Buzzluck: winnings confiscated on the basis of an increasingly confused and improbable series of excuses
Friday, August 07, 2009
Buzzluck: winnings confiscated on the basis of an increasingly confused and improbable series of excuses
Buzzluck is a relatively new casino using Realtime Gaming software.
There is no license information listed anywhere.
The terms and conditions page lists business registration and server location, neither of which exactly inspire confidence:
Buzzluck.com is registered as a gaming provider with hosting services out of Costa Rica.
These factors combined - software license with a provider many of whose licensee are problematic and a location in the weakest possible of banana republics - does not leave one with much confidence as to the solidity, financial or otherwise, of this nascent operation.
Buzzluck is one of the Casinomeister accredited online casinos.
I was contacted by a player from whom Buzzluck had confiscated winnings of €33,000, and who had unsuccessfully elicited the help of Bryan Bailey of Casinomeister. This large win was achieved through a combination of reload bonuses and a big hit on the slots.
The casino's justification was initially twofold:
• The player claimed a bonus coupon for which he did not qualify, not having clicked through from the appropriate affilate site, viz a viz Casinomeister.
• The player's telephone number was inoperative.
Neither of these excuses bear too much scrutiny.
Whether or not the bonus coupon in question was invalid is a somewhat beside the point, as the player never actually used it - the €33,000 slot winnings were achieved from an earlier coupon, so he never got around to redeeming the disputed bonus.
If he had used the disputed coupon, incorrect affiliate tracking could reasonably explain the issue - it seems rather unlikely that a player would willfully redeem an unclaimable coupon and create an obvious problem for himself.
As it stands, the coupon was never redeemed, and the winnings were achieved via an entirely undisputed bonus. But the casino saw it otherwise:
As to the disconnected phone issue, it seems beyond absurd and utterly unreasonable to deny so much money on the basis of a phone apparently not working for a period of three days! Would it not be fair to at least try a few days later?
But again, the casino had a different take on the matter:
If the phone was off, as you mentioned, it would either go to your voice mail or request that the call be tried again later as the person in unavailable.
Ultimately, the number you provided was not operational, and therefore puts your account in breach of the General Buzzluck Terms and Conditions, to which you agreed when you created an account with us.
So, in summary: the phone was inoperational and the bonus code, which the player didn't actually use, was regarded as invalid.
On this basis was €33,000 confiscated.
Something doesn't add up; you don't take such arbitrary, draconian action on the basis of so little.
However, things got a little more confusing at this point.
On the basis of an enquiry from another affiliate, Buzzluck claimed that the €33,000 had not been confiscated because of inoperative phones and unredeemed bonuses.
The player was, in fact, a fraudster.
Strange that they somehow failed to mention this rather crucial issue at any point of the proceedings, preferring to offer those two rather weak excuses.
Buzzluck did, however, have a reason for not coming out with the fraud allegation sooner: they did not want other fraudsters to get any ideas, or otherwise expose their "fraud detection" procedures.
At this point, I remain as confused as before: how does a simple claim that a player is a fraudster tell anyone anything about anything beyond the simple ostensible fact contained in the words?
To summarise this affair:
• Player wins a substantial amount of money from new casino Buzzluck, licensed in a banana republic.
• Casino denies win on the basis of a couple of weak, doubtful excuses.
• After being pressed, the casino adds to the story with a more serious allegation, which was not, funnily enough, mentioned previously.
• No evidence for any of this is presented to anyone, beyond claims from Buzzluck Casino.
My take?
Buzzluck is not well funded, and paying €33,000 to one player would put a dent in the budget. When faced with the prospect of such a hit, a couple of weak excuses were cobbled together without too much thought as to the justifiability of such actions on such a poor basis. When it became apparent that more was needed, more was presented: a bogus claim about fraud, with no corroboration offered.
I think that is a reasonable hypothesis which fits the facts.
As general advice: don't patronise casinos located in banana republics on the basis that they happen to be recommended by questionable affiliates.
On a more specific note: do not patronise Buzzluck. If you do, then make sure you don't win too much. If you win too much, you may find that your legitimately-redeemed bonus code was in fact illegitimate.
You may also find that you phone suddenly doesn't work.
Either way, you will run the very strong risk of not seeing a penny of your money.
7 Previous Comments
Hi I sent my affiliate manager this like and heres his response
hi, it was a case regarding a fraudulent account. It was brought up by both casinomeister and beatingbonuses and both cleared us. As for this specific website, we don't know who the person is and instead of him/her doing his due deligence and reaching out to us for clarification, he/she made that post.
Thanks for the feedback.
1) I rarely, if ever, waste my time talking to rogue RTGs.
2) Assuming I DO talk to them, they will blow me off with the same uncorroborated nonsense they blew Casinomeister and BeatingBonuses of with. So why bother? Casinomeister bought it and, as far as I can tell, barred the player before he could comment; BeatingBonuses bought it in the main, and deleted all forum content after a fair discussion.
So much for a fair hearing.
3) This page ranks Google two or three for a search for "buzzluck".
By 
100% Gambler, at
2:19 pm
I've sent an email to the affiliate address listed, as they do not offer a player email - see the contacts page at Buzz luck.
If they respond, I will report on the matter.
By 100% Gambler, at
2:38 pm
Do you have an email address for them? The only one available on the site is the affiliate one (the field in the player web form is actually to small for my HPG address, which is ridiculous), and they haven't replied.
By 100% Gambler, at
2:59 pm
Many thanks for this info I thought buzzluck was a good place for players, no worth investing a lot of time in them, they can go bananas !
By 
, at
10:32 pm