Draga Vitamae70,
Hvala vam na strpljenju dok smo pregledali dodatne informacije i istoriju igara koje je pružio kazino.
Nakon provere raspoloživih dokaza, došli smo do zaključka da se sporni dobici ne mogu smatrati validnim za povlačenje.
Kao što smo utvrdili, kupon bez depozita je iskorišćen dok je još uvek bilo preostalog stanja od oko 10 dolara od prethodne igre bonusa „Bez pravila" od 350%. Ovo je stvorilo situaciju sa mešovitim stanjem, jer novi kupon nije iskorišćen sa čistog nultog stanja.
U potpunosti razumemo vašu tvrdnju da je sistem kazina dozvolio iskorišćavanje kupona i slažemo se da bi idealno bilo da se takve situacije automatski spreče. Međutim, nakon pregleda istorije opklada, čini se da je ovaj mešoviti balans imao direktan uticaj na rezultat. Da je bio dostupan samo predviđeni saldo kupona od 30 dolara, saldo bi pao na nulu pre nego što je kasniji dobitak generisan. U jednom trenutku, dodatni preostali saldo iz prethodne bonus igre omogućio je da se sesija nastavi i na kraju dostigne sporni iznos povlačenja.
Takođe moramo uzeti u obzir da prethodni bonus od 105 dolara nije bio unovčiv/nezamenljiv, što znači da bi u svakom slučaju bio odbijen od bilo kakvog odobrenog povlačenja. Uzimajući u obzir ovo, i činjenicu da je kazino vratio vaš originalni depozit od 30 dolara kao pravi novac bez ikakvih ograničenja, verujemo da je rešenje kazina u ovom slučaju bilo ispravno, iako je cela situacija idealno trebalo da bude sprečena tehničkim merama.
Iz ovih razloga, nismo u mogućnosti da zatražimo od kazina da vrati sporni dobitak od 150 dolara i ova žalba sada, nažalost, mora biti odbačena. Razumem da ovo nije ishod koji ste očekivali, ali na osnovu dokaza koje smo dobili, ne možemo smatrati dobitke validnim.
Srdačan pozdrav,
Martin
Dear Vitamae70,
Thank you for your patience while we reviewed the additional information and the game history provided by the casino.
After checking the available evidence, we have come to the conclusion that the disputed winnings cannot be considered valid for withdrawal.
As we have established, the no-deposit coupon was redeemed while there was still a remaining balance of around $10 from the previous 350% "No Rules" bonus play. This created a mixed balance situation, as the new coupon was not played from a clean zero balance.
We fully acknowledge your point that the casino system allowed the coupon to be redeemed, and we agree that ideally, such situations should be prevented automatically. However, after reviewing the bet history, it appears that this mixed balance had a direct impact on the result. If only the intended $30 coupon balance had been available, the balance would have dropped to zero before the later win was generated. At one point, the additional remaining balance from the previous bonus play made it possible for the session to continue and eventually reach the disputed withdrawal amount.
We also need to take into account that the previous $105 bonus was non-cashable/sticky, meaning it would have been deducted from any approved withdrawal in any case. Considering this, and the fact that the casino returned your original $30 deposit as real cash with no restrictions, we believe the casino’s solution was correct in this case, though the whole situation should have ideally been prevented by technical measures.
For these reasons, we are unable to ask the casino to reinstate the disputed $150 winnings, and this complaint will now sadly need to be rejected. I understand this is not the outcome you were hoping for, but based on the evidence we received, we cannot consider the winnings valid.
Kind regards,
Martin
Automatski prevedeno: