Rushmore Casino steals $7444 with no adequate explanation given

[Embalu]

This response of Rushmore is in contradiction with their previous responses. Here is an earlier response of the casino:

"This player was investigated and the address was visited that he had provided on sign-up. He did not reside at the address which he had indicated, due to this we refunded his deposits rather than paying out the winnings. He was certified with us also but due to several accounts in the region coming back as having used stolen identities we had to rely on private investigators to check the addresses provided. If a player did not reside and an address they had provided we considered the account fraudulent and did not proceed further with investigating them."

Here they admit that they didn't investigate further after the address issue which means that they don't have any other reasons of not paying. They specifically state here that the reason is the address problem and that they didn't investigate further.

Moreover, they have never mentioned in the past that they also have other reasons, they have always kept repeating that the reason is that the address is not mine. Also, Steve informed me that they have not mentioned this to him until he pointed out that the address issue is a weak excuse. Then they suddenly came back with this other excuse.

"This is due to other investigations which were carried out which show connections between several players which in most cases were..." - It is clear that here they speak about their investigations in general, and not specifically about my case. They don't explicitly say that I were connected to somebody because they know very well that this doesn't apply to me.

[thepokerkeep]

It looks to me like Embalu is the victim of bad timing and nothing more.

It's unfortunate that he somehow got mistakenly included in the fraudulent group that Rushmore was investigating at the same time Embalu was attempting to withdraw his winnings.

From what I'm reading here, he was completely cleared by the investigators. It's now time for Rushmore to step up and make things right for this player.

Unless Rushmore has absolute proof that Embalu was defrauding the casino, failure to pay the man his winnings amounts to outright theft.

We're talking about $7k here..... not life changing money but enough to make a big difference in someones' life. Hardly enough money for the casino to risk their reputation over!

C-Planet and Rushmore were on my short list of properties to be added to my new projects but until this is resolved, I will not be doing business with them.

[joeyl]

Just another RTG clip joint anyway Pokerkeep.

Common identifiers it is now.

Before it was another residence.

The real problem is the player kept complaining, and the casino tried to ignore rather than see it through in a professional manner.

[Caruso]

Huh? What am I missing here? Are the above comments a response to Anthony's post about notifying Ben? Or am I missing something else?

I posted, nice and publically, in "unethical behaviour reports".

Next thing I know, it's been shifted into this far less public affiliate-only forum. Not only that, but the "trail thread" thingy, the "ghost" thread which remains in the original forum along with the "moved" sign, has also been deleted.

FWIW, when the Casino Rewards matter was resolved, the thread was also moved. That in itself is, shall we say, understandable if inexcusable, BUT they also deleted the "moved" reference whatsit. WTF??

I ask that this thread be moved back to the forum where I posted it, the "unethicla behaviour reports" forum. I hope I don't need to go into WHY.

[joeyl]

It is arguable it should remain in the unethical section until resolved.

I think every GPWA member should check the unethical section when they drop by.

This thing's been going a while, no point in getting wound up at this stage.

[Caruso]

Ok then, it sounds like Rushmore is saying that the problem here isn't even about the address, but is about the other wider investigation of the id fraud. You say he was exonerated. It doesn't sound like Rushmore agreed that he wasn't part of that group they were investigating.

Unfortunately, while casinos can usually heap obfuscation upon obfuscation in their attempt to steal players' legitimate winnings, in this case they cannot. The reason they cannot is, oddly enough, to their credit - they actually conducted a proper, independent investigation into the matter. If they'd simply reeled out all the usual BS about multi-accounts I daresay many would have bought it as per inevitable. But they did not.
<O</O
<O</O
They investigated a player for a specific alleged wrongdoing. He passed.
<O</O
So let's not now start on with the "well, maybe what they ACTUALLY meant was..." line. You can usually sell that one, but not in this case, because in this case we have independent proof.

And yes: well noted about the Rushmore rep's lie about this being resolved. This is a lie - not a "mistake" - because he was specifically invited to discuss the matter in private at GIA, and he specifically refused.<O</O
<O</O

It's just another indicator of the disreputable behaviour of this disreputable group.

A possibly irrelevant note is to say that this casino used to be considered "reputable" by the most reliable section of the online gambling industry for reputation reporting: bonus hunters. If the BH brigade says a casino is paying, then it certainly is, because they are THE worst possible casino customers and the first to get shafted. Yet not so long ago, I was seeing praise for them.

So Rushmore did use to be solid, little question on that.

A similar note is to mention that in Budapest, they were handing out 60% affiliate commission deals. No way is 60% sustainable. No way.

My point?

I think times have got tough, they've paid out a fair bit and are desperate to save money now. They fully expected the pay off on the cost of this "independent investigation" to be a full exoneration of their suspicions and full non-payment of all winnings, and they are gutted to discover that people are actually owed. And right, although 7.5K hardly seems a bank-breaking sum, we don't know how solid they are right now. They may be barely ticking over.

My speculation regarding their liquidity is just that: speculation - though I'd say it fits the bill.

There is no speculation about this player's case. Let's be clear about that.

[Rushmore Ben]

Hi Caruso,

As I mentioned before I do not take care of player issues and only the marketing side of the the business.

So I have nothing to add to this dispute and it is between the player and the casino manager to solve this.

However where do you get off making statements like this ?

"A similar note is to mention that in Budapest, they were handing out 60% affiliate commission deals. No way is 60% sustainable. No way."

There where two people present in Budapest myself and Steve Rubin, who now works for another operator. We would never make a 60% rev-share deal and certainly did not.

I really would like to meet you face to face to discuss this so called 60% deal you or another affiliates where offered.

So lets make a time to meet in Prague and you can tell me all about it!

Regards

Ben

Unfortunately, while casinos can usually heap obfuscation upon obfuscation in their attempt to steal players' legitimate winnings, in this case they cannot. The reason they cannot is, oddly enough, to their credit - they actually conducted a proper, independent investigation into the matter. If they'd simply reeled out all the usual BS about multi-accounts I daresay many would have bought it as per inevitable. But they did not.
<o></o>
<o></o>
They investigated a player for a specific alleged wrongdoing. He passed.
<o></o>
So let's not now start on with the "well, maybe what they ACTUALLY meant was..." line. You can usually sell that one, but not in this case, because in this case we have independent proof.

And yes: well noted about the Rushmore rep's lie about this being resolved. This is a lie - not a "mistake" - because he was specifically invited to discuss the matter in private at GIA, and he specifically refused.<o></o>
<o></o>

It's just another indicator of the disreputable behaviour of this disreputable group.

A possibly irrelevant note is to say that this casino used to be considered "reputable" by the most reliable section of the online gambling industry for reputation reporting: bonus hunters. If the BH brigade says a casino is paying, then it certainly is, because they are THE worst possible casino customers and the first to get shafted. Yet not so long ago, I was seeing praise for them.

So Rushmore did use to be solid, little question on that.

A similar note is to mention that in Budapest, they were handing out 60% affiliate commission deals. No way is 60% sustainable. No way.

My point?

I think times have got tough, they've paid out a fair bit and are desperate to save money now. They fully expected the pay off on the cost of this "independent investigation" to be a full exoneration of their suspicions and full non-payment of all winnings, and they are gutted to discover that people are actually owed. And right, although 7.5K hardly seems a bank-breaking sum, we don't know how solid they are right now. They may be barely ticking over.

My speculation regarding their liquidity is just that: speculation - though I'd say it fits the bill.

There is no speculation about this player's case. Let's be clear about that.

[joeyl]

Charming.

[Caruso]

Totally irrelevant to the issue, but to clear up:

We would never make a 60% rev-share deal and certainly did not.

Another lie. I was there, and saw it. Call it marketing hype, whatever. 60% affiliate cut. I didn't photograph it - I didn't see any reason to. But there it was.

I hope the sheer arrogance of this affiliate rep is now plain for you all to see.

[Rushmore Ben]

Hi ,

1. It is relevant, you are calling me a liar and claiming something that is not true.

2. What are you talking about ? what did you see ? do you want me to send you a picture of the both.

3. How am I being arrogant by defending my part of the business which is marketing?

4. Its Ok to air your frustrations over a player issue, but to state things that just aren't true and to accuse me of lying is not on.

5. Please explain what you saw or think you saw or heard , please just explain.

Regards

Ben

Totally irrelevant to the issue, but to clear up:



Another lie. I was there, and saw it. Call it marketing hype, whatever. 60% affiliate cut. I didn't photograph it - I didn't see any reason to. But there it was.

I hope the sheer arrogance of this affiliate rep is now plain for you all to see.

[GCG]

IMO this is a PLAYERS issue and Ben is trying to HELP, so let him do that.

Affiliate marketing for C planet is his business, 60% commission for a month is a common offer.

Calling somebody a liar is another way of showing your frustration and the sad truth is that name calling is quite common now on this forum too.

[TheCPA]

Hi Ben.

I too wrote to you asking for help on this and got the patent response that You handle the affiliates and Louise handles the players.

We only came to you because Louise would not engage us on the problem to solve it.

it is between the player and the casino manager to solve this.

That would be fine, however, the Casino Manager has to participate if this is going to get resolved.

All of inquires have been met with short and sweet answers.
All essentially just stating the decision has been made and there will be no more discussion from the Casino Management on the matter.

That said Ben, as affiliates that care about fair treatment to the players we send the various programs, I think this situation puts you on the playing field too. Not just Louise.

When a player has a legitimate issue, it's ALL OF OUR PROBLEM.
Affiliates, Players, Casino Managers, and YES,...Affiliate Managers too.

With that in mind, we are asking you to take up this case and get it resolved in the best interest of keeping the Affiliates satisfied, if for no other reason than that.

Thanks,
Nick

[Caruso]

IMO this is a PLAYERS issue and Ben is trying to HELP, so let him do that.

Gotta tell you something:

Without players, there are no affiliates.

[Caruso]

As to the arrogant offer to "talk to me in Prague": if this character represents affiliates only, then that is pointless. The redoubtable Louise may be a different matter, however. Assuming this isn't cleared up properly in the next two weeks, then please pencil that one in.

Maybe a GPWA representative could avail themselves and be present, as a trusted affiliate representative? It'd be an hour max.

I would rather see it cleared up before then, of course. The last meeting I had, in similar circumstances, at the last event was not one that any of us will recall with much affection, good intentions nothwithstanding.

[TheCPA]

Without players, there are no affiliates.

I think it's even more than that.

Without affiliates, most of these casinos would not survive the competition out there. Hell, a lot of them don't anyway!

Without Casinos, the software providers would suffer.

I get right back to the real solution I have preached on for years.

It takes ALL OF US to make things work properly and fairly!

Affiliates, Software Providers, Players, and Affiliate/Casino Managers.

It takes all of us working together to solve and resolve all issues regardless of which entity might have been fouled.

In this case it's the Player, however, if an Affiliate were having a problem, I would hope the Players would rise to lend a helping hand too.
Actually, that does seem to happening a bit more in recent years, and I think it's a good thing.

[GCG]

Gotta tell you something:

Without players, there are no affiliates.

Absolutely !

I just hope this will be sorted out asap for the player.

[pgaming]

If it matters Embalu you have my vote of confidence and you should be paid ASAP. The rest is just useless rhetoric IMO. Rushmore's careless handling of personal documents is negligent on their part.

Played and won now pay the man!

Good luck Embalu

greek39

[Rushmore Ben]

Hi Nick,

Both Louise and I are employees, we don't make decisions.
I have spoken to Casino management yesterday and the decision stays the same.

I don't call the shots and therefore have nothing more to add.

Regards

Ben

Hi Ben.

I too wrote to you asking for help on this and got the patent response that You handle the affiliates and Louise handles the players.

We only came to you because Louise would not engage us on the problem to solve it.



That would be fine, however, the Casino Manager has to participate if this is going to get resolved.

All of inquires have been met with short and sweet answers.
All essentially just stating the decision has been made and there will be no more discussion from the Casino Management on the matter.

That said Ben, as affiliates that care about fair treatment to the players we send the various programs, I think this situation puts you on the playing field too. Not just Louise.

When a player has a legitimate issue, it's ALL OF OUR PROBLEM.
Affiliates, Players, Casino Managers, and YES,...Affiliate Managers too.

With that in mind, we are asking you to take up this case and get it resolved in the best interest of keeping the Affiliates satisfied, if for no other reason than that.

Thanks,
Nick

[Rushmore Ben]

Hi Caruso,

1. In regards to a meeting , it is to discuss the so called 60% rev-share we offer.

2. I really have no idea what you are talking about , when did we ever meet ?

3.
Both Louise and I are employees, we don't make decisions.
I have spoken to Casino management yesterday and the decision stays the same.

I don't call the shots and therefore have nothing more to add.

Regards

Ben

As to the arrogant offer to "talk to me in Prague": if this character represents affiliates only, then that is pointless. The redoubtable Louise may be a different matter, however. Assuming this isn't cleared up properly in the next two weeks, then please pencil that one in.

Maybe a GPWA representative could avail themselves and be present, as a trusted affiliate representative? It'd be an hour max.

I would rather see it cleared up before then, of course. The last meeting I had, in similar circumstances, at the last event was not one that any of us will recall with much affection, good intentions nothwithstanding.

[Daera]

So Ben, what is the official reason why the casino refuses to pay this players winnings?