Dobar dan,
Pažljivo sam pročitao vaše objašnjenje i verujem da još uvek postoji nekoliko važnih kontradikcija koje treba razmotriti.
Prvo, u vezi sa isplatom od 100 evra: navodite da je isplata otkazana jer sam iskoristio sredstva za dalju igru pre nego što je mogla biti obrađena.
Međutim, imam snimak ekrana koji pokazuje da je kazino/sistem otkazao isplatu od 100 evra. Dostaviću ovaj dokaz Kazino Guruu.
Još važnije, vaše objašnjenje ne rešava suštinsko pitanje.
Nakon što ste mi konfiskovali približno 4.500 evra i smanjili stanje na 700 evra na osnovu pravila o maksimalnoj isplati, pokušao sam da podignem preostalih 700 evra.
U tom trenutku, rečeno mi je da imam dve opcije: ili da platim proviziju od 20% ili da nastavim da ulažem još 87 evra.
Sada potvrđujete da je to zaista bila situacija.
Dakle, imam jedno vrlo jednostavno pitanje:
Zašto bih dobrovoljno nastavio da se kockam sa 700 evra kada je 700 evra već bio maksimalni iznos koji sam smeo da unovčim?
Da sam nastavio da igram i osvojio još 500 evra, 1.000 evra ili čak 5.000 evra, i dalje ne bih mogao da podignem više od 700 evra zbog vašeg pravila o maksimalnom isplati.
Stoga, kada je primenjen maksimalni limit za isplatu od 700 evra, nastavak kockanja bi mogao samo da ugrozi moj novac koji mogu da isplatim. Nije bilo realne koristi za mene.
Nisam nastavljao da se kockam jer sam želeo da igram. Pokušavao sam da ispunim dodatni uslov koji je kazino postavio kako bih dobio pristup novcu koji je već bio dostupan na mom računu.
Postoji još jedna važna stvar na koju i dalje izbegavate da odgovorite:
Da li tretirate 700 evra kao novi depozit ili mislite na moj prvobitni depozit od 70 evra?
Moj originalni depozit od 70 evra je već bio potpuno izgubljen pre nego što sam aktivirao bonus od 140 evra. Zatim sam ispunio puni uslov klađenja od 140 evra × 40.
Pa šta je tačno osnova za tvrdnju da sam ipak morao da uložim svoj prvobitni depozit?
700 evra nije bio novi depozit. To je bio preostali iznos nakon što ste već primenili pravilo za maksimalnu isplatu od 700 evra.
I postoji još jedno pitanje koje treba objasniti.
Tvrdite da je isplata od 100 evra otkazana jer sam sredstva koristio za igranje. Ali imam dokaze koji pokazuju otkazivanje sa vaše strane.
Takođe navodite da je 100 evra koji su na kraju zadržani od mog salda od 600 evra bila naknada od 20%.
Ova dva objašnjenja treba pomiriti.
Ako je povlačenje od 100 evra otkazano jer sam navodno koristio sredstva za igranje, zašto kazino sada opisuje još jedan odbitak od 100 evra kao naknadu za povlačenje od 20%?
I zašto mi je rečeno da mogu da ispunim uslov tako što ću uložiti još 87 evra umesto da platim proviziju od 20%, samo da bi potom nestalo još 100 evra?
Upravo zato sam zamolio Casino Guru da istraži kompletan niz događaja, umesto da posmatra svaki događaj posebno.
Prihvatio sam početnu konfiskaciju od 4.500 evra, iako sam se sa tim snažno ne slagao.
Ono što me zanima je šta se desilo posle:
Salo od 5.200 evra
→ približno 4.500 evra oduzeto
→ Preostalo 700 evra
→ rečeno mi je da ili platim 20% ili uložim dodatnih 87 evra
→ stanje smanjeno na približno 600 €
→ na kraju isplaćeno samo 500 evra.
U svakoj fazi sam pokušavao da podignem novac koji je preostao nakon što je vaše pravilo za maksimalnu isplatu već primenjeno.
Dostavio/la sam snimke ekrana i dokaze o relevantnim događajima, uključujući otkazivanje isplate od 100 evra.
Stoga vas molim da prestanete da dajete opšta objašnjenja vaših pojmova i da direktno odgovorite na ova konkretna pitanja.
Verujem da bi Casino Guru trebalo da pregleda i snimke ekrana i utvrdi da li je vaše trenutno objašnjenje u skladu sa onim što se zapravo dogodilo na mom nalogu.
Good afternoon,
I have now read your explanation carefully, and I believe there are still several important contradictions that need to be addressed.
First, regarding the €100 withdrawal: you state that the withdrawal was cancelled because I used the funds for further gameplay before it could be processed.
However, I have a screenshot showing that the €100 withdrawal was cancelled by the casino/system. I will provide this evidence to Casino Guru.
More importantly, your explanation does not address the fundamental issue.
After you confiscated approximately €4,500 and reduced my balance to €700 based on the maximum cashout rule, I attempted to withdraw the remaining €700.
At that point, I was told that I had two options: either pay a 20% fee or continue wagering another €87.
You now confirm that this was indeed the situation.
So I have a very simple question:
Why would I voluntarily continue gambling with €700 when €700 was already the maximum amount I was allowed to cash out?
If I had continued playing and won another €500, €1,000 or even €5,000, I still could not withdraw more than €700 because of your maximum cashout rule.
Therefore, once the €700 maximum cashout had been applied, continuing to gamble could only put my withdrawable money at risk. There was no realistic upside for me.
I was not continuing to gamble because I wanted to play. I was trying to fulfil an additional condition imposed by the casino in order to access money that was already available in my balance.
There is another important point that you continue to avoid answering:
Are you treating the €700 as a new deposit, or are you referring to my original €70 deposit?
My original €70 deposit had already been completely lost before I activated the €140 bonus. I then completed the full €140 × 40 wagering requirement.
So what exactly is the basis for saying that I still had to wager my original deposit?
The €700 was not a new deposit. It was the remaining balance after you had already applied the €700 maximum cashout rule.
And there is another issue that needs to be explained.
You state that the €100 withdrawal was cancelled because I used the funds for gameplay. But I have evidence showing the cancellation from your side.
You also state that the €100 ultimately withheld from my €600 balance was a 20% fee.
These two explanations need to be reconciled.
If the €100 withdrawal was cancelled because I supposedly used the funds for gameplay, then why does the casino now describe another €100 deduction as a 20% withdrawal fee?
And why was I told that I could satisfy the requirement by wagering another €87 instead of paying the 20% fee, only for another €100 to subsequently disappear?
This is exactly why I have asked Casino Guru to investigate the complete sequence rather than looking at each event separately.
I accepted the initial €4,500 confiscation, even though I strongly disagreed with it.
What I am questioning is what happened afterwards:
€5,200 balance
→ approximately €4,500 confiscated
→ €700 remaining
→ told to either pay 20% or wager another €87
→ balance reduced to approximately €600
→ only €500 ultimately paid out.
At every stage, I was trying to withdraw the money that remained after your maximum cashout rule had already been applied.
I have provided screenshots and evidence of the relevant events, including the cancellation of the €100 withdrawal.
I therefore ask you to stop giving general explanations of your terms and answer these specific questions directly.
I believe Casino Guru should also examine the screenshots and determine whether your current explanation is consistent with what actually happened in my account.
Automatski prevedeno: