Rushmore Casino: theft of winnings with no proof of player wrongdoing

Monday, May 10, 2010

Rushmore Casino: theft of winnings with no proof of player wrongdoing

The Rushmore Casino group is no stranger to questionable behaviour with regard to player payment issues and others - you can see details of everything I've reported in my Rushmore, Cherry Red and Slots Oasis warnings.

In February this year, Hungarian player Balazs M reported on another Rushmore incident in the Rushmore Casino doesn't pay thread at Winneronline.

In summary:

After cashing out $9500, including $7500 in winnings, the player was independently investigated by two private investigators who had been hired by Rushmore as a result of an identity fraud issue perpetrated with stolen passports. The reason given by the casino was that the player had registered as his address a house which was not his actual residence.

The reason for the discrepancy was that his parental home was his permanent address, and since the casino requested this information, he supplied it. He currently lives in rented accomodation, a different address.

The player was initially investigated, via standard means, by the people employed by Rushmore - an investigation he satisfied completely. The investigators established that he lived where he claimed, and that his family home was also correctly listed.

Rushmore refused to pay, saying as follows:

This is actually the address of his mother. We can not verify this player and refuse the right to pay the player.

False information was provided, and this is not his residence.

The address the player supplied was the address the casino had asked for - his permanent residence. As such, Rushmore appears to have required him to supply an address that would ultimately illegitimise any cashout. This is an absurd situation, created by the casino and resulting in absolutely no sinister or fraudulent activity on the part of the player.

The rejection of the findings was a surprise to the investigators, and also something of a professional slant, as it appeared to cast doubt on the integrity of their work. The Hungarian colleague had this to say;

To put you in the picture, similar kind of problems occured in the case of three other Hungarian citizens. They have a permanent address but they rent a flat elsewhere. I have described the Hungarian circumstances extensively and in detail to my British connection (temporary address, but the required utility bills go to the permanent address etc.).

My task was to undoubtedly identify you. This was done, and I forwarded this in this manner to my British partner, who forwarded the identifications to the casino, word-for-word.

My personal opinion is that the casino doesn't play with honest cards.

The investigators decided to go one step further, and verify the player physically. This they did, with a face-to-face meeting, which was also fully satisfactory.

Rushmore continued to refuse to pay, and carried on with same bogus insistance about "misleading information" which they themselves had requested.

The investigator finally gave up in frustration:

I'm very sorry that this is their decision, which is incomprehensible for me and for my colleague, too. My possibilities are exhausted with this, unfortunately.

So, as a result of supplying the information specifically requested by Rushmore Casino, the casino refused to pay - even after the player had fully satisfied all aspects of the independent investiagtion which the casino itself had instigated.

The player then publicised the matter in the Rushmore issues thread at the GIA. He gave every indication of being genuine, and the casino was invited to take part in a private examination of the issue.

They refused.

Previous to this, the player had attempted to air the matter at Casinomeister, Rushmore being a Casinomeister accredited casino. According to his testimony in the GIA thread above, he received short shrift from self-proclaimed player watchdog Bryan Bailey:

03-11-2010, 06:17 PM

Some weeks later Casinomeister banned me. I asked him why I was banned and he informed me that the reason of banning is that I gave false information when signing up at Rushmore and the address is not mine but my mother's.

I had an account at Casinomeister and Rushmore informed CM about their "findings". I think everyone was banned from Casinomeister who was called "guilty" by Rushmore.

Banned indeed he was:

embalu banned

Bailey appears to have done little more than read and repeat back what the casino told him - his response was an almost exact copy of the casino's response to the player.

The player also filed a complaint at Gambling Grumbles, which was written up in the No payment but for a different reason report. Here, the casino appears to have started weakening and trying a different tactic:

We would have not paid him even if the residential address issue would have been cleared. This is due to other investigations which were carried out which show connections between several players which in most cases were connected by e-wallet account.

So to summarise the situation so far:

The player was investigated on the basis of an accusation that was proven groundless; the casino continued to insist that the player was in the wrong, and refused to pay him, long after he had already been proven right. Once it became apparent that this tactic was dead in the water, they threw some further bogus and entirely unsubstantiated accusations into the mix, none of which had previously seen the light of day and which, in the light of the full and clear investigation carried out by independent professionals at the behest of the casino, appear not a little desperate.

I have also publicised the matter in the GPWA Rushmore Casino steals $7444 thread, and have encouraged the player to follow this up further with another complaint service.

Permalink | Reply (4) |

4 Previous Comments

Here is another Rushmore Casino warning, posted by a webmaster involved in the GIA discussion I mentioned above.

By 100% Gambler, at 8:14 pm

I've added the various relevant links to my Rushmore Casino warning page.

By 100% Gambler, at 11:25 pm

The player filed a Rushmore doesn't pay complaint at Ask Gamblers.

The casino failed to respond, and has been signed off as "Very unresponsive and unprofessional" by the webmaster.

By 100% Gambler, at 1:59 pm

Se my Rushmore returns confiscated funds article for the final, satisfactory outcome of this matter.

By 100% Gambler, at 2:10 pm