Rushmore Casino steals $7444 with no adequate explanation given

[Embalu]

Rushmore has not replied within the deadline at askgamblers.com, so the casino was credited with negative points and this appears at the complaint status "Very unresponsive and unprofessional Customer Support.":
http://www.askgamblers.com/c-83/rush...gnores-e-mails

But I'm still hoping that something will happen at their meeting.

[bb1web]

Perhaps this will help them.

When this all first came to light I backed the casino on principal, though as E will probably recall, I did try on his behalf to get him satisfaction.

However I understood, as it was presented to me at that time (as I understood it, sometimes i get things wrong, but anyway) ... that the reason the denial was the info was not presented correctly about who's address it really was, and if you make exception for one it opens a can of worms which by technicality, is not one deserved.

Not how I would have played it. I would have paid the guy, and the 10 or 20k it cost, which to my knowledge, the only thing the player was really guilty of , was having had some transactions with known fraudsters, but that was the extent. and of course not specifying that his address was his mother's, not his own. (the technicality).

that money paid would have been the greatest advertising money could buy. Not too mention it sets a mindset with those in the industry that if something of the same / similar comes up again, if you then said no, ... not much of us would have questioned you because you paid the time before. (therefore making it known this was not going to fly the next time around, but that you'd be big enough to do it this one time).

I remind, you would be paying not someone guilty of fraud, but (to my knowledge) is really only guilty of bad decision making, or perhaps better said, misunderstanding.

that said, here's the other reason I sided with the casino after their denying my requests he get paid. The player knew everything to do to handle this matter in ... to my mind .... almost perfection.

Though I would have went to myself first, (based on I know I have had great success in such matters and in fact just got a Lady paid 2k that she will tell you she didn't ever think she'd see) but if not me ... next stop would have been Caruso amongst a handful of top choices.

The player was very well documented, in every way except the one that mattered which would have avoided all this.

Most people would not be so versed in chasing down a non payment , as they would be likely to just follow the rules and give correct info in the first place.

Now maybe there is room for mistake due to reasons given (rather than re-hash it), but in same breath, it very much makes me think if the player knew to do all that he did to get as far as he has gone (which has been a ways , congrats on that E), that why on earth didn't he think to cover his bases in the first place?

That's one base to have covered in the first, ..... since then I assure you he's rounded the diamond several times to arrive here today.

so based on the technicality, and the fact that I believe, the player knew better, and for whatever reason, not necessarily evil, he didn't cover his base .. surely not in the competent manner he has addressed the situation since.


...........

but here's the thing C Planet.

Even though there's not a slew of complaints against you about not paying, as a partner in business, I have to seriously question your entire approach.

Instead of turning this situation to your favor, by being the bigger, more magnanimous casino which is player-friendly, and strives to pay those who are innocent, but perhaps stupid (sorry E, no offense, remember I'm working to get you paid here and you haven't looked stupid near enough - short of the original mistake of not giving proper info of location) ....

instead you nix the image of being the casino that cares. That is not cold and heartless. To appearing to be just that.

............

Your whole approach has sucked. And unless you're prepared to provide some tangible evidence as to why this player may be a fraud, then you need to suck it up and save while there is still something to save. People forgive those who realize their mistakes. They never forget a stubborn beyond reason attitude.

.........

Now please do the right thing here, and either provide us with a reason for not paying beyond that of some vague generic response, or pay the person so we can all get on with life an I personally ..... don't have to go around and take down all your links because you refuse to recognize that we need more than just your say so ... that the player is fraudulent or otherwise undeserving beyond that of the mother's address scenario.

Not because that would be wrong, but because you have not stuck to that as the main reason, therefore that loses credibility.

.........


* I take moment to apologize to anyone one I might have offended in my rather strong wording but it was to make a point, not to make accusation or light.

[bb1web]

I hasten to add that you don't have to provide proof to the whole world, Rick mentioned at GIA that a few affs who have no financial interest in the matter, would suffice nicely. Show them.

[bb1web]

<title>HTML clipboard</title><meta name="description" content="Slot tournaments at online casinos can be played daily, over a period of time or play the sit and go tourneys at these respected online casinos."><meta name="keywords" content="slot, tournaments, machine, games, online, casinos, tourneys"><meta name="Microsoft Border" content="trb"><style type="text/css" media="all"> table.cltrn { margin: 1em 0; width: 100%; border: 1px solid #aaa; border-collapse: collapse; } table.cltrn th { background-color: #aaa; border-bottom: 3px double #aaa; color: #ddd; font-weight: bold; padding: 8px 5px; } table.cltrn td { padding: 3px 5px; text-align: center; } table.cltrn tr { border: 1px dotted #aaa; border-width: 1px 0; } table.cltrn tr.odd {} table.cltrn tr.even { background-color: #DDDDDD; } table.cltrn th.name, table.cltrn td.name, table.cltrn th.casino, table.cltrn td.casino { text-align: left; } table.cltrn td.date {} table.cltrn tr.started td.starts { color: #009900; } table.cltrn td.endsoon { color: red; } table.cltrn td.prize {} table.cltrn td.entry {} table.cltrn td.flag { width: 16px; } table.cltrn td.us { background: transparent url('http://www.casinolistings.com/sites/all/themes/casinolistings/images/flags/us.gif') no-repeat 50% 50%; } table.cltrn td.us-some { background: transparent url('http://www.casinolistings.com/sites/all/themes/casinolistings/images/flags/us-some.gif') no-repeat 50% 50%; } table.cltrn div.description { color: #0000FF; font-size: 60%; } table.cltrn div.sort { display: none; } div#cltrn a { color: ##0000FF; } div#cltrn p.linkback { color: #0000FF; font-size: 60%; } </style>

In case you didn't understand me, because I know i'm bad at that sometimes, what i tried to say is that first the casino claimed the info provided for the owner of the address, was incorrect (he said it was him, not his mother).




But then somewhere along the way there was voiced that this was due to fraud suspicion and that it wouldn't have been paid no matter what.




Understandable that you may have chosen to use the technicality of the incorrect home owner as a reason to not pay, as to rather give up that you were on to a fraud tactic.





But once this went as public as it has, it should have been a change of tactics on the part of the casino for 2 reasons, 1) he might be innocent of evil intent, 2) BECAUSE any ad agent worth his morning coffee would have seen this for the opportunity that it was, and even if it meant giving a fraudster his early Christmas, that it would STILL ALSO BE your casino's same, and for a fraction of the money it would cost to gain such public sentiment.


IF, you could purchase it at any price.


Think about it guys. You need to have some sort of working relationship between the departments if for no other reason than simple good business, let alone the real, legit reason for doing it.


Because it is the right, smart thing to do.



I can't possibly believe this was run past all departments and everybody said ... thumbs down.

[Caruso]

the only thing the player was really guilty of , was having had some transactions with known fraudsters...

Eh????????

The whole point of this whole discussion, and the entire contents of all the documented dealings with the independent investigators, was to establish the unquestionable fact that this player was not involved in the "fraud ring" which was the apparent cause of the "independent investigation" in the first place.

Did you miss that?

I remind, you would be paying not someone guilty of fraud, but (to my knowledge) is really only guilty of bad decision making, or perhaps better said, misunderstanding.

OK.

Remind what the "bad decision making" was?

What was his "misunderstanding"?

..it very much makes me think if the player knew to do all that he did to get as far as he has gone (which has been a ways , congrats on that E), that why on earth didn't he think to cover his bases in the first place?

Which "bases" should he have covered?

Particularly since you seem quite keen to imply some kind of non-existent wrongdoing:

the player knew better, and for whatever reason, not necessarily evil, he didn't cover his base...

You are implying wrongdoing. Substantiate it.

(to casino) Instead of turning this situation to your favor, by being the bigger, more magnanimous casino which is player-friendly, and strives to pay those who are innocent, but perhaps stupid

Remind me what he did that was "stupid", from which the casino, in paying him, could appear "magnanimous?

I take moment to apologize to anyone one I might have offended in my rather strong wording but it was to make a point, not to make accusation or light.

OK. So, according to BB1web:

1) The player is "stupid".

2) The player "had transactions with known fraudsters".

3) He was guilty of "bad decision making" and "misunderstanding".

4) He failed to "cover his bases", which is I think your way of saying "cover his tracks".

None of the above is substantiated in any way with any information we have been given. In other words, you have concocted an absolutely accusatory tissue of smears. Why? Are you just looking to shovel a bit of muck and hope that some of it sticks?

And do you think that signing off with "I'm not accusing anyone of anything" somehow legitimises your smears? Well actually: it doesn't. You've made a host of accusations above, none of which have, for the main part, even been a part of this discussion.

Posting these kind of verbose and unsubstantiated smears really does nothing to serve the justice of the situation. If people must make accusations, please substantiate them.

[joeyl]

Steve?

Embalu has produced an evidence bag with the casinos hired investigator backing him.

I've seen nothing else of any note from either side.

[Embalu]

bb1web: There's a lot of errors in your post. As Caruso has already pointed out most of them, I just would like to add this:

You say that I have not given the "correct" address and that I have made a bad decision. Then look at these parameters of my addresses:

Address 1:
- permanent, official address (since 1992)
- written in my government ID and registered at every official place
- all mails, utility bills and bank statements go here

Address 2:
- temporary address
- does not appear in my documents
- name on utility bills is the name of the apartment owner and not mine

I think it is clear that the correct decision is to register with address 1, which is what I have done.

[Caruso]

Rushmore has apparently said they "believe" the player used some kind of software to cheat them. No, I'm not joking, before anyone asks.

This is beyond ridiculous now.

They also appear to have dropped the "ID fraud" line, as this was obviously dead in the water, the player having been independently verified. So having investigated him, and found him to be clean, they've come up with this monumental idiocy to try and cling on to the last vestiges of legitimacy.

I can only conclude at this point that the Rushmore group is going under, there is no way this is evidence of anything less than desperation.

[GCG]

post deleted

[bb1web]

Hi again,

I guess I had it wrong. Its not like i have made a career of following this but i told it like i understood it to be.

rather than rehash what I obviously misunderstood ... I said what i did with that point of view.

And I never meant to infer I thought the player was stupid, I thought i at least got that part across.

I apologize E, because i truly never meant that. I was meaning a stupid act, not a stupid person.

......

Thanks to Joeyl for summing up what I didn't see.

So the investigator that works for the casino said that the casino was crooked and provided evidence as such?

NOW I understand. I'm sorry for not getting it ... until now. I have a lot going on and just dropped the ball.

Please indulge me one more

so I have this right.

So for $7444, minus the cost of hiring the investigator since that money would or could have went towards just paying the player, the casino has chosen to see its reputation fall to such as it now appears, and despite how incredibly unbelievable it is that this could be true, that they would be stupid enough (and yes this time i mean it not as an action but as a decision making person) to trade all that for 7 grand,

there is no chance it isn't true because the very investigator they hired with THEIR money, now has come forward to say that what his report stated was opposite what the casino presented.

is that right?

Geez CP. And I again apologize for not getting it, if that above is correct.

[bb1web]

Can someone tell me is this just a rushmore situation .. meaning like some aff programs have casinos in their stable which have only the affiliate program in common ... where as other programs all the casinos in the program are owned by the same people.

so do i need to take down cherry red and slots oasis too? Or just Rushmore?

thanks.

[bb1web]

BTW:

I went back thru my PMs at GIA and unfortunately I am too good about not tying up too much space, so I had already deleted our correspondence but I could have sworn that E told me he had been involved with some transfers between himself and others using an eWallet, which was what triggered all this in the first place.

That the others were the ones who were really the ones accused of fraud but he was being figured as guilty by association.

I guess I had it mixed up with something else. but that is what i meant by stupid. because it is stupid to get involved with money transactions with people whom you don't know, when there are other alternatives that exist.

I must have confused this situation with one of the several I have helped out with in recent times.

[Caruso]

So the investigator that works for the casino said that the casino was crooked and provided evidence as such?

He investigated the player as per the casino's remit - they employed him to do so.

He said that the matter he had been employed to investigate had come out in favour of the player.

He didn't call he's employers "crooks" in so many words, but he did say:

My personal opinion is that the casino doesn't play with honest cards.

"Not playing with honest cards" is evidently a rather quaint Hungarian expression for suspected lack of integrity.

I could have sworn that E told me he had been involved with some transfers between himself and others using an eWallet, which was what triggered all this in the first place.

I suspected you had mixed up two different situations. This was another player, about a year earlier. Handle was "moholy".

In fact, I suspect all your above comments, which I proceeded to disect heavily, were probably entirely based on this other player. It's an understandable mistake, as the casino is the same, and the result, not at all surprisingly, was the same: no pay.

Bit of a common theme with Rushmore.

But no, this an entirely distinct matter.

[Caruso]

Can someone tell me is this just a rushmore situation .. meaning like some aff programs have casinos in their stable which have only the affiliate program in common ... where as other programs all the casinos in the program are owned by the same people.

Rushmore, Slots Oasis and Cherry Red are all under the same management and ownership umbrella. They all state:

This casino is owned and operated by Rushpod Investments NV, Curacao, Netherlands Antilles.

[Embalu]

bb1web: Ok, no problem. Yes, you have confused this issue with something else, we have never sent PMs to each other.

[Caruso]

Since everyone will be conveniently located in one room next week, I think it'd be a good idea if a GPWA rep can perambulate over to Rushmore, preferably with me in tow, to raise this matter in a little heads up.

If nothing else, I want to hear first hand from a casino rep that in the casino's opinion, their software is rigged. That'd be a first.

I'll PM Michael to this effect.

[Anthony]

I am sure one of us could bring you in tow.

[Steve Russo]

Yesterday, Graeme Levin (owner of The Gambling Portals Group, which includes Gambling Grumbles), was in Prague. We had discussed this situation the day before he left and agreed to attempt to bring it up with Rushmore.

Here is the e-mail which I received from him:

Hi Steve,

I spoke briefly with the Marketing Director of C-Planet, who own Rushmore.

He said they have written to the player requesting proof of how the Moneybookers account was funded. This will indicate whether he was part of a fraudulent ring of players.

If the response is satisfactory, he will get paid immediately.

We have permission to publish or post this information.

[Caruso]

I am sure one of us could bring you in tow.

Nice to meet the other half of the APCW team.

Both Michael and Anthony bumped into the Rushmore reps on a casual basis, but none of us could locate them subsequently. I spoke to Michael about his stance as the owner of the GPWA, after which I ditched any more attempts to locate Rushmore as anything Michael can do will be far more meaningful than any acrimonious, stress-inducing and ultimately pointless get together with me and Anthony and the reps.

Michael was also at pains to point out that this thread did not get moved out of the location in which I originally posted it out of any desire to cover the matter up, which I appreciated, particularly as I hadn't even been planning to raise the matter.

Anyway, it looks like another angle has now come up, so we'll wait to see how this one plays out.

[Rushmore Ben]

Hi,

1. Please see post.

http://gambling-mojo-casino-communit...1/blog-view/36

2. For the record, nobody from GPWA bumped into
me or my other affiliate managers at the show, it was a pretty small venue and we where around for the whole two days, we stayed in the Hilton like everyone else and attended all the social gatherings, nobody from GPWA attempted to speak to us.

3. I did happen to meet Graeme from Gambling Grumbles, Which was a pleasant and successful meeting.

Regards

Ben

Nice to meet the other half of the APCW team.

"Both Michael and Anthony bumped into the Rushmore reps on a casual basis, but none of us could locate them subsequently. I spoke to Michael about his stance as the owner of the GPWA, after which I ditched any more attempts to locate Rushmore as anything Michael can do will be far more meaningful than any acrimonious, stress-inducing and ultimately pointless get together with me and Anthony and the reps."

Michael was also at pains to point out that this thread did not get moved out of the location in which I originally posted it out of any desire to cover the matter up, which I appreciated, particularly as I hadn't even been planning to raise the matter.

Anyway, it looks like another angle has now come up, so we'll wait to see how this one plays out.