Public complaints: Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void (Page 6)
Best Online Casinos
Hot Topics22nd Nov. 2024 at 05:48 pm CET
-
Ganja37, today at 04:21 pm CET
-
Slot_Star, today at 02:41 pm CET
-
Pat1991, today at 01:05 am CET
-
JJepsa96, today at 05:19 pm CET
-
Xavi22, today at 03:38 pm CET
-
Comingsoon19, today at 03:08 pm CET
-
player92, today at 03:00 pm CET
-
garfield68, today at 12:44 pm CET
-
Endstation, today at 11:47 am CET
-
Emmerichc, today at 10:38 am CET
-
SixtyNine69, today at 10:23 am CET
-
gamble1, today at 04:21 am CET
-
Pat1991, today at 01:15 am CET
-
XXLEONIDASXX, yesterday at 07:26 pm CET
-
slotliebe89, yesterday at 05:20 pm CET
-
JJepsa96, yesterday at 05:17 pm CET
-
sigi36, yesterday at 04:13 pm CET
-
Gudrun0309, yesterday at 11:15 am CET
-
Pat1991, yesterday at 02:31 am CET
-
Andre, on 20th Nov. 2024 at 06:46 pm CET
-
Hanshanshans, on 20th Nov. 2024 at 06:26 pm CET
-
frapi07, on 20th Nov. 2024 at 05:06 pm CET
-
Pat1991, on 20th Nov. 2024 at 02:37 pm CET
-
Pat1991, on 20th Nov. 2024 at 02:34 pm CET
-
frapi07, on 19th Nov. 2024 at 11:43 pm CET
-
smoka3, on 19th Nov. 2024 at 10:25 pm CET
Impending ceiling collapse at historic Swiss ...
DGGS: The top-selling slots in October ...
GambleJoe Team
JulianCommunity-Manager / Complaint Specialist
CounterSoftware developer
MatthiasProject manager
DanielFounder
Community Forum-Moderators
Members who assist the GJ team in moderating the forum.
Andre
gamble1 online
Langhans_innen
Saphira
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Liked this post: s****e
In the Gamble Joe terms and conditions is that you have to pay for the registration here 5000Euro to Gamble Joe.
Have you agreed in the terms and conditions, which hopefully you have read through exactly or? Otherwise you would be pretty funny.
Honestly Spielo, no one needs you here.
I ask the Gamblejoe team to check the relevant people here. I guess there are double accounts or casino employees.
The message from Spielo alone looks like a standard casino email message.
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Nobody has liked this post so far
Just writing "The player is penalized twice"...He is not penalized, he is rewarded less. Making 100€ out of nothing is probably only a punishment here as well.
Random: You can somehow also give it up. The fact with the AGBs changes of course nevertheless some. You can also use a ridiculous comparative example that does not exist. These are valid and honest terms and conditions. To even talk about fraud just shows how much you are already in it. But maybe you're just in a bad mood after 1200€ for free spins and want to let that out somewhere? What Casinofremdes would perhaps be good.
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Nobody has liked this post so far
Damn... after all these years we are now finally blown
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Liked this post: s****e
And from this alone you can see what an unprofessional club Lapalingo is.
It clearly says there - the most you can do is convert it into REAL money.
And the section you colored blue contradicts itself.
After converting bonus funds into real money funds, the maximum payout amount is 100.
And in the next sentence you immediately say that this means (and this means refers to the previous sentence and should be an explanation of it) that everything won with bonus funds will be paid out only 100 euros.
Well, this is also ok. But the problem is that it is real money after conversion.
Thus, the TE has not played with Bonus money and has full claim to his wins.
They write extra still purely that all wins up to 100 are limited with BONUSGELDERN are won.
Thus, even in Lapalingos terms and conditions that the TE must get his money.
The TE has according to the terms and conditions of Lapalingo itself not violate the terms and conditions.
Anyone who can read sees that, right?
They have it extra so formulated that you could get the first time read over this impression, but if you read exactly what is there and really takes the meaning of it then the TE has not violated the terms and conditions.
Either the of Lapalingo are stupid as bread, can not afford a lawyer, or it is full intention because they know that such a T&C is totally illegal and therefore they formulate it so in the hope that players who do not throw a legal eye on texts understand it as Lapalingo wants to make them know.
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Nobody has liked this post so far
You could smoothly work in marketing
I'll stick with it, he has already lost 200 euros. The casino wants him to
The casino wants him to pay out the money and Deposit it again. Total nonsense and serves only to prevent
to prevent existing series
As almost everyone here knows, you almost always lose after ner payout.
And as I said, around 100 euros is the payout limit for you anyway,
so you could never understand it.
By the way, you always put 10€ as a mega gift!
That is zero and nothing in my eyes. A nice gesture,
but nothing more
And it seems for the casinos yes to be worthwhile, otherwise they would not
not do it. Then I can also live with the danger that someone wins
wins something bigger.
But that would be against the rip-off mentality of the casino code.
Rather people gamble away the 10€, and pay in hundreds again afterwards
in. Which is the purpose of the €10 bonus.
But if someone should ever manage to implement, and come to 500 €,
the casino will of course protect itself. How much will that be?
Don't the casinos already gamble enough Bonuses?
And if someone has already deposited hundreds or thousands, and gets
then a gift, which is limited to 100 €, yes wow!
Are already noble facilities, these casinos!
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Liked this post:
Julian
Apart from that, there are such rules also in many other casinos with NoDeposit Bonus. And again: The casino can think up rules for their bonus offers as it wants, especially if the player himself does not deposit anything. Who then does not like it is not forced to accept the. This is not subject to any online casino laws, just because some other providers handle it differently.
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Liked this post:
sippi, s****e
In the thread of Hammerdammer you write how unsafe you feel at Gamblejoe because a user had several accounts.
You are then afraid that it could be this user again. There you were full of agreement with the other users.
So there you feel unsafe on Gamblejoe. ðŸ˜
But to defend every fraudulent behavior of casinos and to call users who disagree with that paranoid.
That's what I call schizophrenic.
I have no idea what is wrong with you.
But it is becoming increasingly clear that you are probably not a normal user who does not have other interests or represents.
And how much I spend in casinos, how many free spins I buy or how often I go to the hairdresser goes to you rather bone times purely nothing.
Just to make that clear.
And to accuse me of frustration because I'm not on the side of a fraudulent casino sounds very borderline debil.
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Nobody has liked this post so far
This is exactly the problem. Because the casinos reside on a far away island,
and there is no legal way to deal with them. And this monopoly position is rigorously
exploited.
Also AGB`s can be immoral, that would be to be clarified however only before a German
Court to clarify.
Do you really think that all terms and conditions of the casinos would have legal validity here?
And the scary thing is that you always emphasize that everything is in it.
That is complete insanity.
I claim that the fact that 100€ is shown as real money is enough for a German court to say
that a German court says that it is confusing and not clearly regulated for the consumer, and
clearly regulated and evident, and therefore void!
That's why I just don't understand that you defend them all here to the knife.
You're German and grown up with the fact that not everything in AGB `s stands,
Has continuance. There are enough landmark decisions.
Shows among other things this case:
Faulty revocation instructions are the chance to redeem expensive real estate loans earlier
or to convert them into more favorable loans
Incidentally, these were also quite normal general terms and conditions, and if you read through the cases, they are
itself only at a completely certain sentence hung up. But it was enough to make thousands of real estate contracts
void to make. It is thus because of much smaller "offenses" already dazwischengehauen!
Therefore times the request to you times independent thoughts to make, than always only everything in such a way to accept
accept, as it stands somewhere!
This post has been translated automatically
Lapalingo declares €8,000 win void
Nobody has liked this post so far
And yes you are right. Obviously I am not a normal user. I look at this forum and the "normality" that prevails here and I'm damn glad I'm not a normal user. Really. If one day I become one, everyone has the right to shoot me on the spot.
strkie: may be everything, is also true so, sure AGB are not necessarily rechtskräfitg. If a casino gives you but 10 € they can probably determine how much they want to pay out in the end. Since as a player to want to influence at all is already strange enough.
This post has been translated automatically