshots of rules and affiliate sites.
 
 1) 4/21 proof of account verification (1PrinceProofOfVerification).
 2) 4/24 chat attempting to arrange verification call (2PrinceSlotsLVChat).
 3) 5/6 email from Slots.lv informing me that my account was being closed based for investigation (3PrinceAccountClosureMay6).
 4) 5/6 email from Slots.lv informing me that I was guilty of bonus abuse and my winnings confiscated (4PrinceConfiscatedWinningsMay6)
 5) 5/8 letter from my attorney to Dispute Resolution Office (DRO) among others (5LowyToDROLetter1May8).
 6) 5/21 response from DRO (6DRORespons1May21).
 7) 6/1 letter from my attorney to DRO rebutting their response (7LowyToDRO2June1).
 8) 6/15 response from DRO (8DROResponse2June15).
 9) Slots.lv Double Up Bonus rules as of 7/14 (9SLVDblUpRulesJuly15)
 10) Slots.lv Terms of Service as of 5/22 (10SLVTermsOFServiceMay22).
 11) Kasinoking.co.uk proof of no max wager as of 6/24 (11KasinoKingProofJuly15).
 12) Thepogg.com proof of no max wager as of July 23 (12PoggSlotsLVNoMaxBetJuly23).
 

Slots.lv - hiding and misrepresenting bonus terms and confiscating my winnings

To submit an online gambling complaint, register a new account or log in.

Create account

Log in

Got a complaint about a gambling site?

Casino Review Site Logo

Log out

Account

Title

Complaint Details

Posted By

Disputed amount

Date raised

Date closed

Player’s Complaint

To protect the privacy of our users, all personally identifiable information has been redacted. If you see anything we've missed contact us at complaints@casinoreviews.com.

Player's Complaint

Player Complaint Responses

Complaint Title

This complaint may have been archived. If you are looking for information about your complaint, please contact us at complaints@casinoreviews.com