Draga PMaria64 ,
Hvala vam što ste me obavestili i izvinjavam se zbog kašnjenja. S obzirom na količinu imejlova koje primam, neki ponekad mogu biti previđeni. Zato je uvek najbolje da me direktno kontaktirate ovde u temi kako bih mogao da proverim i brzo odgovorim.
Dragi Instaspin kazino,
Nakon poslednje poruke igrača i naše interne diskusije u Centru za rešavanje žalbi, moram da priznam da smatramo da je stav igrača ispravan.
Cenim vaš trud da rešite problem izdavanjem novog bonusa bez uslova za klađenje. Međutim, iako ovo može izgledati kao najjednostavnije rešenje, ono ne rešava u potpunosti pravičnost situacije. U suštini, vraća igrača na početak bez odgovarajućeg uvažavanja napretka koji je već postignut pod prvobitnim uslovima.
Kao što znate, trudimo se da pomognemo igračima kada se prema njima postupa nepravedno, a u ovom slučaju, vaš agent za podršku je priznao da je došlo do greške na vašoj strani dok ste pokušavali da rešite problem. Ovo priznanje jasno pokazuje odgovornost kazina.
Ključno pitanje je: zašto bi ovaj igrač, koji je već ispunio značajan deo zahteva za klađenje, trebalo da bude stavljen u nepovoljan položaj u poređenju sa drugim igračima čiji bonusi nisu greškom otkazani? Igračevo obrazloženje u vezi sa zagarantovanim i negarantovanim dobicima je i validno i logično.
Da ilustrujemo:
- Ukupan dobitak: 2.767 evra
- Preostali iznos klađenja: 1.000 €
- Zagarantovani dobici: 2.767 € – 1.000 € = 1.767 €
Čak i u najgorem slučaju - ako igrač izgubi svaku sledeću opkladu dok ispunjava preostale uslove - zagarantovani iznos bi i dalje bio 1.767 evra. Ponuda bonusa od 500 evra, čak i bez uslova za klađenje, daleko je manja od ove garancije. Čak i pod pretpostavkom 100% RTP-a, igrač bi na kraju dobio znatno manje od onoga što je već efektivno obezbeđeno u okviru originalnog bonusa.
Štaviše, pošto je vaš tim već priznao grešku u dnevniku ćaskanja, teško je razumeti vaš trenutni stav. Pozivanje na vaše korektivne mere kao na čin „ dobre volje " je obmanjujuće: ispravljanje sopstvene greške nije dobra volja - to je jednostavno pravedan tok delovanja. Pored toga, pominjanje mogućnosti povraćaja depozita i zatvaranja računa nije konstruktivno i ne može se razumno smatrati zadovoljavajućim rešenjem.
Naš predlog je sledeći:
- Uplatite igraču garantovani dobitak u celosti, tj. 1.767 €, na osnovu gore navedenog proračuna.
- Dozvolite igraču da nastavi sa novim bonusom „ dobre volje " kao dodatnom prilikom, jer ne možemo kvantifikovati koliki bi njen dobitak mogao biti od ispunjenja preostalog uslova za klađenje (iako bi se statistički očekivali dalji dobici).
Verujemo da ovaj predlog predstavlja pravedno, racionalno i uravnoteženo rešenje. Molimo vas da nam javite da li se slažete sa ovim pristupom ili da pružite jasno objašnjenje zašto smatrate da ova logika ne drži odgovor.
Hvala vam i radujem se vašem odgovoru.
Dear PMaria64,
Thank you for letting me know, and I apologize for the delay. Given the volume of emails I receive, some may occasionally be overlooked. That’s why it’s always best to ping me directly here in the thread so I can check and respond promptly.
Dear Instaspin Casino,
Following the player’s latest message and our internal discussion in the Complaint Resolution Center, I must acknowledge that we consider the player’s position correct.
I appreciate your effort to resolve the matter by issuing a new bonus without wagering requirements. However, while this may seem like the simplest solution, it does not fully address the fairness of the situation. Essentially, it resets the player to the beginning without proper regard for the progress already made under the original terms.
As you know, we strive to assist players when they are treated unfairly, and in this case, your own support agent admitted that a mistake occurred on your side while attempting to resolve the issue. This admission makes the casino’s responsibility very clear.
The key question is: why should this player, who had already completed a significant portion of the wagering requirement, be placed at a disadvantage compared to other players whose bonuses were not mistakenly cancelled? The player’s reasoning regarding guaranteed and non-guaranteed winnings is both valid and logical.
To illustrate:
- Total winnings: €2,767
- Remaining wagering: €1,000
- Guaranteed winnings: €2,767 – €1,000 = €1,767
Even in the worst-case scenario - if the player lost every subsequent wager while completing the remaining requirements - the guaranteed amount would still be €1,767. Offering a €500 bonus, even without wagering requirements, falls far short of this guarantee. Even assuming a 100% RTP, the player would end up with significantly less than what was already effectively secured under the original bonus.
Furthermore, since your team has already acknowledged the mistake in the chat log, it is difficult to understand your current position. Referring to your corrective actions as an act of "good will" is misleading: correcting one’s own mistake is not good will - it is simply the fair course of action. Additionally, mentioning the possibility of refunding deposits and closing the account is not constructive and cannot reasonably be considered a satisfactory resolution.
Our suggestion is as follows:
- Credit the player’s guaranteed winnings in full, i.e. €1,767, based on the above calculation.
- Allow the player to continue with the new "good will" bonus as an additional opportunity, since we cannot quantify what her winnings might have been from completing the remaining wagering requirement (though statistically, further winnings would be expected).
We believe this proposal represents a fair, rational, and balanced resolution. Please let us know if you agree with this approach, or provide a clear explanation as to why you believe this logic does not hold.
Thank you, and I look forward to your response.
Automatski prevedeno: